Post by Harriet on Feb 16, 2011 16:44:24 GMT -6
My case on chuck started after the chat regarding John took place. His responses to me in private gave me scummy vibes and I decided to look into his conduct more in depth this morning.The more I looked into my chats and private conversations with him, the more scummy Chuck became. His vote on me is NOT the reason for my case on him.
I do, however, find his reason for voting for me completely unsubstantiated and NOT pro-town.
I wanted to put my case up for everyone to read now rather than making everyone read. It's not "finished". I have other things I want to add, but due to time restraints and IRL responsibilities, I want to go ahead and post what I have done. Hopefully, I can come back and finish
1.) Chuck's voting inconsistencies and opinion regarding Susan
In a private conversation with me
Feb. 8, 2011
Notice, Chuck doesn't think Susan is suspicious based on her post.
Next, Romeo points out, again, how Chuck is not suspicious of Susan in the chat MINUTES before he posts his vote. Romeo's post can be found on the Your Vote thread:
maskmafia1.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=fairgrounds&action=display&thread=177&page=2
So after the chat with Romeo, what does Chuck do?
Minutes later, Chuck votes on Susan based on factors he told me he did not find suspicious.
Post can be found:
maskmafia1.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=fairgrounds&action=display&thread=177
My vote is on Susan. I disagree with her opinions on secrecy and the need for blindsides. I don't think her actions match up with her opinions. And she didn't seem to want to explain. I don't understand her blind trust of Sincerity.
Quote:
(9:02:46 PM) mmg1chuck: you certainly seem convinced on Sincerity
(9:02:56 PM) mmg1chuck: what did she do to convince you
(9:03:43 PM) Susan Appleton: she's been open and forthomin' with her opinions to me
(9:04:20 PM) mmg1chuck: well that's good, but hardly convincing
Susan thinks secrecy is good, but being open and forthcoming is good enough to convince her you are town?
2.) Chuck's position regarding John
Conversation refernced can be found:
tinypaste.com/5e853e
Read it and you will see that John repeatedly talks about things other than John. In my chat with him Chuck repeatedly tried to change the subject regarding john in the chat? Why?
During the chat with John, I asked Chuck and a few other people what they thought about him. Chuck's response struck me as odd.
I asked Chuck to choose wether he thought Chuck was town/scum/third party. He chose town. I questioned him about his choice.
Basically, in this conversation, Chuck makes up a role/circumstances to fit his ideas. I find his actions in the chat suspicious. Rather than contributing, he changed the subject. After than, he constructed circumstances surrounding John that simply doesn't make sense. If you are going to go through the effort of thinking up circumstances such
"[20:59] mmg1chuck: but i'm thinking it might be something that his powers disappear if anyone figures it out?
[20:59] mmg1chuck: not just if he tells?
[20:59] mmg1harriet: If he had a role that he couldn't talk about but was town, do you think he would still scum hunt?"
Is Chuck simply a crappy player who thinks things but does follow through? Or if he mafia, trying to appear to give useful insight but when questioned, is unable to provide a logical explanation?
Sorry I slopped this together. I would much rather have had a bit more time to type this out, but I am afraid that wont be possible until after tonight.
I do, however, find his reason for voting for me completely unsubstantiated and NOT pro-town.
I wanted to put my case up for everyone to read now rather than making everyone read. It's not "finished". I have other things I want to add, but due to time restraints and IRL responsibilities, I want to go ahead and post what I have done. Hopefully, I can come back and finish
1.) Chuck's voting inconsistencies and opinion regarding Susan
In a private conversation with me
Feb. 8, 2011
[20:51] mmg1chuck: what are your thoughts on Scottie?
[20:51] mmg1chuck: the simple townie
(I say its weird but I don't have much of an opinion because I haven't talked to Scott)
[20:52] mmg1chuck: i talked to him before alignments and a little last night, but nothing of substance
[20:54] mmg1chuck: i didn't much like his post in Susan's secrecy thread
[20:54] mmg1chuck: it raised some red flags for me
[21:20] mmg1harriet: What do you think of Susie?
[21:20] mmg1chuck: i'm struggling to get a handle on her
[21:21] mmg1chuck: my instinct seems to be saying that she's ok -- even tho i keep disagreeing with her
[20:51] mmg1chuck: the simple townie
(I say its weird but I don't have much of an opinion because I haven't talked to Scott)
[20:52] mmg1chuck: i talked to him before alignments and a little last night, but nothing of substance
[20:54] mmg1chuck: i didn't much like his post in Susan's secrecy thread
[20:54] mmg1chuck: it raised some red flags for me
[21:20] mmg1harriet: What do you think of Susie?
[21:20] mmg1chuck: i'm struggling to get a handle on her
[21:21] mmg1chuck: my instinct seems to be saying that she's ok -- even tho i keep disagreeing with her
Notice, Chuck doesn't think Susan is suspicious based on her post.
Next, Romeo points out, again, how Chuck is not suspicious of Susan in the chat MINUTES before he posts his vote. Romeo's post can be found on the Your Vote thread:
maskmafia1.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=fairgrounds&action=display&thread=177&page=2
Alright, time to throw this out there.
Chuck - I havent really thought much about him up til this point except that he is more of an unknown than anything else from my point of view. So why Chuck suddenly? He hasn't been on my radar much yet. His vote for sudden has made me take pause and have to think about him a bit more. I feel like this is a sudden bandwagon move on his part, especially after he talked about his suspicions last night in the group chat. Here's the highlights.
mmg1chuck (10:11:00 PM): hiya?
mmg1nadia (10:11:16 PM): hey
mmg1nadia (10:11:30 PM): chuckname your top 2 suspets
mmg1nadia (10:11:32 PM): go go go go
mmg1chuck (10:11:36 PM): eddie
DinoTheDynamite (10:11:45 PM): okay you named, one, ur bi
mmg1chuck (10:11:47 PM): scottie
mmg1chuck (10:12:04 PM): and then a whole bunch
DinoTheDynamite (10:12:18 PM): so you, a lurker, don't like...well...fellow lurkers?
mmg1chuck (10:12:40 PM): huh?
mmg1nadia (10:13:01 PM): lol
mmg1nadia (10:13:11 PM): do you think you are a lurker
mmg1nadia (10:13:12 PM): chuck
mmg1chuck (10:13:33 PM): idk, i certainly don't talk as much as Dino
mmg1sergey (10:13:45 PM): Ha!
mmg1sergey (10:14:02 PM): If "not talking as much as Dyno" makes you a lurker than all of us our lurkers.
mmg1chuck (10:15:25 PM): but in any case, my suspicions about Eddie and Scottie are not based on lurking
mmg1chuck (10:15:51 PM): they are based on them trying to get along, fit in, make friends and be agreeable
mmg1scott (10:16:45 PM): ...you'd prefer more fighting?
mmg1chuck (10:16:53 PM): yes
mmg1scott (10:17:07 PM): That was sarcasm. Or at least I thought it was.
mmg1chuck (10:18:04 PM): I'd prefer more taking of positions, more disagreeing with Susan's secrecy and blindsides theory
mmg1sergey (10:18:57 PM): Who would you both vote for now?
mmg1scott (10:19:13 PM): That's not quite what it sounded like you were saying at first.
As for her secrecy, this is the first I'm hearing of her being suspicious of dino.
mmg1chuck (10:20:01 PM): I'm leaning towards Eddie, but still pondering and watching
mmg1sergey (10:21:15 PM): So do you think any of the big names that came up today are suspicious?
mmg1sergey (10:21:39 PM): I meant Eddie and Chuck.
mmg1chuck (10:22:06 PM): Sincerity has certainly attracted my attention more than once
have a crush on her or something, Chuck?
mmg1sergey (10:22:48 PM): Or do you find her suspicious?
mmg1chuck (10:23:02 PM): Nadia -- idk -- I think the whole Angel thing is a null tell
mmg1chuck (10:23:14 PM): Angel was a bitch
mmg1chuck (10:23:37 PM): no i have a crush on someone else
mmg1scott (10:24:37 PM): I'll be posting this chat record at least. I've got the last 6 hours or so on here.
mmg1scott (10:24:52 PM): I'll make sure to do so before I leave at least.
mmg1chuck (10:25:19 PM): at least? scottie being helpful and trying to get along again?
mmg1scott (10:25:47 PM): You say that like it's supposed to be a bad thing.
mmg1chuck (10:26:09 PM): yep
Okay, so I've taken out the irrelevant text/banter/off chucktopic discussion and this is what we're left with.
As of 10:20ish last night, his top suspects are Eddie and Scott for looking to get along, being agreeable, not fighting enough, etc. Okay..., that's a stretch, but to each his own. Doesn't like care to vote Nadia because of the black swan debacle. Sincerity is mentioned but no further explaination.
So today, I sign on to see he has not voted Eddie, nor Scott, nor Sincerity who were all mentioned by him, but Susan? The only mention of Susan here is that he wishes others would disagree with her game theory. Not regarding any actions on her part. So what exactly changed for Chuck to suddenly vote Susan? Nothing that I can see. He doesn't allude to anything changing in his own voting reason referring to what had been posted on the boards about her. Just that he has a beef with her game theory and for some reason it suddenly outweighs any suspicions he had of Eddie, Scott or Sincerity. That to me is fairly weak and the vote looks like a bandwagon one.
Chuck - I havent really thought much about him up til this point except that he is more of an unknown than anything else from my point of view. So why Chuck suddenly? He hasn't been on my radar much yet. His vote for sudden has made me take pause and have to think about him a bit more. I feel like this is a sudden bandwagon move on his part, especially after he talked about his suspicions last night in the group chat. Here's the highlights.
mmg1chuck (10:11:00 PM): hiya?
mmg1nadia (10:11:16 PM): hey
mmg1nadia (10:11:30 PM): chuckname your top 2 suspets
mmg1nadia (10:11:32 PM): go go go go
mmg1chuck (10:11:36 PM): eddie
DinoTheDynamite (10:11:45 PM): okay you named, one, ur bi
mmg1chuck (10:11:47 PM): scottie
mmg1chuck (10:12:04 PM): and then a whole bunch
DinoTheDynamite (10:12:18 PM): so you, a lurker, don't like...well...fellow lurkers?
mmg1chuck (10:12:40 PM): huh?
mmg1nadia (10:13:01 PM): lol
mmg1nadia (10:13:11 PM): do you think you are a lurker
mmg1nadia (10:13:12 PM): chuck
mmg1chuck (10:13:33 PM): idk, i certainly don't talk as much as Dino
mmg1sergey (10:13:45 PM): Ha!
mmg1sergey (10:14:02 PM): If "not talking as much as Dyno" makes you a lurker than all of us our lurkers.
mmg1chuck (10:15:25 PM): but in any case, my suspicions about Eddie and Scottie are not based on lurking
mmg1chuck (10:15:51 PM): they are based on them trying to get along, fit in, make friends and be agreeable
mmg1scott (10:16:45 PM): ...you'd prefer more fighting?
mmg1chuck (10:16:53 PM): yes
mmg1scott (10:17:07 PM): That was sarcasm. Or at least I thought it was.
mmg1chuck (10:18:04 PM): I'd prefer more taking of positions, more disagreeing with Susan's secrecy and blindsides theory
mmg1sergey (10:18:57 PM): Who would you both vote for now?
mmg1scott (10:19:13 PM): That's not quite what it sounded like you were saying at first.
As for her secrecy, this is the first I'm hearing of her being suspicious of dino.
mmg1chuck (10:20:01 PM): I'm leaning towards Eddie, but still pondering and watching
mmg1sergey (10:21:15 PM): So do you think any of the big names that came up today are suspicious?
mmg1sergey (10:21:39 PM): I meant Eddie and Chuck.
mmg1chuck (10:22:06 PM): Sincerity has certainly attracted my attention more than once
have a crush on her or something, Chuck?
mmg1sergey (10:22:48 PM): Or do you find her suspicious?
mmg1chuck (10:23:02 PM): Nadia -- idk -- I think the whole Angel thing is a null tell
mmg1chuck (10:23:14 PM): Angel was a bitch
mmg1chuck (10:23:37 PM): no i have a crush on someone else
mmg1scott (10:24:37 PM): I'll be posting this chat record at least. I've got the last 6 hours or so on here.
mmg1scott (10:24:52 PM): I'll make sure to do so before I leave at least.
mmg1chuck (10:25:19 PM): at least? scottie being helpful and trying to get along again?
mmg1scott (10:25:47 PM): You say that like it's supposed to be a bad thing.
mmg1chuck (10:26:09 PM): yep
Okay, so I've taken out the irrelevant text/banter/off chucktopic discussion and this is what we're left with.
As of 10:20ish last night, his top suspects are Eddie and Scott for looking to get along, being agreeable, not fighting enough, etc. Okay..., that's a stretch, but to each his own. Doesn't like care to vote Nadia because of the black swan debacle. Sincerity is mentioned but no further explaination.
So today, I sign on to see he has not voted Eddie, nor Scott, nor Sincerity who were all mentioned by him, but Susan? The only mention of Susan here is that he wishes others would disagree with her game theory. Not regarding any actions on her part. So what exactly changed for Chuck to suddenly vote Susan? Nothing that I can see. He doesn't allude to anything changing in his own voting reason referring to what had been posted on the boards about her. Just that he has a beef with her game theory and for some reason it suddenly outweighs any suspicions he had of Eddie, Scott or Sincerity. That to me is fairly weak and the vote looks like a bandwagon one.
So after the chat with Romeo, what does Chuck do?
Minutes later, Chuck votes on Susan based on factors he told me he did not find suspicious.
Post can be found:
maskmafia1.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=fairgrounds&action=display&thread=177
My vote is on Susan. I disagree with her opinions on secrecy and the need for blindsides. I don't think her actions match up with her opinions. And she didn't seem to want to explain. I don't understand her blind trust of Sincerity.
Quote:
(9:02:46 PM) mmg1chuck: you certainly seem convinced on Sincerity
(9:02:56 PM) mmg1chuck: what did she do to convince you
(9:03:43 PM) Susan Appleton: she's been open and forthomin' with her opinions to me
(9:04:20 PM) mmg1chuck: well that's good, but hardly convincing
Susan thinks secrecy is good, but being open and forthcoming is good enough to convince her you are town?
2.) Chuck's position regarding John
Conversation refernced can be found:
tinypaste.com/5e853e
Read it and you will see that John repeatedly talks about things other than John. In my chat with him Chuck repeatedly tried to change the subject regarding john in the chat? Why?
During the chat with John, I asked Chuck and a few other people what they thought about him. Chuck's response struck me as odd.
I asked Chuck to choose wether he thought Chuck was town/scum/third party. He chose town. I questioned him about his choice.
[20:57] mmg1harriet: If he is town, what would be his motivation for implying he is a third party?
[20:58] mmg1chuck: idk, i still suspect he has some role that he can't talk about
[20:58] mmg1chuck: i know we asked him
(I point out that we asked him twice)
[20:59] mmg1chuck: but i'm thinking it might be something that his powers disappear if anyone figures it out?
[20:59] mmg1chuck: not just if he tells?
[20:59] mmg1harriet: If he had a role that he couldn't talk about but was town, do you think he would still scum hunt?
[21:00] mmg1chuck: you certainly would think so
[20:58] mmg1chuck: idk, i still suspect he has some role that he can't talk about
[20:58] mmg1chuck: i know we asked him
(I point out that we asked him twice)
[20:59] mmg1chuck: but i'm thinking it might be something that his powers disappear if anyone figures it out?
[20:59] mmg1chuck: not just if he tells?
[20:59] mmg1harriet: If he had a role that he couldn't talk about but was town, do you think he would still scum hunt?
[21:00] mmg1chuck: you certainly would think so
Basically, in this conversation, Chuck makes up a role/circumstances to fit his ideas. I find his actions in the chat suspicious. Rather than contributing, he changed the subject. After than, he constructed circumstances surrounding John that simply doesn't make sense. If you are going to go through the effort of thinking up circumstances such
"[20:59] mmg1chuck: but i'm thinking it might be something that his powers disappear if anyone figures it out?
[20:59] mmg1chuck: not just if he tells?
[20:59] mmg1harriet: If he had a role that he couldn't talk about but was town, do you think he would still scum hunt?"
Is Chuck simply a crappy player who thinks things but does follow through? Or if he mafia, trying to appear to give useful insight but when questioned, is unable to provide a logical explanation?
Sorry I slopped this together. I would much rather have had a bit more time to type this out, but I am afraid that wont be possible until after tonight.
