If instead of a case-by-case approach you're forever gonna distrust me because I can be dangerous as scum, wouldn't it be better then to always trust me instead? It's kind of like what my brother once told me about predicting what happens to the economy: "Statistically, the best way to predict the economy is to always say it will be improving. 19/20 times you will be right. One out of all these 20 times you'll be wrong, but that still leaves a success rate of 95%."
Statistically I'm town in 3/4 or even 4/5 of all the games, so by blindly trusting me you'll probably be better of than by blindly distrusting me.
Obviously my response above was just a joke, but my point is Sadu, your argument is bull****. I can't do anything with/against a never-trust policy.
Anyway, Kokirion, you haven't responded to my question regarding the vote on me.
Forgot about that.
3 things:
- I never saw you as pro-town, mostly just a gutfeeling, but you don't play as sharp and (in my eyes) genuine as you normally do as town. Doesn't make you scum, but there are simply people of whom I have better reasons to believe are town.
- Your vote on Malon yesterday, that was simply not how I would've imagined town-Sadia to play.
- by process of elimination. In the post where I voted for Froyo I showed how I narrowed my list of suspicious people down. You are simply part of a select group of people that can be scum, in my eyes. And in combination with the 2 earlier reasons I gave, I think there is a fair chance you are in fact scum.
And your attempt to make me look suspicious now by simply saying I've done manipulative things before in other games makes me more sure about my vote. If you are scum that would be a splendid way to survive, by making your attacker seem not trustworthy.
