Benjamin Samuels

And that is why I didn't claim to you. I was convinced you were talking to at least one scum. I have got to stop being so paranoid. And I love you too!

Sign me up too.

Vote: End day early

I got a successful result on both nights.

I missed this earlier today. I had voted once this whole game when you posted this gem (aka blatant lie), so I fail to see how I could have achieved any of the outcomes you claim I have. I've already explained why I didn't vote yesterday. I posted immediately after the post that you are referring to clarify that I meant "last game", not "last place". They merged, so you probably missed that. And I realise that is was flag boy who forgot to bold his vote - soz!

It wasn't me.

Inventor or jack-of-all-trades could potentially account for the other blocks.

And he consistently said he found Paul suspicious on Day 1 and Day 2. I'm leaning town on Elijah. whatevs. You forgot to bold your vote. I didn't vote because I was on the couch sick for most of Day 2. I came up for air a couple of times, but missed the end of the day completely. At the start of the day, I was leaning town on Paul and therefore didn't jump on it straight away. I read back on Day 1 in the context of what was said in Day 2. I was onboard with the vote on Paul, just didn't make it to voting. I'm the town blocker and, just to be clear, I'm not a jailkeeper. See above for why I didn't vote. Vote: Louis Townsend. For the record, I blocked Louis on night 1 because I thought his reasoning for his vote on Liam on Night 1 was messed up. He was encouraged by Robert to vote for Reginald. In the absence of this I don't think he would have changed his vote. I considered blocking him again last night, but wanted to hear from him first. Last night I blocked Kendall, based on his voting patterns. He placed his first vote on Paul on Day 1, but did so early enough and as a poke to speak up, so it was also going to be easy to explain why he changed his vote. Then yesterday he was trying to be a good townie by hammering Paul when his fate was already sealed. I don't think poke votes are seen that often as serious claims of scumminess.

I don't think scurvy cares what side you are one. And one of the two replaced in the last place was scum. *last game (not last place)

One just voted for the other because they were telling lies. What are you saying?

The normal version of bodyguard sees the bodyguard dying if the one he or she is protecting is targeted for a kill. Are you suggesting the twist is that you block or that you also die if the person you target is targeted for a block? Can you clarify the twist?

Or the bus driver told him, as Ethan suggested happened: I was also contacted with a claim that a block had occurred. This was a very brief conversation because it felt like the person was fishing for info on roles.

Not helpful. I agree that Ansel was looking a little scummy yesterday, but enough to attract the attention of a vig? Also, I'm not convinced that a town vig would kill on night 1 because there generally isn't enough to go on. Louis's logic for his initial vote on Liam was messed up - he said he doesn't think Liam should be sent to the gallows, but then votes for him. He mentions Reginald at the time, but choses not to vote for him. Louis changed his vote to Reginald after he was questioned about it by Robert. I don't think we should rule him out as scum just because he placed that hammer vote. Here's the post from Robert questioning Louis about his vote: This was a follow up to his initial vote. I don't think a policy lynch is helpful. Why do you think Liam is scum? As annoying as his Flag obsession is, "nothing better to do" is not a good enough reason to vote for him. I doubt he will get off-ed by scum while he is being a flag-obsessed dick. If he is town, he should start helping with finding the scum instead of protecting himself and the Flag. I agree with the comments on William's vote. I thought at the time that it came across as really lazy. The number of votes on Reginald had no bearing on the timing of my vote. I had asked Reginald a question about his initial random vote and the change in vote because of the proof, which he didn't fully respond to. So, I asked him to clarify what he meant by the initial vote being out of necessity. I was waiting for him to respond to this, which he never did despite posting between when I asked the question and when I ended up voting. Between this (not answering my question) and the discussion involving him during that time, I was happy to place a vote on him. I thought we had made a good choice at the end of the day as he wasn't defending himself and also didn't respond to the (someone else's) question to at least provide us his views on the players for us to consider the following day.

Seriously, don't encourage him.

Vote: Reginald Aston His initial random vote pinged me and I agree that he has not been answering questions directly, including why he thought that initial vote of his was "out of necessity".