Hinckley Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 But what about Shadows and Sparky, who turned out to be "insane but independent". Wouldn't that make them belong to a fourth group, then? No, if you're paying attention!, you would know that Martin's investigation showed them as Not Insane. I confess to editing to fix those tags. It's confusing enough without the broken tag making half the paragraph red. I apologize for rule-breaking. Sowwy. The content of the post remained the same.
Rick Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 No, if you're paying attention!, you would know that Martin's investigation showed them as Not Insane. But Dr. Blutziegel's investigation brought to us this morning reported them as 'Insane, but independent'. That's where the confusion comes from. Jesus, have you had your meds this afternoon. Why don't you lie down for a while?
badboytje88 Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I'm all pale white Except for your chest which appears to be yellow some times... But Dr. Blutziegel's investigation brought to us this morning reported them as 'Insane, but independent'. That's where the confusion comes from. Jesus, have you had your meds this afternoon. Why don't you lie down for a while? Independent = Not insane = Not sinister insane and thus sane?
Scouty Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Except for your chest which appears to be yellow some times... I blame that on neglect (sky god!). It's white, as in my unphotogenic photograph/mug shot. I'm albino, stop making fun of me!
Hinckley Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 But Dr. Blutziegel's investigation brought to us this morning reported them as 'Insane, but independent'. That's where the confusion comes from. Agreed. I've asked for clarification here and have been told...by disembodied voices...that it's consistent. Not sure why the discrepancy (really not sure ) but the results speak for themselves. The investigator, who was shown to be Insane, investigated Shadows and got the result of Not Insane. The autopsy of Shadows's brain showed that he wasn't Sinister, but had intention to do us harm. Those are the results.
badboytje88 Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I blame that on neglect (sky god!). It's white, as in my unphotogenic photograph/mug shot. I'm albino, stop making fun of me! Sorry I didn't mean to make fun of you. You know we are a lot alike in some ways. Both struggling to find our identities and stuff like that. Stop it Chancy can't you see I'm talking to the pale guy! Cheesss
Rufus Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Something has come up, and I must unvote. Until further notice. Sorry, you'll have to wait for my reason why. Unvote: Nurse Pepper/ Bob TCM ... still waiting ... Has anyone questioned about Martin's briefcase? Martin's briefcase was still around in the morning. Maybe the staff knows something about it?
Admiral Ron Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Martin's briefcase was still around in the morning. Maybe the staff knows something about it? I am afraid I dont, all I know is that he carries it everywhere.
CorneliusMurdock Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Read Dr. Blutziegal's letter. It says the suitcase was found open and empty. This implies the killer(s) took whatever was in it.
Rufus Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I am afraid I dont, all I know is that he carries it everywhere. Just thinking back over Dr Bloodbrick's photographs of the scene, Martin's briefcase was found open and empty at the scene. I guess we'll never know what was in it.
Walter Kovacs Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Read Dr. Blutziegal's letter. It says the suitcase was found open and empty. This implies the killer(s) took whatever was in it. If there even was anything in it to begin with. Surely the staff wouldn't let a patient run around with a briefcase without checking it's contents first.
Ricecracker Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 It's unfortunate that you don't trust me, Jesus, but I prefer only to speak up when I have something to add. But what about Shadows and Sparky, who turned out to be "insane but independent". Wouldn't that make them belong to a fourth group, then? This is what I find confusing, too. Why keep referring to them as not insane, when, in fact, they are..? I personally do not see how voting for the King will help us at all, so I'm not going to, unless much more evidence is brought forward...
Hinckley Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 It's unfortunate that you don't trust me, Jesus, but I prefer only to speak up when I have something to add. This is what I find confusing, too. Why keep referring to them as not insane, when, in fact, they are..? I personally do not see how voting for the King will help us at all, so I'm not going to, unless much more evidence is brought forward... I've only explained this about 15 times... No, there does not appear to be a fourth group. I think there's a very thorough explanation as to why voting for the King makes the most sense. There are many things that will be clear once we find out his allegiance. The fact that he has only appeared once to briefly defend himself, weakly I might add, and has since disappeared makes him seem all the more guilty to me. Now your odd and weak rationale behind not voting and asking again about the 4 groups makes me suspicious of you. It's no longer just the unexplained absence...
KotZ Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 All I have to say is that I'm not Sinister. Would anyone like to tell me what evidence there is against me? I'm sticking with my gut here, and I am not Sinister. But only with my death, will prove another Insane: Washing Bear. He is innocent. As for Jesus, do not trust him.
Hinckley Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 All I have to say is that I'm not Sinister. Would anyone like to tell me what evidence there is against me? I'm sticking with my gut here, and I am not Sinister. But only with my death, will prove another Insane: Washing Bear. He is innocent. As for Jesus, do not trust him. I can understand you're being upset, but what is it you have against me? It wasn't me who brought the information against you. That person has revealed themselves. Is there other reason you have to suspect me? I'm certainly not saying it isn't unreasonable to suspect me. I'm just wondering your reasoning. I wish we didn't have to do this. I did trust you, but the only way to test our theories is to vote you off. This is a horrible thing and I am very sorry. Even more sorry if you are innocent. But it wasn't me who brought this theory forward, so if you are innocent, your blood is not on me, but Mr. Nowhere.
Ricecracker Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I've only explained this about 15 times... No, there does not appear to be a fourth group. I think there's a very thorough explanation as to why voting for the King makes the most sense. There are many things that will be clear once we find out his allegiance. The fact that he has only appeared once to briefly defend himself, weakly I might add, and has since disappeared makes him seem all the more guilty to me. I understand your explanation, but I don't understand why you keep referring to them as Not Insane. That's all I found odd. Now your odd and weak rationale behind not voting and asking again about the 4 groups makes me suspicious of you. It's no longer just the unexplained absence... Odd and weak rationale? Because I actually trust our PR and who he trusts? If you're so sure of The King's guilt, why don't you vote for him yourself, instead of hiding behind Sal's vote...
KotZ Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 I can understand you're being upset, but what is it you have against me? It wasn't me who brought the information against you. That person has revealed themselves. Is there other reason you have to suspect me? I'm certainly not saying it isn't unreasonable to suspect me. I'm just wondering your reasoning. I wish we didn't have to do this. I did trust you, but the only way to test our theories is to vote you off. This is a horrible thing and I am very sorry. Even more sorry if you are innocent. But it wasn't me who brought this theory forward, so if you are innocent, your blood is not on me, but Mr. Nowhere. You lied to me, there's a reason. But I do understand the reason. You escape my wrath for now, Jesus. I am completely innocent, unless somebody injected me, and then decided to have me do the dirty work. UNVOTE: Jesus/Hinkley VOTE: Mr. Nowhere/Scouts
Hinckley Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 You lied to me, there's a reason. You approached me in the bathroom and asked if I had a night action. I had never spoken to you before. I wouldn't tell someone I don't know, and therefore don't trust, about my night action. Is that the big lie? Well, I feel I have now more than sufficiently explained that. I am completely innocent, unless somebody injected me, and then decided to have me do the dirty work. Dirty work? What dirty work have you done? This seems like a new tactic. Are you suggesting we'll find, after you're lobotomized, that you were the one that killed Martin? Are you saying it was the injection that caused you to kill Martin? Now I'm rather happy that we've voted for you today. Are you a scummy little Sinister piggy after all? Oink oink. Interesting... Very interesting, indeed. Please clarify for us. Is that what you're saying now? You're bad but I made you bad? I just want to make sure everything is crystal clear before you're executed.
KotZ Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Oh, you're misinterpreting me. I'm saying maybe I was injected, but I did what you wanted me to only for that night. Like a one-time thing. You "convert" somebody for the night to kill or do what you want so your hands look clean. You have the chance of removing one Insane for good, and then the other can be found out later.
Hinckley Posted January 10, 2011 Posted January 10, 2011 Oh, you're misinterpreting me. I'm saying maybe I was injected, but I did what you wanted me to only for that night. Like a one-time thing. You "convert" somebody for the night to kill or do what you want so your hands look clean. You have the chance of removing one Insane for good, and then the other can be found out later. Typical scum tactic: Right before death, plant the seed of doubt that you would try to craft if you could admit you had committed the crime. Seems like you are revealing yourself to be the Sinister the investigator found you to be... Besides, I injected you on the first night and nobody was killed. And my findings were consistent with the death and lobotomy results of Shadows... Perhaps the seed of doubt you planted will work and people will think I caused it. If you are innocent it will certainly look bad for me now that I seem convinced of your guilt. But for me, this ridiculous ruse seems like an amateurish attempt to get rid of me after you're gone. Or you're afraid you'll be executed and they'll find evidence you're Sinister, even though in this crazy place you were actually Insane, so you're overly paranoid and pre-thinking the worst case scenario! This place is cuckoo-bananas!
iamded Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Vote:Cookie Custer (Roncanator) I do not trust him one bit. Okay, so now you jump out with this vote? Alright, I see your reasoning for it, but I am still yet to hear why you said what you did this morning. Do I have to quote it again, along with my reason for confusion, hombre?
Dragonator Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 well, thank you for those words King, I am much more certain we are doing the right thing now! Seriously, you expect us to believe that Jesus forced you to kill someone with his syringe? I find that to be completely ridiculous.
Scouty Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 I can understand you're being upset, but what is it you have against me? It wasn't me who brought the information against you. That person has revealed themselves. Is there other reason you have to suspect me? I'm certainly not saying it isn't unreasonable to suspect me. I'm just wondering your reasoning. I wish we didn't have to do this. I did trust you, but the only way to test our theories is to vote you off. This is a horrible thing and I am very sorry. Even more sorry if you are innocent. But it wasn't me who brought this theory forward, so if you are innocent, your blood is not on me, but Mr. Nowhere. Heyheyhey now. Why should the buck fall on me? I, just like you, am a messenger. I thought I already said this. I feel like I'm being ignored . It's as shallow as this: he approached me, we trusted each other, he told me the results, I told you the results. Trust me, I (or we) would've said this information to everybody at the right time. But then you went all Leeroy Jenkins and said it all out, without even asking me to verify it, as you later did. Can I be sure it's true? No, but it's something. Something is nothing if it's sealed up. You lied to me, there's a reason. But I do understand the reason. You escape my wrath for now, Jesus. I am completely innocent, unless somebody injected me, and then decided to have me do the dirty work. UNVOTE: Jesus/Hinkley VOTE: Mr. Nowhere/Scouts Unfortunately, Jesus is right. Your death or the Bear's death would be the clairvoyance to discover the truth in the investigators findings. So, with that, I'll unproxy Salvatore Samuels/Dragonator and make this more direct: Vote: King of Delaware. You know, since you voted for me when all I've done is brought something.
Hinckley Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Heyheyhey now. Why should the buck fall on me? I, just like you, am a messenger. No hard feelings. I trust you right now. If The King of Delaware is shown to be innocent, I'll trust you less. I credit you for opening my eyes to the King's guilt. He certainly seems that way now. I was duped by him and Bear. If you're right, I will trust you 100%. If not, my suspicion towards you would be highest. Does that make sense? I mean no offense, that's just the most logical way for me to approach this. I love you.
JimBee Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 First, please stop color coding everything. You're giving me a headache. Second, *sigh* The evidence is compelling, but I can guaranty that I knew for a fact that King was innocent on Janurary 1st. Could that have changed since then? Yes, especially with Jesus and all of his switching. But I still trust him, and since I know that I am not Sinister, and he's still defending me, he is innocent. I'm certainly not voting for him since I do trust him, but I don't want to say anything about knowing of his innocence as of today since it will mean I'm next on the chopping block if he turns out Sinister. And if he's innocent, I know who to vote for tomorrow. And, by the way, I can say that a little boy out in the garden told me that Martin's killer was a patient. If that helps at all.
Recommended Posts