That's strange there should be a quoted post there. Probably because it was a post with only 2 quotes.
So, in short, Prof P is likely lying about his QT Ability stating that my role could be a safe claim. Thoughts, particularly @scattered mind?
I agree with this. The thing I'm nervous about rn is that if I were scumProf, I would be stalling things out as much as humanely possible right now, and might manipulate a NP through apathy/human error.One thing for sure, if PP's going to sub out we should see that as an attempt to escape this and should lynch him before that happens.
I agree with this. The thing I'm nervous about rn is that if I were scumProf, I would be stalling things out as much as humanely possible right now, and might manipulate a NP through apathy/human error.
I always doubt my cases and re-evaluate the strength of it; I just don't show it if it's the best option for the day for the sake of pressure. I think it is very plausible that NP is scum, but I'm giving him the leverage he so-desperately desired to give him a chance to contribute. If Prof gives a good response, I will move back to him, as he is second-scummiest rn.Are you no longer certain NP is scum? If not, what made you think that? You said something about your role name that he mentioned that made you for the first time doubting your case on him, but then he gave an unexpected reason for that that does not have much connection to roles, just to PP's personality.
Given the situation that Prof is nearly lynched, do you think it's truly worth using a sub up for someone you may be able to play for a matter of hours? I feel like it'd be best to save the substitute for night, and would do that myself, so confirmation about how this will be handled would be appreciated.@Professor Palutena has requested to be subbed out due to time constraints. Replacements are being contacted.
Hades demands that I apologize for the inconvenience
I noticed in my role that it lacked anything about my QT partner perhaps having a safeclaim, which has become somewhat standard in roles recently. I checked because recently a lot of QTs have been town/indie or town/scum partnerships, and so I was more cautious than normal. I then figured that I could perhaps catch out Prof P in a lie and thus 'confirm' his alignment if I said the right thing, and so that's why I asked what I did, and phrased it the way I did.
This could be buddying. Maybe. Both alignments can ask this, but if PP is scum, this is giving Prof P a chance to explain, which is what scum would want to happen in this situation. This could be the case especially if there's something that can be explained based off PP's role, which IE would have known in advance.
We want a hammer so that a sub isn't used unnecessarily and Prof has made it clear he won't post again because he wants to sub out.As everyone has said, that sub out is really scummy.
##UNVOTE: lord o da rings
##VOTE: Professor Palutena
Nobody else should vote Prof. P. We don't want an early hammer, as he could give us info on bb if he does flip town.
Go ahead with the hammer, but I'd still like to hear thoughts from these people first:We want a hammer so that a sub isn't used unnecessarily and Prof has made it clear he won't post again because he wants to sub out.
It's strange that you say this, because I remember the exact opposite. When town Prof. is suspected, he generally disappears or self-votes. When scum Prof. is suspected, he's generally calm, cool, and collected. I'll try to find a good quote of his that says this.Exactly, the only reason he's watching the thread is probably to stall us from hammering as a last ditch effort, in case a he'll sub out and the votes will reset.
Town PP would not sub out like this- he would at least put down a comment responding to bb, but scumPP would definitely prefer not to post anything that might give any further info to the town. @Professor Palutena if you are town and just throwing this game, well, that's a shame, but I don't think that's the case knowing you.