Because I thought it should have been obvious to him, he's played several games now.
I was not trying to be evasive, nor was I trying to go on and on about my weird theory. I figured your next question would be something along the lines of why did I change my mind so I went ahead and gave you the why.
Posted on mobile.aquariacentral.com
Perhaps Lab Rat should have gone to bed last night when she told us she was going to. Maybe she would have thought up more believable answers had she slept on it.
Lab was in agreement with what Piranha had posted, saying she also thought there were 5 scum. She also stated that Pappy likes to hand pick roles. She even told Pir to look at the games Pappy modded (instead of asking who he's been teammates with in prior games).
After that, she told him she did not agree we should guess who Pappy picked "for obvious reasons." When Pir asked Lab Rat to explain what those obvious reasons are, Lab replied but refused to answer him "just in case the roles were not random."
Clearly, Labby could have answered the question asked without naming names, as could anyone else with any experience in the game -- and as Lady G and I both did ourselves. But for some reason, Labby didn't want to. She blew this off instead.
I asked Lab Rat why she wouldn't answer what seemed to be a simple, direct question. She said because she didn't want to "give away townie PRs".
Not a good answer, Lab Rat.... as I pointed out to you when I asked you the same question again. Having given it more thought, Lab Rat then came up with a different answer: "it should have been obvious to him, he's played several games now."
It concerns me when someone, pressed to answer a question twice after refusing it the first time then comes up with an excuse instead of giving a real answer. Had Lab Rat misread the original question and that's why she said she didn't want to give away townie PRs? (That wasn't the question asked of her.) Or had she become irritated that a relative noob asked what she thought was a dumb question which was too obvious for her to bother with?
"I was not trying to be evasive..." <-- yet, Lab evaded my question when she replied.
"...nor was I trying to go on and on about my weird theory." <-- yet, Lab did exactly that.
"I figured your next question would be something along the lines of why did I change my mind so I went ahead and gave you the why." <-- again, Lab Rat avoided a simple question by answering (instead) something that was not asked.
This doesn't add up. Lab wasn't trying to protect the identity of our townie PRs (who were not even being named). More likely, she already knows who got the mafia roles because they are her teammates. That's why she misread the question Piranha asked originally, why she evaded the point in her reply, and why she later gave me two different answers.
I vote to lynch Lab Rat.
She seems to be playing fast and loose with the truth this game. This, along with many other suspicions already raised and talked about by other players, leads me to believe Labby is scum.
