Open 314: CSL Express [SCUM WINS]

[Coventry]

Hi, everyone. Sorry for sleeping through the first day. I have just a few observations. I’ll make them as brief as possible and try not to be a bore.

First, of course, there are those who were so quiet as to blend into the décor. I have nothing for yourfriendlynoggin and very little for Vifam or Andrew94, so I’ll get to them first. I’ll stay away from block quotes because in even a one day recap I find they can make the post painfully long but I’ll reference post numbers where it seems appropriate.

Vifam, perhaps your most interesting post was #146 in thread. In this post you tell Shotty to “back up” because Hiraki “hasn’t done anything scummy” and vote for Neil because of his “tough guy act”. What interests me here is that Shotty had just launched his attack on Hiraki, turning attention in Hiraki’s direction for the first time. And of course poor grumpy Neil had already attracted a fair amount of ill-will and suspicion, so it was an easy vote to make and also raised the real possibility of Neil responding in some way that would make him look even more guilty.

This would all be less curious if Hiraki, who you defended in that post, hadn’t thrown a sleepy second morning vote in your direction with the hint that his vote for you was all about proving Don_Johnson was scum. But given that could you explain why you finally decided to vote for Neil just as some attention was being focused on Hiraki? I mean Neil had been grumpy Mr. Cries a Lot pretty much from the start and I can’t believe you found nothing suspicious in any of Hiraki’s first day actions. So if you could tell us a little about your thought process here I would appreciate it very much. Thank you.


Andrew94, just a couple of things. In post #110 in thread you vote Oversoul and say your reasons are the same as Hiraki’s. But Hiraki gave no reasons, simply quoted, in its entirety, a post made by Oversoul.

Now Oversoul’s post was bad. It was sickly sweet and commented on everyone without pointing out anything new or putting pressure on anyone. It was a post made by someone who wanted to be seen as contributing without actually doing so, and so you’re talking about either a timid and clueless passenger on this train or scum wearing a “come on, guys, let’s get those baddies—whoever they are” mask. But since Hiraki hadn’t given reasons I’m just curious as to your wording. It’s a tiny thing…but you know, it’s a thing.

In post #153 in thread you praise Shotty’s post #147. You know, the one where Shotty has his “Eureka” moment because Hiraki used the word bussing after Shotty accused him of bussing Neil without actually using the word.

You know, early on, when Hiraki was banging on Neil non-stop while also posting that Neil was “bad town” I had a passing suspicion that they might be together. But by post #147 Hiraki was going after Neil pretty hard. If they were both scum Hiraki was right, he would have been bussing them, and it was at this point that Shotty made his accusation. So considering Hiraki using the word bussing suspicious is sort of like:

Shotty: Hiraki, I think you murdered and ate your girlfriend.
Hiraki: I’m not a cannibal.
Shotty: How interesting! No one here said you were a cannibal.

Anyway, if you could offer some thoughts on why you thought that post was so good and similarly why you thought Hiraki’s reasons were so good when he took a swipe at Oversoul I’d appreciate it very much.

And oops, getting long anyway, so I’ll break these up. I’ll have some more soonest. Glad to be up and around and once again, hi everybody.

[Coventry]

Hi, just me again. I promise I won’t do this constantly, but I’m just catching up.

The Longing

, way, way back in post #77 you said you had a couple solid leads. If they haven’t evaporated would you be so kind as to share your thoughts?

You haven’t posted much but a couple of your posts (#79 and to a lesser extent #83) were in quick defense of Vifam, and this ends in voting for Sigma in your post #85. Honestly, I thought the finger in Vifam’s direction was pretty weak, too, and Sigma did look a little shady early in the day…but considering how few posts you’ve made why the quick defense? So early on day one why not let Vifam fight his own battle? I’m just a little curious?

I’m more curious about something you did later. In posts #125, #128 and #132 you go after Neil from various directions. You know, telling him it’s scummy to insult people (I wish tells were that easy). In post #167 you even say scum are more likely to make an appeal to emotion (once again, I sure wish this was true). But both of those are far more often just bad player tells. So this is just background, but I’m curious as to whether you actually believe being emotional and begging for pity really are general scum tells or if you were just trying to put pressure on Neil. If you were, why, since he was pretty much already self-destructing?

Don_Johnson

, you really like calling for bandwagons. You were the third vote on the original Vifam bandwagon, called for a bandwagon on Hiraki after claiming Hiraki was withholding content and then, just as the noose was tightening around Neil’s neck vote Vifam again with the charming sobriquet “let’s lynch Vifam”.

So just one question: Why are you so interested in lynching Vifam?

Oversoul

.

Oversoul, Oversoul, Oversoul. Jeepers, your post #186 in thread is bad. If I was judging just based on that post I would vote for you right now.

Your post #220 in thread is very nearly as bad. I mean these posts require no one to defend themselves and bring to light no new information. They take up space and serve to give the illusion that you’re contributing. You did take a little whack at Hiraki in your post #163 when he was voting for you but that was sort of a reflexive gesture.

In #186 while giving your “town” read for Don_johnson, Shotty, Hiraki and Neil (maybe only Hiraki and Neil in tandem) you do vaguely suggest that TheLonging has done two things you didn’t like, but you never go so far as to accuse him.

I like you so far today much better. Good on calling out the two quick Vifam votes. And you know, having looked at the totality of your posts I just don’t see scum because (and I don’t mean to be impolite here) there is no pattern I can discern in your posts. Usually when scum do what you did in #186 and #220 you can get a sense of what direction they would like town to go even as they avoid ever saying it.

So just one thing: You did call out TheLonging a little in #186, but you never actually accused him. What are your feelings on him now?

Thanks again, everybody. And special thanks to anyone who bothers to answer my questions. I’ll post again with a few things for Hiraki and Shotty and after that I promise my posts will not be so long.

[Coventry]

Hi, Hiraki.

You’ve posted a lot. I like that. I also like your early vote for Oversoul, your early belief that Neil was “bad town” and not scum, the way you jumped all over Oversoul’s really bad overview post and part of your response in your post in thread #202 to Neil’s plea for all of us to come together as a family to hunt out the vipers in our midst.

I’m sorry, but there were a couple other things that didn’t thrill me quite so much. I could go on and on about why but it boils down, basically, to two things.

One: You threw an easy second vote on Vifam rather early on day one. You snatched it back when Vifam reached L-2 because you thought that was too close for a (more or less) random bandwagon. In isolation I would have no problem with this. I might very well do it myself, as I can sometimes get a bit squeamish in a game this size at L-2.

But…

First thing on day two you’re back to voting Vifam again. And when you first tried to do so you posted that it will “prove Don_Johnson scum”. This could be random, of course, nothing more than happenstance, two acts taken for completely different reasons. Or it could be that you have some little suspicion of Vifam, nothing you can put your finger on really, but something enough to make him a sort of default suspect you move on from when better opportunities arise.

I suppose it could even be a sign of some soft cooperation, you throwing gentle votes at Vifam and Vifam jumping in (his post #146 in thread) to tell Shotty to “back up” because Hiraki “hasn’t done anything scummy” and voting Neil, the most popular wagon, as soon as critical attention turned toward you.

Anyway, if you could explain your voting pattern in regard to Vifam I would be very appreciative.

Two: Your behavior toward Neil. I actually beamed when you identified him, very early on, as a bad townie. It seemed a strong and confident read. But in post 123 you vote for Neil, after listing a series of reasons that to my mind seem to prove him as exactly that, a bad townie. Now, that could be a difference in reads. But then you taunt Neil, daring him to defend himself in post #130 and putting pressure on him to make a case in #133 before this quote in post #156, responding to a question about your evolving opinion of Neil: “I did, before analyzing his posts deeply. Then I realized this had to be scum.”

There’s a bit more, including post #162: “Neil's new post is lmffo. I don't really want to say where, because it's pretty obv. he's scum now.” And post #166: “There is no town reason to withhold content”, but you seemed absolutely set on NON (No One but Neil).

So could you point to the moment when you were unable to look in any other direction? If the moment had come after Neil’s post #161 (where he did make the unfortunate statement: “I did some ISO's and read over the game again, but I've not posted any of my reads or cases. For a reason.” I could have understood it more, but it seems to have come much earlier.

It’s probably not a big thing, and certainly Neil seems to have had no reads, no cases, and no reasons. But if it’s no bother I would like you to explain a little more how you went from reading Neil as “bad town” to “pretty obv. he’s scum now.” when he was bumbling, confrontational and strangely passive aggressive from beginning to end.

Anyway, thank you for your time and any answers you might give.

[Coventry]

Drmyshottyizsik, I hate to be so blunt, and if I’m wrong you have my sincerest apologies, but everything about your behavior to this point just screams scum.

Your accusation of Hikari in post in thread #135 contains reasons untrue, generic and obsolete. You even end it by throwing out a very special message to TheLonging and Don_Johnson saying that “Hiraki/Niel Scum team is a go.”.

The slap fight between you and Hiraki that follows through the 130s and 140s eventually opens a new and really dumb avenue of (sort of) attack with “I caught you using a word!”. And this continues, on and off, until post 199, when the most curious thing happens.

Sigh... Ok Hiraki I will accept that but I was more wanting you to explain where you came up with that... bussing is a lot different that what people were saying you maybe doing. Sorry I got so caught up on that. Now let's do some scum hunting!

But this was your high point. I’m just going to post my notes on your post after 199 to the end of day one:

Post 206: Suddenly Shotty says “Neil you are the most useless player here.” after Neil went after Hiraki (badly but no worse and less voluminously than Shotty did). Huh?
Post 208, 210 and 212 and 214---engages in a very silly dispute with Neil which SHOTTY provoked—name drops someone outside game—in general does nothing that is in any way helpful, unless he’s trying to push poor cranky Neil into another meltdown.
Post 218: Asks Hiraki why he is trying to “be over dominate”.—pitty-pat.
Post 224: Tells Hiraki he is being “condescending and intimidating”—double pitty-pat
Post 227: Then after all this, when Hiraki says he is sure Neil will “flip scum” in post 226 Shotty VOTES NEIL! Putting him at L-1 with no independent reason given! Just to be “productive”!

Here is Shotty’s post number 227:

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
Fine I'll be productive

unvote
vote Neil

So, Shotty, here are my questions to you:

When you went on about bussing had you just missed that Hiraki had declared Neil scum, voted him and was increasingly tunneling on him, or was there some other thought process at play?

What was it about Sigma's repeating Hiraki's answer that finally ended your quest so thoroughly that by the end of the post you wanted to "let's go scumhunting!"?

Why the suddenly very high level of antagonism toward Neil immediately after this, in defense of Hiraki, even though you'd been picking at Hiraki the whole thread?

Why, when you'd just told Hiraki that he was being over-dominating, condescending and intimidating did you vote the bandwagon he'd been pursuing so strongly immediately after Hiraki tells you he doesn't want to argue with you because he's sure Neil will flip scum. Were you so thoroughly dominated and intimidated that you felt the need to follow Hiraki's lead, even though you'd been barking at him throughout the day, even though you were putting Neil at L-1, even though you offered no additional reasoning of your own?

Why are you voting Vifam along with Hiraki as soon as the sun rises on day two? And why was Vifam who you should have been voting for all along?

Once again, if I have misjudged you I am sorry, and I will certainly consider your future behavior and your answers to the above questions, if you care to answer them, as we continue to move forward. But for now I am sorry, I really must...

VOTE: Drmyshottyizsik

[Coventry]

Hi Hiraki.

So you became convinced Neil was scum because I suppose you're saying the...volume of his incompetence and bad behavior.

I mean the argument could be made pretty convincingly that almost no one on the train did much in the way of scumhunting on day one. I suppose that isn't so unusual for day one, depending on the personalities. So was it just the volume of Neil's uselessness or did you just become so tired of his "butthurt" that you were anxious for him to leave the train regardless of his affiliation?

I'm sorry to come back to this but you moved very quickly from seeming very certain Neil was bad town to very certain he was scum. And once you'd decided he was scum you seemed quite terminally focused on him throughout the rest of the day.

As certain as you now seem about Vifam and Don_Johnson, based on Don_Johnson jumping in to make the appearance of starting a last minute wagon on Vifam being evidence that they are in evil league together.

So in general do you equate villainy with poor, obvious and inconsistent play? I mean it surely is true sometimes, but I think good players have as much chance of being scum as bad ones. Neil was an extremely poor player first and foremost. Could he have been scum? Certainly. Was he? No. But he was condemned for being cranky, thin-skinned and unable to communicate his thoughts clearly.

Jumping in at L-1 to announce that you wanted to start a wagon on your partner would be very poor play. Does very poor play take place? Oh, you bet. But had Don_Johnson tried the same gambit twice before, once on you? Yes. So in essence you're once again equating bad play with incompetence. Surely you could be right, but you're doing the same thing twice in a row, both times with a great deal of certainty...and you were just wrong the first time.

Now if you had voted Don_Johnson there may have been a whisker more credibility to your argument, as you would have at least been attacking the player who executed the poor game play. After all, as scum Don_Johnson may have jumped in any direction for his last minute ploy. He would know Neil was innocent so he could pick any other innocent player. Or he could pick his partner, and wrap them both up in an easy to open package on day two. But you pick to vote the

partner

.

I just find myself curious about that. Anyway, thank you for your answers.

Have you given any thought to the selection of SigmaEXE003 as the first victim of the villains? I was just wondering.

[Coventry]

EBWOP:

That should be "equating bad play with villainy".

Really, it would be quite difficult to argue with someone equating bad play with incompetence.

[Coventry]

Thank you very much for your answer, Oversoul. Would you happen to have any thoughts on why Sigma was the first person the bad guys went after?

[Coventry]

Don Johnson, thank you very much for your answer. I have to admit that I distrust gut feelings. I’ll go farther and say that when I have a bad feeling about someone but no real reason for that feeling I will usually look to see if there is one, but I certainly would never cast a vote based on that solely.

Now in the case of Vifam that would be very difficult to do since he has been not so present. Too many of our fellow passengers have slipped off to the sleeping car for far too long and that puts us in danger of focusing our attention on people simply because they have posted and therefore given us something to react to.

I also rather distrust stacking lynches, which is something you and Hiraki have both danced around the edges of. That said, I do have some doubts about Hiraki and until Sigma’s post in thread #215 I had some doubts about him as well. (If you’re reading this from the great beyond, Sigma, that was a kind and generous gesture you made toward Neil, futile as it turned out to be).

Given your doubts about Sigma, however, what have you gleaned from his subsequent death and the revelation of his status? Anything? I must admit I’m a bit puzzled that no one has seemed interested in any possible implications of Sigma being the first target of the scum.

[Coventry]

Once Vifam flips scum, Don_Johnson will flip scum too.

You make some good points that bad play doesn't equate to scum all the time, but that's the point of the game. Scum usually make bad play, and we're out to get them. If we aren't looking for bad play=scum, then what are we looking for?

Hi, Hiraki. Me again.

So what if you manage to lynch Vifam and he, like Neil, flips passenger instead of scum? Would you still pursue Don_Johnson? I mean you logically could, because it was Don_Johnson’s last minute attempt to start a wagon on Vifam that set you marching down this path.

So Vifam wasn’t a partner, you could say, Don_Johnson’s actions were still a sure scumtell.

If Don_Johnson committed the mistake you are acting on why aren’t you trying to lynch Don_Johnson?

Because you see, if you lynched Don_Johnson and he was shown to be a scum you would have sufficient reason to at least engage Vifam. On the other hand, if Don_Johnson was just another flipping passenger you could lay this entire line of suspicion to rest because Vifam was only the target of the comment.

And yet you (and seemingly Shotty) have decided to strike out in the other direction. Which leaves open the possibility of arguing for the back-to-back lynchings of two quite possibly innocent men.

That just doesn’t pass a sniff test, Hiraki. So can you explain why you would want to vote for Vifam first, when the move at the end of day one was made by Don_Johnson. Because, assuming you are correct and Don_Johnson’s strategem, Don_Johnson could be guilty without Vifam being guilty, but Vifam can’t be guilty without Don_Johnson being guilty.

That just really bothers me. A lot.

As for the second part of your message that I quoted above.

I’ll take a big dumb unforced error as quick as the next person but I want to make sure it’s a scum error first.

I look for patterns in behavior, which as noted above I believe I’ve seen in Shotty’s play. I also look for more subtle errors, such as someone getting a little bit greedy and deciding they can lynch two people for the price of one if they stack the lynches in the right order.

Anyway I would just really like your logic behind wanting to lynch Vifam first for Don_Johnson's post.

Thanks again.

[Coventry]

I'm terribly sorry, Hiraki, but what you are doing then is lynching Vifam for an error (and remember, you said you do your scumhunting by looking for errors) that Don_Johnson made.

And if Vifam is town it somehow clears Don_Johnson for his action.

That isn't even close to passing the sniff test.

You haven't made any sort of case for Vifam being scum apart from this interchange. But you have made me reread your posts to this point. I mean voted for Vifam in your in-thread post #82. But in your in-thread post #107 you posted:

Nevermind. Real vote here.

Unvote, Vote: Oversoul

Which might lead a reasonable person to believe that your early vote, which you quoted as though it somehow verified your long-standing case against Vifam, was not a real or a serious vote. And since you yanked the vote you quoted just above

off

Vifam as soon as he got to L-2 I just can't believe you had a very scummy read.


Maybe I'm being dense. Maybe you're operating on a meta you haven't shared. Either of these things are certainly a possibility. But I do know you're making some mistakes here, acting in a way that doesn't flow logically and playing rather fast and loose with the actual facts of what you have done.

Posting your vote on Vifam as though it was part of a

serious

case when you yanked that vote at L-2 and never again expressed any suspicion of Vifam until

Don_Johnson's error

and then trying to use that vote to prove you had previous suspicions of Vifram when you yourself said that a later vote on another player was:

Real vote here.

Is extremely suspicious. Why? Because it seems patently dishonest. And it seems dishonest in the pursuit of pushing on your fellow passengers an extremely illogical course of action.

Anyway, as I said, maybe I'm missing something big and obvious. But I've studied your posts pretty closely, in context and isolation, and I don't think so.

As always, thank you for talking to me. And if there is anything that might make me see the error of my ways please do share. I am very close to moving my vote to you, in spite of how bad a showing I feel Shotty has made, but I would be happy if you could explain your actions in a way that would dissuade me.

[Coventry]

Shotty,

Hiraki is confirmed town because he unflinchingly championed the lynching of an innocent.

But it would have been proof of his guilt if he had championed the lynching of scum. And you suddenly and submissively went along with this dominating, condescending and intimidating person's wishes:

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
Fine I'll be productive

unvote
vote Neil

because you were executing a secret strategy to prove Hiraki was scum because he successfully lynched scum.

Did you read that after you wrote it? Hiraki pushing the lynching a helpless sap of a train passenger proves Hiraki's innocent, but if Neil had been scum it would have proven Hiraki guilty. Now that Hiraki pushed the lynching of an innocent, one you contributed to, he's aces in your book.

Once again, you are swearing up Hiraki based on the role he played in lynching an innocent and defending the role you played in that lynching by claiming it was a secret plan to prove Hiraki was scum because he led the rush to lynch his scum buddy.

Up is down. Black is white. You know, if the people on this train accept that explanation, with the logic behind it, the mafia deserves this train.

Thank you, Shotty, for answering. By the way, any thoughts on Sigma's death?

[Coventry]

And you can't see the person who pulled the wagon on an innocent (and has now thrown together a phony history of being suspicious of Vifam)...

....for what possible reason?

Thank you for your answer.

[Coventry]

Also, Shotty...

...why are you voting Vifam, exactly? Why was that who you should have always been voting for? These are sort of important questions to me and I would be extremely grateful if you could answer them.

Because you original answer to this question:

Why are you voting Vifam along with Hiraki as soon as the sun rises on day two? And why was Vifam who you should have been voting for all along?

Because Neil nor Hiraki are scum.

Really makes no sense at all. There are a lot more than three people on this train.

Anyway, thank you for any answers you decide to share.

[Coventry]

Thank you very much for your answer, Oversoul. Would you happen to have any thoughts on why Sigma was the first person the bad guys went after?

This seems like fishing for info that only scum need to know...

Really? Wouldn't scum already know? It seems to me like scum hunting. You know, exploring the thoughts and opinions of the other people on the train.

Why do you think that only scum would need to know that? Thanks for any answer.

[Coventry]

Hi, Oversoul.

I was just a little surprised that there was no discussion of Sigma's death. No seeming examination of what he had done on day one that might have led the scum to kill him. I was trying to create some. You know, investigating.

[Coventry]

Oversoul,

Neil was a passenger, not Mafia. It's a two shot goon, right? I'm not that dense, am I?

[Coventry]

Shotty,

The goon would know exactly why he shot Sigma, wouldn't he? I mean assuming it wasn't just random? Am I somehow mistaking the role of a goon here. I know it's been awhile, but...anyway, any explanations would be deeply appreciated.

[Coventry]

So I am that dense. So then the scum have both of their bullets still and we're two mistakes away from losing? Is that correct?

[Coventry]

Shotty and Don_Johnson,

Dumb is dumb and misinterpreting Sigma's death scene was certainly dumb on my part. Would either of you care to explain how that would make it more likely that I was scum, though?

[Coventry]

Actually, my pm as a replacement did not correspond to that under the spoiler button, which I failed to click on or even really register until after this discussion began. As I read the thread prior to deciding whether to replace or not I saw Neil's post with the roles, which also did not mention the revenge kill. I even thought the flavor extremely strange and wondered if Tragedy was opposed to writing a scene with a death in it on some odd moral grounds. So I pursued my ignorance about as thoroughly as one could.

So certainly you could lynch me for this mistake. You'd be one mistake away then and there wouldn't even be much intelligence you could gain from my wrongful removal from the train, except the snippets you could possibly gain from rereading my first impressions. If you are scum that's a win, and if you're not it wouldn't require any hard thinking.


Hikari, thank you for your answers. I wasn't questioning so much your decision to place a vote on Oversoul. At the time it looked like a really good vote. I was questioning why you would present your vote on Vifam as part of your existing case when later you described your vote on Oversoul as a "real" vote, which to my way of thinking indicates that your previous votes (including the one on Vifam which you removed at L-2) were not. Thank you for any clarification you can give.

[Coventry]

Hello, TheLonging.

Thanhk you for your response. I'm replacing Jakesh 97. I can't agree that I think scum use appeals to emotion more than desperate town, as Neil would tend to demonstrate. But I've certainly seen it expressed as an opinion before.

Andrew94, I try very hard to be polite because so many people seem to be unable to separate being accused of playing the part of scum with being accused of being scum. No, that sounds a bit insane, so I'll just say that people tend to get angry and have their feelings hurt, and I don't like hurting them. I tend to bother people a lot with questions and I can be a bit persistent, so the less stridently I can scream "I think you're the scum!" the less I think I'll upset someone. For instance, I have some real suspicions about Hikari but I've quite enjoyed chatting with him. So instead of screaming "you're ducking my question!" I say "I hate to bother you again, but..." because really, if I asked a good question (maybe even if I asked a stupid one that he might have to cover the answer for later) and he is scum, it is really his job to duck it.

Hikari, I do understand what you're pointing at with Don_Johnson, but I still thnk that if your opinion is dominated by your view of don_johnson's actions it would seem more logical for you to vote for don_johnson. And I'm not sure about don_johnson either, because surely he wouldn't act so obviously, over-the-top careless and superficial if he was scum. He's not even trying to sell any of the wagons he's called for other than yelling "Wheee, let's lynch 'em!". I know someone yelling for just about any old lynch is mafia 101, but he's being so blatant. And I just don't think the tells on Vifam are that strong. I hate to do this to you but can you take another try at explaining why you would prefer to go for Vifam first in this situation? Thank you, either way.

[Coventry]

Hmm...I would have rather not had what I said confirmed. I made the mess by not looking under the button, I should have had to clean it up. That said, thank you to Shotty for asking and Tragedy for answering.

Unfortunately, Shotty, it makes what I'm about to do now even less pleasant. And I do apologize.

These questions are from my first post to Shotty. The answers, in bold, are his responses to those questions.

When you went on about bussing had you just missed that Hiraki had declared Neil scum, voted him and was increasingly tunneling on him, or was there some other thought process at play?

Yes I missed that

What was it about Sigma's repeating Hiraki's answer that finally ended your quest so thoroughly that by the end of the post you wanted to "let's go scumhunting!"?

I realized I had missed it

Why, when you'd just told Hiraki that he was being over-dominating, condescending and intimidating did you vote the bandwagon he'd been pursuing so strongly immediately after Hiraki tells you he doesn't want to argue with you because he's sure Neil will flip scum. Were you so thoroughly dominated and intimidated that you felt the need to follow Hiraki's lead, even though you'd been barking at him throughout the day, even though you were putting Neil at L-1, even though you offered no additional reasoning of your own?

Because Hiraki, since he was being so dominate, seemed like that kind of guy who would bus his scum buddy, and bus him hard. So by voting for Neil, I was able to wait for a lynch and then see what happened. Right now Hiraki is confirmed town in my book.

Now maybe I shouldn’t be lecturing anyone about missing something, but in between post in thread #123, where Hiraki first voted for Neil and post in thread #135 where you first vote Hiraki for being in a scum team with Neil six of the posts relate directly to Hiraki’s vote on Neil, including two that expressly mention the fact that Hiraki is voting Neil.

That’s a lot of that exchange for someone who is legitimately scumhunting to miss, especially someone who is hinging their case on the relationship between Neil and Hiraki.

And besides, did you really get it, even then?

Sigh... Ok Hiraki I will accept that but I was more wanting you to explain where you came up with that... bussing is a lot different that what people were saying you maybe doing. Sorry I got so caught up on that. Now let's do some scum hunting!

This is your post, #199 in thread. And you still don’t seem aware that Hiraki was voting Neil at the time you accused him of being scumbuddies with Neil. It really sounds to me more like scum deciding a particular case isn’t going to work and letting it go because they don’t really care. Especially with that “let’s do some scumhunting!” on the end.

But then, you really didn’t let it go?

Why, when you'd just told Hiraki that he was being over-dominating, condescending and intimidating did you vote the bandwagon he'd been pursuing so strongly immediately after Hiraki tells you he doesn't want to argue with you because he's sure Neil will flip scum. Were you so thoroughly dominated and intimidated that you felt the need to follow Hiraki's lead, even though you'd been barking at him throughout the day, even though you were putting Neil at L-1, even though you offered no additional reasoning of your own?

Because Hiraki, since he was being so dominate, seemed like that kind of guy who would bus his scum buddy, and bus him hard. So by voting for Neil, I was able to wait for a lynch and then see what happened. Right now Hiraki is confirmed town in my book.

Okay, so you dropped your case against Hiraki because you realized you’d missed Hiraki’s vote and explanation and then decided to “go scumhunting!” with him.

But then your entire reason for voting for Neil is based on the possibility of Hiraki voting for Neil in order to bus his scumbuddy.

And then when Neil turned out to be an innocent passenger it not only confirmed Hiraki as town – confirmed – but also launched you into an immediate morning vote on Vifam, which you have never bothered to really explain.

There is dishonesty in your answers, Shotty. Either you never really gave up your case on Hiraki/Neil or you voted for Neil for a different reason than the one you provided me above. Or I am misunderstanding you, and I would like you to have an opportunity to set me right.

Any answers you could provide would be appreciated.

Also, given Shotty’s first day vote on Neil to find out if Hiraki is scum or town and Hiraki and Shotty’s second day vote on Vifam to decide if don_johnson is scum, can I ask a question for anyone?

It’s been about two years since I’ve played Mafia. Back when I played we tried to figure out who seemed scummiest and voted for them. Is it now common practice to figure out who seems scummiest and then vote for someone we think may be tenuously linked to them?

Because somehow that doesn’t seem quite right.

[Coventry]

Oh, and Glowball, welcome onto the train!

[Coventry]

A better question is : why not?

No. A better question is why.

Not that you're voting for Vifam any longer anyway. Now you're voting for Hiraki.

And by the way, Hiraki taking his vote off Vifam when you put your vote on Vifam is a town tell, though it's not enough to give me a town read for him. At this point I would be tempted to jump off any wagon that had you and Shotty both on it, no matter what I thought my reads were telling me. I'm sorry, but your behavior has been that consistently suspect.

And Andrew, could you be so kind as to explain any reasons you might have for your day two actions?

Thanks to either of you for any explanations you provide.

[Coventry]

Don_Johnson,

I'm not ignoring my reads. I said that if you and Shotty jumped on a wagon I was pursuing I would be tempted to.

I'm voting Shotty. He is the person I am most suspicious of. At the moment Hiraki would be second. You would be third, though your response has certainly moved you a bit in the pro-town direction, at least for me.

But believe me, if I was voting for someone and you and Shotty jumped in to vote with me I would certainly consider moving it. Why? Because based on your actions I do not have faith in your motives.

And see, you still haven't given me a reason for why you are voting for Vifam. You said instead that you wanted him to give you a reason not to. But that ultimately devolves to just picking someone randomly and waiting for them to talk you out of lynching them.

And why is essential, don. Why is the reason you make the choice you do, why others might be persuaded to follow your lead or at least explore their own feelings toward the person on whom you've cast your vote.

And thank you very much for answering.

[Coventry]

Hi, everyone. Sorry for the absence.

The three people I am most suspicious of currently ride the Vifam wagon. There is, to my way of thinking, which I hope I have outlined sufficiently in my previous posts, more indication that any of the three of them are bad guys than Vifam.

I could certainly be wrong. Vifam could be scum and certainly one, maybe even two of the three people of whom I am most suspicious could be innocent. But here's the thing. I can't believe I'm wrong on all three, and, coincidentally, the three who are pushing this wagon. And at this point in the game I just don't see the value to scum bussing and I see a great deal of value in scum trying to pull the train to a ruinous mislynch.

I am currently voting for Shotty. I am most comfortable voting for him. If the deadline looms and taking Shotty off the train still seems as unlikely as it does now I will vote for Hiraki. I have more misgivings about Hiraki being scum than I do Shotty, but he is my second most likely suspect.

I will not vote for Vifam today, short of Vifam confessing. I do not judge the evidence against him to be sufficient and I do not trust the motives of those who are pushing for his lynch.

[Coventry]

Tragedy,

don_johnson's vote, I believe, is actually on Vifam. I mention this because I would hate to be surprised with a sudden Vifam lynch.

Shotty,

I certainly believe there are bad guys on the Vifam wagon. Would you care to make your case against Vifam again? I mean again for the first time. Since to this point the totality of your case against Vifam is contained in the following two quotes:

Wow!

Vote Vifam

Should have went with this in the first place.

Because Neil nor Hiraki are scum.

Actually, would anyone who is currently pursuing Vifam care to...ummm...make a case? One that doesn't require the rewriting of history and includes actions taken or not taken by Vifam himself? Or, if you are determined to vote Vifam to see if don_johnson or someone else on the train is scum or not, an explanatin of why it wouldn't make more sense to vote for the person you do have evidence against first?

After having asked for this five or six times now without getting an answer I don't really expect one this time, but it makes me feel better if I keep asking and maybe it reminds some folks that to this point no case has really been made.

[Coventry]

L-2 is a nono.

Unvote, Vote: Yourfriendlynoggin

L-2 isn't really a horrible spot to be in.

L-1? I can agree. L-2? Not really. Vifam gets paranoid from here on out before people start defending him(stupidly).

Oh, Hiraki, I was so hoping you wouldn't be scum.

Thank you for finally making a case on Vifam. It is stretching, contradictory and hypocritical and gives me even more insight as to why Shotty has avoided making one throughout the day. I won't even quote and post your repeated entreaties for Neil to get an icon, including one where you point out how it will help him as much as it helps you.

We're close to the deadline. I would still prefer Shotty, but I am now sufficiently comfortable with this vote:

Unvote: VOTE HIRAKI

I'm very sorry.