Mini 1830 - Game Over

[Huntress]

Hi there!

Will read up and post later today.

[Huntress]

I wasn't able to finish catching up yesterday, but I'm working on it today in between other jobs.

[Huntress]

Most of the questions I had while reading have been addressed pretty thoroughly in the thread already but here are a few that I couldn't find answers to.

@ eagerSnake:

- Why feel the need to tell everyone (in 6) that you're not making a random vote? And why attack Victor for his vote in 74 rather than ask for an explanation?

I disagree. Establishing scumteams is a great way to POE people into your town block. For example, we will number players 1-11. Everyone starts off as scum in your book. Over the course of the day, numbers 5-11 have all earned town points, and you have moved them into your town block. Numbers 1-4 are still in your scum block as they have not earned any town points. Number 1 has scumtold, and is the scummiest of the block. After reading interactions between 1 and 2, you determine that it couldn't be scum interaction, so 2 is moved to your townblock. Etc.

And if you're wrong about 1 you end up with scum in your townblock.

rhazhbash is probtown because there are opportunistic scum on him

Who are the opportunistic scum? I know you have a scumread on Gerry, but you imply more than one here.

Sorry, meant to have two parts to that post.

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

I'm putting Manuel back into my "would lynch today" pile for this post.

Why is that?

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

@RhazhBash can you elaborate what's so scummy about this post? You can't just say "___ is scum cause of this post" And not elaborate as to why. This is why I think you're mafia. Maybe if you explained your reads a bit more. I could change my mind.

Did I miss you asking the same thing of Victor for 258?

[Huntress]

Vote: CCC

My other scum reads at the moment are eager and gamma, with Rhaz/House a little lower.

[Huntress]

Please explain eager and Gamma?

I'll dig out the detail on these tomorrow. I haven't had time to do it today.

Also, why a vanity vote on CCC instead of voting me if I'm among your scum reads?

I'd have expected a case if you were going to seriously vote CCC instead of joining my wagon.

Hardly a vanity vote to vote my top read at this stage of the Day. Why should I vote you when I had stronger reads?

I'm a little curious about why Huntress scumreads me, but I don't really think that was something I had to say out loud.

Why not?

Huntress, are you fully caught up?

I was fully caught up when I posted yesterday. I still need to do some meta reads though, and follow up on some stuff.

Might I ask why?

I'll explain tomorrow as I haven't had a chance to do it today.

[Huntress]

But I didn't say anything yesterday about not having time. That can't have been your reason then so why say now that it was?

[Huntress]

Why?

[Huntress]

I don't like this opening at all. It feels like just stalling and trying to avoid suspicion. The questions feel weak, and I don't see where their line of questioning is going either. They didn't have any questions at all for CCC, who they ended up voting for, and who is supposedly their top scumread. Nor any questions for House's slot, or Gamma's slot, who they also are supposedly scumreading. The only question for me was stuff from RVS which is weak.

The questions were there to fill in some gaps for me, that's all. I would have followed a couple of them up but House beat me to it, so I left it for the moment. I didn't need to ask CCC anything as I'd already seen enough to give me a scum read on him. The whole thing is a work in progress and I'll ask questions when I need to. I see no point in asking about stuff that's previously been discussed at length when I've already read the results of that discussion. Why would you want me to when it would just clutter up the thread?

@Huntress: Because you were catching up.

I had caught up by then.

[Huntress]

Main reasons for my scumread on CCC are as follows:

Post 50: When Grendel asked eager about him, CCC made sure he got his own oar in first showing that not only did he want to steer the discussion his way, but also that he wasn't interested in hearing how eager responded, which suggested to me that he already knew eager's alignment.

95: I didn't like his reasons for his suspicions here. The first, on Gamma, was just taking advantage of Gamma's own comment and calling him scummy for something that really wasn't - it was just a guess at the setup - and the second, on Jester, didn't hold true, as CCC later admitted.

121: How can you have a scum read on someone who's completely absent?

122: More self-meta.

Another thing that is niggling at me is the use in several of his posts of the phrase "I can easily see a Town player ...". I feel like he's doing this for effect, a sort of "I'm a Townie too!" statement.

I do think that scum trying to maintain flexibility in reads might want to be slow to commit to a reads list; but again, I can see how a Town player might have this opinion.

This reply to Victor re: Square was written immediately after CCC had posted his own readlist (which was not exactly a shining example of commitment to reads) and gives me a similar impression to the above, that he made the list because he thought it would make him look town. The list itself gives more of a scum vibe than a town one.

Because you didn't see fit to present a case on CCC, who nobody was voting, while simultaneously calling me scum, when I had a viable wagon.

It doesn't add up.

I don't see why. I don't need to write up a case to know who I want to vote, and if I did choose someone with votes already on them it would have been Gamma, or maybe eager, not you. You were only fourth on my list, a minor read. Why would I vote my lowest read at the time rather than one of the others?

[Huntress]

Gamma's votes were pretty stale iirc. My slot's wagon was the one being pushed.

It struck me as odd that you would plunk down a naked vote and not attempt to present a case since you saw something that apparently nobody else did.

I'd been spending my time finishing my catch up read so it was either post my reads then as I did or leave them for next day to add more detail. I chose the first option and I'm glad I did as it turned out I didn't have enough time the next day to do a proper follow up.

The only points I had against Rhaz were from posts 29 and 89, mainly the latter. I did have a question for Rhaz but he'd gone before I could ask it. As for your slot's wagon being the one being pushed, apart from eager's vote, which just looked like a pressure vote, the second vote on Gamma was more recent than the second vote on your slot.

[Huntress]

The question of whether eager has prior experience with me is equivalent to whether I have prior experience with eager, is it not?

The point is that Grendel asked for eager's opinion on it, not yours, and your post looked like an attempt to pre-empt that.

I suspected deliberate lurking.

Lurkers actually post occasionally. GreenNope hadn't even been logged in since before role PMs were sent out.

That was my genuine readslist. If I'm going to be posting a list of reads as Town, I want it to be genuine.

But you look like you're trying to appear "as Town", rather than actually being town. It's like you wanted to make the point about scum trying to maintain flexibility in reads being slow to commit to a reads list, but you needed to do your own reads list first so that you would be able to say that without people applying it to you too.

[Huntress]

Eager, having just read this page I'm tempted to vote you purely for what I've read here, but I'll refrain for now as I still prefer to lynch CCC.

I'll be writing up my notes on you after dinner so I'll have more to say then.

[Huntress]

So, you're suggesting that I read Victor's post, decided to make that point in reply, decided on a (presumably false?) readslist, and typed up that readslist post - all within two minutes?

I'm simply not that fast.

Ah, you're right, I missed the timing of those posts. My bad.

[Huntress]

My read on eager is mainly a gut read but I'll try to pin it down a bit.

Eager's posting felt off from his very first post. Most people who want to do something other than rvs to start discussion just do it. Eager made a point of drawing the players attention to what he was doing. He was too quick to call Gamma town in 70, especially in view of his statement that he starts with the assumption that everyone is guilty until proved innocent. I didn't like the second part of 80. If he thought Victor might be town with an ulterior motive then he should have waited to see what came of it rather than point it out. Either way it would have been better to wait for Victor's explanation first. His vote on Square in 600 was for an extremely flimsy reason. It was also for something that Manuel did, not Square. He's throwing the words "doubtcasting" and "WIFOM" around far too much and adding distracting stuff like 697.

Vote: eagerSnake

[Huntress]

Eager's posting felt off from his very first post. Most people who want to do something other than rvs to start discussion just do it. Eager made a point of drawing the players attention to what he was doing. He was too quick to call Gamma town in 70, especially in view of his statement that he starts with the assumption that everyone is guilty until proved innocent. I didn't like the second part of 80. If he thought Victor might be town with an ulterior motive then he should have waited to see what came of it rather than point it out. Either way it would have been better to wait for Victor's explanation first. His vote on Square in 600 was for an extremely flimsy reason. It was also for something that Manuel did, not Square. He's throwing the words "doubtcasting" and "WIFOM" around far too much and adding distracting stuff like 697.

These reasons don't match up with what she said originally. At first, she claimed it was because the page with Me & Manuel. Then later made up a bunch of reasons, threw "gut" in there, and added one horribly bad point about that page at the end, which was piggy-backing off of what Manuel and House had already said.

Not true. I first stated my suspicion of you in 345, well before that page, and the comments on the earlier stuff were drawn from the notes I made during my first read which lead up to that scumread. My reaction to page 25, mentioned in 624, was based on

your

posts on that page, not anyone else's.

Her reasoning:
1. RVS (She's reaching, pulling straws, trying to spin an attempt to start discussion into something scummy, and admits to conf!bias by saying "I read your first post as scummy, so then I read the read of your posts as scummy, looking for easy lynch)
2. Quick to call Gamma town (She's piggy-backing what other's said, and grave-digging, I explained why I changed on him already)
3. 2nd part of 80 (She's calling me scum for making valid points/taking stances/engaging players)
4. Vote on Square, use of "buzzwords" (She's piggy-backing off of Manuel and House)

1. This is a good example of why I am finding you scummy. The way you have twisted my words into something completely different to suit yourself and are presenting it as fact.
2. Are you suggesting that I ignore everything that happened before I came in? Nope, not going to do that. If I think it's worth mentioning I will.
3. Nope. I'm taking issue with you pointing out that Victor might be town with an ulterior motive. If you were town and thought that then I would have expected you to wait and see rather than draw attention to it.
4. Nope. My comments were all my own.

[Huntress]

But why would he bus when he could just have voted for eagle or left his vote on square?

[Huntress]

All of his reads are contridiictions. He states manuel is town yet votes him here. He says I'm prob town but says he could consider voting me. He says his biggest scumreads are huntress, jester, victor, yet doesn't push on any of them, and instead goes on the opposite wagon.

Am I insane or am I the only one seeing this??

Square was giving his impressions page by page there. The contradictions you're seeing appear to be the progression of his reads through the game. Although I don't see how he ends up on Manuel.

Again, I am interpreting your words from my POV.

What you're doing is not interpretation, more like creative writing.

Here are some follow-up questions I may have used:
If he claimed ulterior motives: So you're claiming a non-town win condition?

How does claiming to be town with ulterior motives equate to claiming a non-town win condition?

What he was doing, in this case, was a lack of action rather than an action. Had he not pointed it out, there would have been no discussion of it.

I disagree. Posting without voting can be a good way to start discussion (I've sometimes done that myself), but my point there was that rather than waiting to see who reacted, he presented himself as one who was Doing Something. Meaning, he gave me the impression he was trying to

look

townie rather than actually being townie.

[Huntress]

I've a town read on Manuel so I'm not willing to vote there.

@ Grendel:

As far as I can see, the following quote is your only explanation of your read on Manuel:

I don't feel like dissecting posts 254, 259 tonight, but both rubbed me the wrong way. And I'm not seeing any thing that looks townie since my explanation on why I thought he could be town. He had a lacking presence in today's voices imo.

What was it about those posts that bothered you?

@ CCC:

I know you had a slight early suspicion of Manuel, but your recent comments on him seem to be more based on eager's posts about him rather than Manuel's own posts.

I've got some comment's on eager's case on Manuel but I've run out of time for now.

[Huntress]

i'd also go for huntress, we gave her enough time and i think she's taking advantage of the situation

Pardon? I don't recall that you were waiting for anything from me? If there's something I've missed please link me to it.

Probably because her reason for voting me is horrible. She claims to have done meta reads, I'd assume she would prioritize those on her scumreads, but I don't think she did, I think she was just trying to look like she was doing something as an excuse for not posting.

Not true. I never claimed to have done meta reads - only that I was thinking of doing some. I did take a quick look at CCC's meta but didn't find anything useful. I certainly haven't used it as an excuse for not posting and anyway, no excuse for that was needed because I

have

been posting.

Once again you are just making things up.

[Huntress]

You literally said you had meta reads to do. If you thought I was scum, you would have prioritized doing a meta read on me.

My top scum read at the time was CCC, not you.

[Huntress]

Going to recheck my read on Gamma because I was getting a more town vibe from him towards the end of Day one. Also Grendel as I had him down as a possible associate of CCC and/or eager.

Vote: CCC

[Huntress]

No way am I going to be able to catch up with this tonight but I've skimmed the last few pages. Jester's hammer was bad. Regardless of the outcome.

House saying there could be both bodyguard and doctor in the game doesn't make sense and I don't think he's explained it, has he?

[Huntress]

Gut is warring with logic here. I

really, really

don't like House's play at the moment but logic tells me he is probably town, although the fact he wasn't nk'd goes against that a bit. Whereas with Gamma it's the opposite. Again, with Jester gut says town but that hammer was bad. I still have a scumread on CCC and townreads on Manuel and Gerry.

House saying there could be both bodyguard and doctor in the game doesn't make sense and I don't think he's explained it, has he?

@ House:

Can you explain this please? Or if you have, can you link me to it?

Uh, it seems unreasonable to watch anybody except the PR that counterclaimed scum's fakeclaim.

Yet you didn't consider it unreasonable not to protect that same PR.


I think the remaining scum are between CCC, House and Gamma, and that there's been some hard bussing going on.

[Huntress]

Huntress you've been tunneling CCC the whole time, could you expand on the fos on him specifically?

It started with my early read on him that he was trying to look town rather than being town, there's been more of that since and I haven't seen much that would cause me to change my mind.

To elaborate: House wanted to trick scum into fakeclaiming doctor.

What makes you think that? Or even that there was a chance of it working? It seems more likely to me that House was either rolefishing or trying to neutralise the doctor if we have one.

[Huntress]

What's an OGI?

[Huntress]

That's no proof of anything. In fact, it's one of the reasons I'm suspicious of House now. (If you're referring to the MD thread.)

[Huntress]

I gave my reads in 1669.

I'm not keen on voting Gamma at the moment. Still debating with myself over House and will try to put something into words on that later.

Vote: CCC

[Huntress]

Sorry I haven't had time to keep up with this over the last two days. I'm working on a summary of my thoughts re: House but it's not ready yet. I hope to have it done later today.

[Huntress]

This is much shorter than was planned, because I realised as I was going through that I was being affected by confbias, so I've cut it down to just the salient points.

The only suspicions I had against Rhaz were from posts 29 and 89, mainly the latter. I'm still baffled by the fuss House made over my not voting him when I finished my original catch up. From the rest of Day one I did get the feeling that he wasn't quite so interested in lynching CCC as he made out to be, but that's a bit subjective. He didn't use the role he claimed to have to protect Square, so we didn't get the benefit of at least one action from the JOAT. In 1431 he renewed the briefly stalled lynch against the uncounterclaimed watcher instead of waiting for an explanation re: the use of the word "blue" (and was promptly sheeped by Gamma and Jester).

The only sticking point is the push on eager but I guess it boils down to this: I don't believe House's bodyguard claim. I don't like the way he was calling for a doctor to claim, or suggesting there might be another protective role, and I think if he was really town with that role he would have waited until the game was over before making an MD thread about it. There was no reason for him to claim when he did (shortly after making that thread), and risk attracting the nk, when his whole reason for not protecting Square was that he thought he was more valuable than him, in which case it would have been better to keep silent about any role.

Vote: House

[Huntress]

That's what I thought at first, then he directly stated that he was tricking scum.

What made you believe him?

I'm voting Huntress for playing it too safe, especially around my wagon.

Explain please.

[Huntress]

I'm giving the "Gamma Is Town" hypothesis a good look because I think that House has a good point; leaving House alive looks a lot like trying to end up getting Gamma lynched, which suggests that it might be a mislynch.

If both were town, which do you think scum would consider more of a threat: House or Gamma?

She did step into the game and almost immediately leap to a suspiciously convenient scumread, which she's then sat on and pushed ever since.

What was "suspiciously convenient" about my initial reads (four of them, not one as you claim here)? "Almost immediately" is inaccurate too.

[Huntress]

Look at the positioning Huntress is doing. She was setting up to demand my lynch after Gamma flipped town.

Nope. I want you lynched first.

JoaT flipped.
Watcher flipped.
Bodyguard claimed. Not cc'ed.

Almost all my posts since your claim have raised a question about your claim, which I guess is the real reason you're attacking me.

I'm a bullet-proof townie

and although it's not a direct counterclaim, I don't see us having four town PRs in an eleven player game, especially where three of them have a chance of preventing a kill (Square claimed a block).

[Huntress]

1) I suspected the same thing as you, but when he explained it it made a lot of sense thanks to The Thing.
2) You have been Ehh on your read on me all of Day 3. Like you're deliberately avoiding forming a hard opinion on me.

1) Where did he explain it? I don't recall seeing anything satisfactory about it.
2) That's because I don't have a hard opinion on you. Gut says town - you "feel fair but look foul" - but there's a lot of sheeping, buddying etc., that I didn't like. Stuff like 1591, where your argument against Jester's hammer could be equally well applied to your L-1 vote.

[Huntress]

He may not have said it himself, but he agreed when I said it.
2) How does
Quickhammer = changes vote after counterclaim?

1) But you said that when he explained it it made a lot of sense, and now you're saying he was just agreeing with you? I think we're going round in circles here. I asked in 1679 what made

you

think that, not what House said. Can you go back and answer that please.

2) There was no counterclaim. House put his vote back on Victor purely because Victor said he was going to bed. You sheeped him, thus enabling the hammer. Read what you wrote in 1591. The knowledge that Victor wasn't lying could apply to you just as much as to Jester.

And instead of seeking clarification, you were happy to sit back and let me lynch him and only spoke up after his wagon fell apart.

I believe I did say that I wasn't interested in lynching him, when there were two votes on him (neither from you by the way, but you do seem to want to take credit for everything that happens in the game, even when it's others that are doing it). Contrary to what you are saying I did ask him for clarification, but I was more concerned with sorting out my thoughts on you.

[Huntress]

1) I thought he was doing it because it felt like a likely town play.
2) Clarify your point please.

1) I can't see why you would think that. It looks far more like a scum play to me so it seems strange that you would jump to the conclusion that it was a likely town play.
2) My point was that the thing you were accusing Jester of could equally apply to you.

I'm giving the "Gamma Is Town" hypothesis a good look because I think that House has a good point; leaving House alive looks a lot like trying to end up getting Gamma lynched, which suggests that it might be a mislynch.

If both were town, which do you think scum would consider more of a threat: House or Gamma?

Of those two? House would have been the bigger long-term threat. Gamma would have been little to no threat (due to being mislynch bait).

I don't see the relevance.

How does it make sense to you that scum would choose to leave House alive at risk to themselves just to push a lynch on a player who you think is already an easy lynch, and little or no threat to them? It doesn't to me, yet that is the reason House has been putting forward for his continued existence, which you are accepting too easily.

And I never said all your scumreads were suspiciously convenient. But your vote was.

And your latest readslist consisted of me, House, and Gamma. House makes way more sense as Town than Scum, and I think he's got a good point about him not dying overnight suggesting that Gamma is likely Town. And I know I'm Town. This is a very suspicious readslist, because the odds of picking three players out of seven, with an estimated two scum, and getting no scum are only two in seven. (If you were Town, moreover, you'd be picking three players out of six - there's only a one in five chance of that leading to a scumfree list. And that's the odds if you pick randomly. If I assume you have even the vaguest competence at recognising scum, your odds of getting it that badly wrong drop even further).

So your "suspiciously convenient" boils down to the fact that you didn't like me voting you after my first read of the thread. I disagree with you about my list. I believe that at least one of them, and probably two, are scum, whereas I know for a fact that person you are voting for is town, so either you are scum or your ability to say who is town and who is scum is not as great as you seem to think it is.

Something just occurred to me. Huntress is currently voting House on the basis that she doesn't believe there are four PRs, right? And she claims to have one of those PRs, while the other two (Square and Victor) are mod-confirmed and certain.

If Huntress is telling the truth, then, she knew about the four PRs since the start of the day.

So, question for Huntress - why didn't you vote House from the

start

of today? Why the wait until you were forced to claim?

No, the four PRs wasn't the only reason for voting House. I didn't even mention that until I claimed (for obvious reasons). If you read my posts you will see the concerns I had about House, and why I didn't vote him immediately. I was still weighing up both sides of the equation.
As for your last point, there was only one vote on me when I voted House. No question of me being forced to claim then so you're wrong about that.

[Huntress]

Also Huntress can you out your reads please? Do you also think House and Gamma? Or are you still fixated on House and CCC. Personally I think CCC is town and being wrong here.

CCC still hasn't supported his vote on me apart from saying that he thought my first vote on him was suspicious and claiming that my scum reads were all town. He seems to be just trying to find things to support his vote rather than really scumhunting.

If you're town and want any chance at all to redeem yourself, take a long hard look at how quiet Huntress was until I voted her, realize the truth that has been eating at me since the Day began, and hammer her.

I'm happy for anyone to look at the timings of my posts, which were 24 hours after my previous post in which I voted you. Unlike you I cannot be posting all day. But I think the reactions of Gamma and yourself to my voting you are more telling than any of my posts.

But I claimed yesterDay, which means she knew my claim at the beginning of toDay. So why wouldn't town!Huntress vote me at the beginning of the Day instead of wait until she was forced to "claim" to state her suspicions, as CCC brought up?

Repeating CCC's misrep? Do you trust him that much that you don't bother to check what he says?

Manuel are you willing to lynch gamma today? Huntress you too?

I'd rather lynch CCC than Gamma, but Gamma is third choice.

That is to say; his scumread on House depends on his scumread of Gamma.

Another example of not reading before posting? It only took me a few seconds to check back and see Gerry's reason for voting House.

[Huntress]

Oh, I see what you're getting at, now. In which case you're asking the wrong question.

The right question isn't whether House or Gamma (who looked like easy mislynch bait at the end of Day 2) would be the greater long-term threat. The right question to ask is whether House or Grendel would have been the greater short-term (i.e. over the next Day) threat.

Given how hard House was pushing Gamma and his previous success in pushing his scumreads to lynch, House would have looked less threatening over a single day than Grendel; scum would presumably have expected House to push Gamma to a lynch, and then would either have nightkilled House the following night or tried to mislynch him on Day 4.

Nope. I asked the right question, which was about your acceptance of House's comment. But comparing him with Grendel, what in House's voting gives you the impression that he would have stayed on a single suspect all Day?

Your reaction to the vote on you is looking a lot like scum.

What reaction are you referring to here?

You've tried presenting subtly flawed logic to support the Gamma lynch;

Where did I present anything to support the Gamma lynch?

Gerry's reason:

Look at the page before that.

[Huntress]

Manuel/mal, the fact Huntress was at L-1 for so long and unhammered should tell you she's scum.

Nope. It tells you that there is scum on my wagon.

I had a suspicion that GreenNope was scum a and offered to replace into that slot first due to my preference for playing scum.

Don't ask me why I thought that, just a, "ding ding ding! ME WANT" for the slot as I was following the game.

House was still using this even though it's been pointed out at least twice that GreenNope hadn't logged in since before the role PMs were sent out. It's not a reason, it's a bad excuse to help out a bad case.

2124 is a retcon by Gamma to back up his vote, guilty conscience perhaps? Mal claims to be drunk, also feels he needs to find a reason before he votes me, despite previously declaring intent (didn't he have a reason for that?). That's the second time that slot has hammered town while supposedly drunk.

*happy dance*

Yep, you're happy because you've got your second mislynch. Who are you planning to make your third?

Fun fact: House has tried to push a lynch on everyone in the game apart from Grendel and Square, both of whom were nk'd, and Manuel, who he just said he was fine with leaving a vote on. And he's started looking at Manuel again toDay.


I'll try and get a final summary of my reads out if I get time.

[Huntress]

No.

[Huntress]

Reads Summary

CCC: For initial scumread see 577 and 597. Nothing he's written stands out as townish. See my more recent posts for comments on his Day three play.

Gamma: There's a lack of guile about his posting which makes me think he's town, but with a few reservations that make me think he could possibly be scum. See 1993.

Gerryoat: His posts feel like town. He's been questioning stuff and I haven't seen anything that made me think scum.

Manuel: Town. He's actively trying to solve the game.

House: Scum. See 1817 and later posts.

Malpascp: Possible scum. I was reading Jester as town but his first hammer was bad. Mal's posting toDay hasn't been so good and 2137/2139 look like covering himself. And I see he's the third person to misrep my vote on House. But they can't all be scum.


Town

Manuel
Gerry
Gamma
Malpascp - this is the main change from my earlier reads
CCC
House

Scum

[Huntress]

Huntress why do you think that we cant have 4 PRs?
As i said before i think 4 PRs vs 3 scum with at least 1 scum PR seems to be balanced for me.

Four PRs in an eleven player game would mean half the town being PRs. And there were too many ways to either block or divert the nk. It's possible if Square's actions were not very strong but from what I understand it's unusual nowadays. A few years ago it was different.

But my main reason for doubting House was that his actions didn't fit with his role. Particularly in regard to Victor.

Also House bussing Eager day 1 is to unreasonable.

Yet he had no problem with accusing me of doing exactly that.