Mini 387: Suicide Bombers, GAME OVER (at last)!

[pablito]

I'm here, let's wagon some poor guy.

[pablito]

I want to vote one of Twoamuzito

[pablito]

But most of all I really don't like Sherlock's posts. But I'm not going to vote him. Seriously Sherlock looked the scummiest to me on the re-read. Tried to make mountains out of molehills.

[pablito]

Sherlock's gone. I'm here now. But I would completely agree with that vote, c_d if he were still around.

[pablito]

Here.

[pablito]

unvote, vote: chaotic_diablo

because someone needs to vote and someone needs to be voted now.

[pablito]

rrrrrrrico.....y suave.

[pablito]

unvote, vote: ubertimmy

I felt compelled.

[pablito]

well then,

unvote, vote: kellychen

[pablito]

blah blah I'm not reading

unvote

[pablito]

vote: Tamuz

I'm not going to bother with the whole c_d mishap there. honest mistake, and I don't see any of the reactions to the discussion as being necessarily scummy.

[pablito]

what you call Twito's finding. that c_d decided to comment on what OMGUS is even though it was already explained. showing that c_d failed to notice what others said before he bothered to post the definition of OMGUS. Damn, you made me comment on it.

[pablito]

c_d and dead rik are arguing points at different levels I think. therefore they're not attacking each other's direct arguments. Also, I think c_d's stealing examples have not been clear enough to make a good point.

good to know for future reference.

also,

unvote, vote: Dead rikimaru

because I sense he's trying to pick an easily won fight.

[pablito]

True I am.

"pick a fight" was a term I used to describe your vote on c_d. It wasn't meant to be literal. Just that you're choosing the easier battle to be won.

[pablito]

I'm not following the replacement tell.

and the difference between DK and KC. She did it first. And a lot of other things in it. I'll discuss this once off my percoset and therefore more coherent.

[pablito]

ah, gotcha, KC. valid point. I tend to not value those types of replacement tells.

Oh yes, I really think that Sherlock was acting scummy and I do not agree with his moves. What purpose does it serve me to mention it now?

To show that I'm taking the game in a different light. And that I choose to do what I want independent of the guy I replaced.

Whether it started an argument or not, oh well. But I think that replacements ought to make some mention and show their stance on the guy they replaced. I think that replacing into a game without discussing pertinent events is not always helping the town. The biggest benefit a replacement can give is to give a new point of view on some mundance points that might have been passed over long ago.

However, in this game, there wasn't exactly anything that was truly huge when I came in, so yeah, whatever.

[pablito]

How incredibly astute of you.

unvote: Dead Rik

[pablito]

hmmm...time for a wagon!

1 for ubertimmy, 2 for MSG

Original Roll String: 1d2

1 2-Sided Dice: (2) = 2

[pablito]

vote: molestargazer

[pablito]

good point.

unvote

neongrey is three

Original Roll String: 1d3

1 3-Sided Dice: (1) = 1

[pablito]

vote: ubertimmy

[pablito]

wtf? did I take anything seriously yesterday and then if you think so, why do you assume that I had intentions of any sort?

FOS: every single scum who's trying to paint me as an opportunistic lynch

[pablito]

Seriously, I'm going to look at all of my posts from yesterday. Out of 20 of them, maybe three or four were productive or serious. Let me isolate them:

But most of all I really don't like Sherlock's posts. But I'm not going to vote him. Seriously Sherlock looked the scummiest to me on the re-read. Tried to make mountains out of molehills.

I wouldn't even consider this one highly serious, but it was honest and it turns out this is one of my more controversial posts. People think this is scummy, but I'm just calling what I think of my predecessor.

Then it takes a long while before I actually do anything worthwhile again.

vote: Tamuz

I'm not going to bother with the whole c_d mishap there. honest mistake, and I don't see any of the reactions to the discussion as being necessarily scummy.

what you call Twito's finding. that c_d decided to comment on what OMGUS is even though it was already explained. showing that c_d failed to notice what others said before he bothered to post the definition of OMGUS. Damn, you made me comment on it.

Here I voted and I tried to subtly not comment while commenting on c_d's definition of OMGUS.

Then I stupidly voted DeadRik for "voting" c_d even though he never had.

Then the last post of any worth was

ah, gotcha, KC. valid point. I tend to not value those types of replacement tells.

Oh yes, I really think that Sherlock was acting scummy and I do not agree with his moves. What purpose does it serve me to mention it now?

To show that I'm taking the game in a different light. And that I choose to do what I want independent of the guy I replaced.

Whether it started an argument or not, oh well. But I think that replacements ought to make some mention and show their stance on the guy they replaced. I think that replacing into a game without discussing pertinent events is not always helping the town. The biggest benefit a replacement can give is to give a new point of view on some mundance points that might have been passed over long ago.

However, in this game, there wasn't exactly anything that was truly huge when I came in, so yeah, whatever.

Here I discuss why I bothered to comment on Sherlock.

Then my final posts were to dice roll and I ended up on ubertimmy and that was it.

There was nothing that was of importance yesterday that happened up until the time that ubertimmy was wagonned.

Jack, why do you suddenly seem so surprised that I'm saying that I wasn't entirely serious? I thought part of your argument on me would've been that I was randomly bandwagonning everyone on D1. If you bothered to look at my insistence on commenting on Sherlock, you would've found easily that yesterday I was vote-hopping a lot.

FOS: Jack

for being so narrow-minded in his argument on me that he wouldn't pick up how obviously lackadaisically I was voting yesterday.

Also, Masterchief, explain your argument on anything. You seem to be randomly commenting on everything for the sake of posting, not for the sake of actually trying to communicate something. Your "what?" and "yeah, I think there's tension surrounding mole and pablito" is so noncommital and unproductive.

[pablito]

DeadRik, a VERY good question.

Honestly, I haven't any big strong tells and I have a feeling that these replacements are just distracting me from trying to find anything worthwhile.

On the basis of gut, neongrey for trying to sneak her vote onto ubertimmy at the last moment possible and also molestargazer for trying to chastise me on the random vote yesterday.

I will look everything over though.

[pablito]

I do find it very suspect that molestargazer decided to chastise my diceroll vote and then suddenly thereafter, ubertimmy was taken out by a torrent of votes.

I feel that msg did not like ubertimmy's lynch at all.

[pablito]

Just for that,

vote: masterchief

Then

unvote, vote: the central scrutinizer

[pablito]

Again, has it not been clear that I've been jumping wagons? And why is this suddenly big news?

Although, thank you very much TCS for that latest post. You put effort into it and it's very much appreciated.

[pablito]

So who wants to bash TCS for using that phrase - since you know, you guys made a fuss about it before?

Also I'll bother to defend KC. The original time when C_D and KC got into it, there was relatively no pertinent discussions happening. They both got into something, but at least it was something - which is more than I or the rest of us can say. And this healthy discussion, even "makes mountains out of molehills" is accurate, is pressuring people into talking about something rather than nothing.

Therefore, no matter KC's alignment, she's at least helping the town by bothering to talk about something especially when there is no true worthwhile discussion happening otherwise.

[pablito]

good idea.

unvote, vote: Masterchief

[pablito]

Honestly, I'm not really voting Masterchief because I find him completely scummy yet. But I find his lack of motivation to find something to comment on...as...lacklustre and annoying. And that can be found scummy. My vote is more of a pressure to make him to say something worthwhile so that he's forced to play this game.

I mean seriously, when you have two votes placed on you and you STILL bother to not even say anything worthwhile about the fact that you're getting votes, then I have to worry about how much you're going to help the town.

[pablito]

Well Masterchief surely isn't gaining pro-towniness posts. But he clearly fails to see that scum don't need to actively do anything to be scummy. Sometimes good scum get away by actively not doing anything at the most opportune times. And right now, MC, you sure are looking scummy by the way you keep avoiding the pertinent points around you and regarding you.

I don't believe this. I haven't doen anything to get suspision on me, yet you all still think I'm scummy by not contributing anything YET.

Yes you have done something to get suspicion on you - and that is "saying essentially nothing in all posts". You fail to see that what's scummy is the act of "actually not contributing anything yet".

[pablito]

So witches float then? That must mean they're full of hot air. *ba dum*

Therefore, I think I'm justified in voting Masterchief then because surely he would float to the surface.

[pablito]

Would it be harmful for me to say that half of the reason I started the wagon is to incite pressure on MC who I believe to be pro-town and the other half of the reason was to see who would join and how others would react?

[pablito]

unvote

of course.

[pablito]

I think your missing the point. Mafia DO contribute so that the "if he doesn't post good, he's mafia" thing can be avoided. Think about it.

The hell? my patience wears thin. I think you're missing the point that you're clearly not contributing and that itself is an action. I was attacking your logic of "I haven't done

anything

therefore how can I be seen as scummy?" because I was trying to explain how by merely existing in this game you have acted and therefore can look scummy.

And seriously, good cannot modify a verb. I still have no idea what you said.

[pablito]

Ah, right. I believe it was because Pablito used slightly different reasons for the vote than me, which I disagree with.
He was lynching an inactive - I was lynching someone who's posts contained absolutely no useful content whatsoever. You could argue that they're similar, but that's why.

No. TCS wanted to lynch someone who didn't talk much. I ran with that because masterchief bothered to say nothing with so many words.

That's a fair point. And this last time, she voted for me purely because I was someone to vote for, and for no other reason. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, and we should be lynching the people who are talking the least?

good idea. unvote, vote: Masterchief

Also see my earlier post:

Would it be harmful for me to say that half of the reason I started the wagon is to incite pressure on MC who I believe to be pro-town and the other half of the reason was to see who would join and how others would react?

Also,

vote: Kelly Chen

because I wanna see her reaction.

[pablito]

Well it is your action because you're allowed to choose to be lazy or you're allowed to choose to not be lazy. You obviously chose to be lazy and I respect that choice, and in fact, I'm currently thinking you're more pro-town than ever because of it. But my whole argument has been that you have chosen something. We keep arguing about our perceptions of words, but I think our perceptions of alignment have stayed stable lately. So I hope this argument can be dropped soon.

[pablito]

Your reaction to my pressure makes me feel that you're pro-town, Masterchief.

[pablito]

Yeah, still not liking Kelly Chen's reactions to everything. I'm good with that vote.

[pablito]

I'm not sure if I saw the progression of how I got to be your top suspect, c_d. So I stand confused. Someday you'll have to explain that.

I'm gone until the 12th so don't expect anything from me until then.

[pablito]

I'm back. I find Twito's retroactive self-cheering for his Ubertimmy vote very scummy. However, I'm unsure if it's because he's scum or genuinely giving up on this game.

[pablito]

Again, has it not been clear that I've been jumping wagons? And why is this suddenly big news

Pablito has been jumping wagons for quite a while now, so that fact should only reinforce the case against him, not provide an alibi. The way that Pablito tries to twist basic logic so that he can continue to do something scummy in front of our noses just means he's trying to give himself an advantage over everyone else.

So witches float then? That must mean they're full of hot air. *ba dum*

Therefore, I think I'm justified in voting Masterchief then because surely he would float to the surface.

Translation: my vote is justified because MC is surely scum.

Would it be harmful for me to say that half of the reason I started the wagon is to incite pressure on MC who I believe to be pro-town and the other half of the reason was to see who would join and how others would react?

Translation: OMG! The MC bandwagon is going downhill so I need to hop off it fast!
That is a clear 180 degree turn on his stance.

Well jumping wagons is something that always appears scummy, and you just value it too much as a scum tell. I usually don't, but that's also because it's something I have done in the past. As for reinterpreting my MC witch statement, you choose to believe that my level of certainty on MC is scummy. I think that's what you're saying at least. And that's valid, but that post was also jokey and should not have been taken out of context of the joke. At least I don't think so.

However, I think you're very wrong on the "180 post" in which I jumped off the MC wagon. I think I laid out evidence that my vote on the MC wagon was not always because I thought MC was scummy.

That's a fair point. And this last time, she voted for me purely because I was someone to vote for, and for no other reason. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, and we should be lynching the people who are talking the least?

good idea. unvote, vote: Masterchief

I voted MC to follow TCS' suggestion. Because I took MC as being someone who said a lot of fluff for no reason at all. In some ways, I was reinterpreting "talking the least" as being the least contributive rather than what TCS may have intended as "lurker". Hm.

Honestly,

I'm not really voting Masterchief because I find him completely scummy yet.

But I find his lack of motivation to find something to comment on...as...lacklustre and annoying. And that can be found scummy. My vote is more of a pressure to make him to say something worthwhile so that he's forced to play this game.

I mean seriously, when you have two votes placed on you and you STILL bother to not even say anything worthwhile about the fact that you're getting votes, then I have to worry about how much you're going to help the town.

I think this post, which was the first one after my MC vote, explains that I was not completely voting MC because I absolutely wanted to lynch him. I used it as a pressure vote. I explained why MC could be found scummy, but at this time I did not say MC was scummy.

Well Masterchief surely isn't gaining pro-towniness posts. But he clearly fails to see that scum don't need to actively do anything to be scummy. Sometimes good scum get away by actively not doing anything at the most opportune times. And right now, MC, you sure are looking scummy by the way you keep avoiding the pertinent points around you and regarding you.

I don't believe this. I haven't doen anything to get suspision on me, yet you all still think I'm scummy by not contributing anything YET.

Yes you have done something to get suspicion on you - and that is "saying essentially nothing in all posts". You fail to see that what's scummy is the act of "actually not contributing anything yet".

Okay, now this post can be completely taken out of context easily. The way I word things makes me look scummy. However, I don't think in this above post I am presenting that I am sure that MC is scum. In the last line I do bother to say that MC has done something scummy, however.

So I thought I was clear when I started the MC wagon that I really didn't necessarily think that MC was scum. And I thought it was clear throughout that I didn't really attribute much "scuminess" to MC. That in itself looks scummy on my part. However, I did admit that I started the wagon to see who would jump on and for what reasons. And it did finally get a discussion started - which is something I had been secretly clamoring for a while.

I vote to pressure people, when I see their reactions I get a better read on them. I brought MC into the fray by starting a wagon on him and he began to actually contribute instead of saying nothing with many words. After that, we finally have a better read on him. I unvoted because I saw that MC was fairly consistent in his stance and wasn't just BSing.

[pablito]

I'll catch up on the rest of the posts later. I just kinda skimmed and picked out what I wanted to comment on. Obviously when someone called me out, I wanted to comment and I found Twito's posts to be very alarming.

[pablito]

blah blah blah, wait wait wait, let's just lynch lynch lynch instead. And Yes, I am purposely keeping my vote on KC, but I won't bother explain until someone asks me to put my list of three.

[pablito]

How about I wait for neongrey to slack off until the deadline comes around and we random-lynch someone that looks vaguely scummy and we never get to me anyway so I tell you in the next day should I survive the night? Sound like a plan? Awesome.

[pablito]

Well I kinda did a re-read. Interestingly, Twito was kinda pushing hard for an ubertimmy lynch before anyone got on board. However, there really was no evidence to push for. So - it's still not a tell. And considering at that point, there was very little ubertimmy was giving us, it's even more of an anti-town tell. However, the way that Twito keeps on mentioning his position on the ubertimmy lynch makes me think it's more luck than anything else. Twito may say it's skill that got him on the ubertimmy lynch, but I think it's just luck. If Twito could manage to explain any reason why he was on ubertimmy that early, I'd give him props for it. Otherwise, I see Twito as being reasonably pro-town, but his actions...not necessarily.

So before I finish my read, I'm going to put my three suspects: molestargazer, Kelly Chen and Save the Dragons/Twomz.

Kelly Chen, first, since that's where my vote lies.

Mostly it was gut that got me, plus there was a lot of interesting things she decided to not address. But now I can find crap to back it up. Oh and by the way, my KC and StD are based on gut feelings, and everything that I'm posting now is just crap I'm throwing together to make me look better.

I get that pablito is being silly, but his joke about Sherlock's posts doesn't make much sense to me. Also, metagaming, bailing on a game when scum strikes me as something Sherlock would do. I need to look for some evidence for that, but if I do, god help you pablito.

I think bird, Twito, and Tamuz are ok. Not actually sure on MSG. I would like to ask Twito for his other thoughts on the game. At the moment I don't think he should be followed on ubertimmy.

Shortly thereafter 121-123, c_d and KC get into a heavy discussion over pretty much nothing, but nonetheless, I see it as KC instigating it.

At this point in the game, while voting C_D was very justified, in retrospect, I'm not getting it. I actually find c_d to be pro-town, and seeing KC and StD attack c_d early upon their replacing, I feel less confident about their alignment. oh, and coincidentally all three of my suspects voted c_d at that point right after another. I doubt all three are scum together, but I find them to be my best suspects.

Oh and another instance where KC instigated a fight with C_D was over the whole OMGUS definition statement. Very useless. But also a bit hypocritical. Twito's argument on it was that c_d was trying to find something to say about nothing, but KC discussing and taking the whole argument to a different level was doing the same thing.

KC knows how to ask the right questions, but I feel she's doing it without a healthy pro-town curiosity. And bah, the whole argument between C_D and KC at that point after the OMGUS definition was very annoying to read.

The best thing KC has going for her is that she actually participates and gets people to think about their actions, which is something scum can do as well, but also KC did help kick off the timmy wagon, but by that point, Dead Rikimaru made a good post to start the timmy wagon phase 2. I still find it humorous that ubertimmy was lynched within 2 hrs since my vote just happened to fall there and all other previous votes were there for ages.

But I've never remembered KC to be the human-interest reporter on the local news channel. She's been asking way too many questions in this game, and I don't remember that. It's really what caught my interest before.

When I voted KC, I wanted to see her reaction, but I was more interested in other people's reactions and I wanted to see how KC might react to other people itching to vote her. Well TCS kinda hinted that he might vote KC, and then KC didn't really comment on TCS' scumminess, considering how she attacked him before. I also noticed that she seemed to be less inquisitive after that point. Something changed, and that's alarming and thus I keep my vote because something smells wrong.


MSG

Whoops!

Sorry all!

pablito, I think that that vote (which is almost random) doesn't seem helpful in this stage of the game. Surely we need to find who's the scummiest and get this day over with before the deadline, not pick off those who have been voted on before, randomly with a dice roll.

Very bad post in retrospect.

*Yawn*
Morning all!

Hey Jack! Mike said to give you a cheer, so... cheer.

Anyway, down to the matter at hand.
I find it odd that no-one has died, although I've never played any mafia variations before. Any ideas, anyone?

bah, the classic first post of the day mentioning the no-kill. I've been trained by the wiki to value this more as a scum tell than doctor, however, we've just recently all discovered the madbomber theme.

Is there any particular reason for that other than you want to lynch an inactive? I don't think you're doing what's best to try and get us a good lynch.

FoS - Pablito

However..

I'm just waiting for something scummy to happen. So far, I see nothing wrong.

I personally think you've got plenty to go off right now, especially if you read back a page. There's even been things happening since you were here.
With that and also your completely useless posts - I've not seen a single one of value - I think I've found my vote.

Vote - Masterchief

MSG on the MC wagon was just way too opportunistic. Extremely opportunistic especially the way MSG tried to stick with the MC wagon no matter what anyone thought. MSG's voting pattern and D2 actions were just too wacky to be pro-town.


StD

I don't really have a case. But I found Twomz to be somewhat suspect for not saying much. And StD doesn't really say much, and as we've learned in this game, not saying much is a common thing. However, if we're to take this whole mad-bomber multi-SK setup as what we're dealing with, I could find StD and also KC's behavior as SKish. And then StD pops out of nowhere and asks for TCS' suspect list. It's very interesting.


Next to go is StD, I kinda want TCS to go next because I'm curious to see what he has to say, but since I've got a gut feeling on StD, I should see his next, plus I know StD will likely pick TCS to go next afterward.

[pablito]

Hmm...honestly, I gotta give it to Twito here. While there was little to go on, he probably went on gut, and it was right. I still don't think that there was any clear-cut evidence that ubertimmy was scum, but I think everyone had reasonable justifications for why they wanted to add to the timmy wagon. I think Twito's justified in cheering himself on being right, but I don't think he can claim that he pushed the wagon into lynch. That accolade must go to Dead Rikimaru.

I feel even better about calling Twito pro-town now. But I'm seriously confused about my own convictions. Even though I have KC and StD on my top three list, they're voting for TCS who is currently my #4.

[pablito]

now who goes next, the central scrutinizer, right? (and neongrey can pop in at any time and finally drop her top 3)

[pablito]

Very insightful, thank you for your analysis Twito.

[pablito]

I don't like the velocity at which MSG has become a "compromise" candidate. More often than not, when 75% of the players (my guess at the moment) compromise on someone who shows up in most of the lists, it's heading toward lynching a scummy townsperson.

I don't foresee myself moving my vote to MSG unless I see more substantial new evidence that incriminates MSG or if it's one day to deadline.

I am known to jump off almost every single wagon, though. Just noting that I'm jumping off before I'm even on it.

I agree with no action until neongrey comes in. However, there's still A LOT to discuss without her input. And I think MC and neongrey are the only two to not post a list, right? So I agree with wanting to see MC's list.

[pablito]

I never like it when someone is that universally suspicious. I just never find much good in it. I like it better when there's two sides of an issue, not one vs the rest.

I had MSG on my list, but I'm not particularly enthused about seeing him lynched anymore.

[pablito]

Yes, if you want to think so, I am somewhat trying to save MSG. It's just that every single time I in previous games I've seen a large group of people jump on one suspect (and no one bothers to defend that one suspect), with one exception - being Nightcow in Lights Out 1 - it has ended up with a pro-town lynch.

I'm hedging my bets because I'm feeling uneasy. I'm feeling less enthused about MSG being lynched, but it's not like I'm actively trying to stop it or defend the arguments against MSG (unless you consider redirecting the lynch toward myself as possibly doing so).

That being said, I still enjoy my KC vote, but would actually like to see TCS as the "in" wagon.

[pablito]

I don't see conclusive evidence showing MC as scum. I think the "MC simply isn't helping the town" is more of the reason why people ar voting than people actually seeing MC as intentionally misdirecting the town. While scum can simply be a non-helper, I don't feel comfortable voting just for that.

[pablito]

I didn't have time to react that one. Had I been around, I think it's likely I would've jumped off.

[pablito]

That's good enough reason to lynch him. Who's gonna jump onto that one now?

[pablito]

pablito, is that another trap that you're saying in advance is a trap?

Yes, you read me correctly.

What do you think about the Kelly-TCS theory, pablito? Anything?

I'm currently hypothesizing there's one scum left according to the bomber theory, unless there's an alternating or joint-placement bomb team. And my top choice for scum is still you, Kelly Chen. I have not bothered to think about any distancing or scum pairs or anything right now. Furthermore, if I were to look at scum pairs, it would be between ubertimmy and X, not between X and Y who are still alive.

As for the Kelly-TCS theory...I could not fathom that pair. There is no distancing, because it's not a pair. I am finding the "compromise lynch" discussion very scummy though. Which kinda goes along with my waning desire to see MSG lynched. I'd also like to echo the sentiment of "where the hell did the MSG wagon go?" thought though.

[pablito]

Time to wagon until claim!

TCS join the KC wagon!

or if Dead Rikimaru decides to vote, I'll follow that one and we can do the same thing as yesterday!

or lets absentee-lynch neongrey!

something's gotta happen by end of tomorrow.

[pablito]

As much as I hate to remove my vote from KC, I'm throwing in my intention to switch to TCS.

unvote, vote: TCS, unvote

. Consider that a -1 for now.

[pablito]

Oh, already claimed, I forgot.

vote: Kelly Chen

for now, but I need a

real

wagon to jump onto soon.

[pablito]

Those vote numbers look off, but the vote placements look right...

*Er, Ahem*

[pablito]

LYNCH! LYNCH! WAGON! WAGON!

I don't find the cases on TCS or MSG very compelling, but I will jump on if nothing else develops.

I agree that my last vote on TCS looked shoddy.

[pablito]

Nothing developed and I did say I wouldn't wait after "tomorrow night" which is now! So

unvote, vote: TCS

But no hammers yet unless you want to look like a fool!

[pablito]

Nah, not sure if MC is scum, but I would be up for moving my vote to another wagon if it develops. I'm all for a good wagon.

[pablito]

I'm still up for a KC wagon. Ready and willing!

[pablito]

I'm still strongly against a MSG lynch for today. For some reason, there's just been scant evidence for anything there. It just seems that there's a lingering doubt but no one bothers to push a case for a lynch. It's very odd that no one's pushing hard for it now. I mean it really greys the cutting board. Especially with how MSG was once the "compromise" vote. It's just everyone's was on it, but no one's pushing it. I mean there's a strong difference between going all Ahmadinejad on him or trying to drown a leper.

Twito, join me on a KC vote. It'll be fun. We'll be all over the shop!

[pablito]

unvote, vote: KC

eh, I don't care, I got my vote back.

I did mention as well that I wanted TCS to be the compromise vote instead of MSG, so I'm clearly not going to make a case against MSG anymore either. And I also obviously don't mind if TCS gets auf'd either. But I think my vote pays tribute to the glorious post jpon where it belongs.

[pablito]

atta boy, TCS, way to make sure that Mr Bojangles doesn't fly off to the moon.

[pablito]

One wagon at 4, one wagon at 3. 6 to lynch or else we forfeit the lynch.

I like the two wagons right now. At the same time, we don't need the camel fat to try to feed the masses. And deadline approaches, so we should figure out crap. I don't want no-lynch to occur.

[pablito]

5 votes on the top vote-getter yields no-lynch.

[pablito]

Yay! Replacement plus deadline extension means we might actually get a result today!

[pablito]

I'm opting to not vote TCS, as it's been clear. Then again, I've successfully fallen off most wagons.

I'd prefer TCS to at least reconsider the vote. I mean, we did get a replacement, and as they always say, when the dragon decides to take the boulders out of the mountain-side lake, you'll never get a better opportunity to make a lifelong friend.

[pablito]

Who's up for a Jack-wagon?

[pablito]

@pablito: same question.

I'm wagon-happy today. Although I'm kinda warming up to the idea of jumping back onto TCS.

[pablito]

Yay! Non-commital! Go ambivalence! I'd be happy with a pablito-wagon if it so starts up because it means I get to defend myself, which I love to do! I love doing it as much as trying to cricket down the sporting. Well, if I had to be serious, I think that at this point it'd be best to see what HackerHuck thinks of things. A new outlook on everything would set me in a new mindset..as would it for everyone else. I do not think that anyone should unvote TCS unless they truly think that his latest defenses have been pro-townish. I go back and forth on it actually. His self-hammering and his attitude could easily be "frustrated townie" rather than "last-resorting scum". At the same time, I look back at how he was before the wagon got full-blown on him and see that he was extremely suspicious and I wonder why things got worse as the deadline came closer than when people started suspecting him. And the fact that KC and StD were on the TCS wagon always made me wary of how it was developing. Thus, I've been seeking counter-wagons.

That explain my behavior as of late? I think it's best to keep our options open and not resolve that we have no other course but to lynch TCS. I really would like to see at least another person claim before end of the day. It's why I'm really wagon-happy at the moment. A pink-coloured whiskey moment, if I may say so.

That being said, I anxiously await HackerHuck's next post...wait...I semi-impatiently await HackerHuck's next post because I remember that we still have a deadline.

[pablito]

Cool! No, MC is gone. There's no reason to bandwagon him even if I were to think he's scum. It'd be better to request a prod and then possible replacement. I prefer some of the more "random" wagons than the more sensible ones.

[pablito]

I'm good with a TCS or mole lynch now.

[pablito]

If I play consistently from one game to another, please let me know because then I would be a poor player. Second of all, don't comment on ongoing games.

Next,

unvote, vote: molestargazer

. Yeah yeah, hypocrisy and all that jazz. But I don't like voting TCS and the main reason I was against the MSG thing was because it was too easy of a lynch at that time. Now it's not the easy thing. Plus, HackerHuck reminded me of MSG's comment regarding my dice roll. That's as close of a tell as we could get.

[pablito]

now at lynch -2?

*MOD EDIT*

The VOTE COUNT - 6 to lynch

4 The Central Scrutinizer (Kelly Chen, Save The Dragons, Jack, chaotic_diablo)
4 molestargazer (HackerHuck, Brutal Assassin, pablito, The Central Scrutinizer)
1 Brutal Assassin (Twito)
Not Voting: Dead Rikimaru, molestargazer,

[pablito]

Twito did on where he saw my big long post. Although it was a very vague mention, so it's not bad at all.

Back to the topic at hand. We got us some wagons! Hitch up the oxen, replace the wagon wheel, load up our non-perishables and call the Donner Family!

[pablito]

OOoh look! The Parrot went AWOL! Happy times go for happy garbanzos!

We got about a week now. I honestly think we can settle our suspicions before then.

MSG - have you addressed this post yet? If not, please do, doo be do bee do.

Whoops!

Sorry all!

pablito, I think that that vote (which is almost random) doesn't seem helpful in this stage of the game. Surely we need to find who's the scummiest and get this day over with before the deadline, not pick off those who have been voted on before, randomly with a dice roll.

That's just after my dice roll lead me to vote for ubertimmy. MSG do you feel that my voting patterns have been erratic and unhelpful, if so, when have my votes been helpful OR if not, why do you feel so?

[pablito]

I intend to return to the disco floor very soon, but CLAIM

unvote: MSG

for now and to prevent a hasty lynch where I'm not the hammer.

[pablito]

I think I was mixing up "genuine newbie" and "innocent newbie". TCS, probably still. Kelly Chen is seeming more town

which takes away any distancing factor.

Jack, between whom did this "distancing" factor exist? KC and who? Jojo?

[pablito]

I wanted Jack to answer and still want him to do so.

[pablito]

Hmm after rereading some of MSG's posts here and in newbie 281 I'm going to

Unvote, Vote:MoleStarGazer

I think I was mixing up "genuine newbie" and "innocent newbie". TCS, probably still. Kelly Chen is seeming more town which takes away any distancing factor.

I was just confused about this post, that's why I asked Jack that question. He talks about MSG primarily, but in the next paragraph, he talks about newbie - which I thought was referring to MSG. Next sentence there's a slight reference to TCS which I don't understand. It really greys the cutting board there. Then he talks about KC. I thought that Jack was talking about KC and MSG distancing, but thinking that KC was town and MSG was not. That's why I had to ask. If not, it would just be camel fat to feed the masses. I still don't get why TCS is only so slightly mentioned here. It's as if Jack has to explain how he's settled on MSG from his list of three and is trying to say that TCS and KC are no longer looking as scummy...but the way it happens is just too confusing.

[pablito]

Ok, that makes more sense Jack.

[pablito]

vote: MSG

Camel fat is what they serve in kebabs in the middle east. It's cheap and plentiful.

[pablito]

The claim and post didn't change my mind, so I put back my vote. You and Kc asked about camel fat, so I explained.

[pablito]

sure,

vote: Jack

[pablito]

blah blah blah, weak case, reading too much into crap, blah blah blah.

Oh. actually I misread.

unvote: Jack

I know, uncharacteristic and crap.

But I actually thought that KC was talking about how Jack was pushing a pair where one person was scum and the other wasn't and how Jack had a vote on even though the partner was his scum partner. But I totally forgot that MSG was the actual scum and TCS was the townie. If Jack originally pushed the MSG-KC pair, yeah then voting him would've made sense. But that's now how it happened, and all, so I should read more into what MSG all said rather than just not caring.

Nah, time again to not care.

vote: KC

[pablito]

unvote, vote: StD

I can be up for that wagon.

[pablito]

Hate to be a bum and all, but if people look back at how the wagons went yesterday...they'd have seen that there was a TCS lynch all ready and available. It was there for anybody's taking. But then BA, me and TCS joined up on the MSG lynch at the most appropriate time (I admit I tried to stop the MSG lynch early on, but at the time it counted most, I was pushing the MSG lynch) to tie up the TCS vs. MSG wagons. Then stuff happened and MSG was lynched.

I think BA is not where we should be searching.

And I forgot who I'm voting for, so

unvote, vote: Kelly Chen

[pablito]

and of course,

unvote, vote: Jack

. I started reading Jack in late D2 and it's uber scummy. He was extremely apologetic on the behalf of MSG and he was also pushing TCS lynch very hard.

[pablito]

Originally I was. But when the TCS lynch looked easier, I went for the MSG lynch during deadline. Timing, my man. Actually, I should look back to when I started defending MSG to see who was willing to let me take that stance.

[pablito]

yes, and I quickly put my vote back after the claim. The unvote was specifically to give time for a claim.

[pablito]

Yep, I'm glad how well MSG tried to persuade me to not random-vote ubertimmy as well. Does that count as distancing as well? Anyone else want to see other crap on me? I'm sure my piss-poor plays during this game provide a wealth of information for scum to abuse.

At least we've learned that scum are aware of each other, if it werent already assumed.

[pablito]

Alright, I'm starting at page 18, post 425 because that's when our top three lists started finishing up and we were finally doing crap.

MSG compares neongrey to StD, but he was kinda defending both and saying that there's not enough to do there.

Interesting that when StD posts his top three list in Post 435, he talks about how he connects MSG with TCS in his mind. I wonder if scum tell each other who they place bombs on and stuff like that. Because if so, it's kind of a point in favor of StD. Also, wasn't StD the one that started this whole suspicion list thing by asking for MSG and MSG's list only? Yeah, I forgot about that when wagonning StD earlier today. StD is on my strongly pro-town list now. Twito's also been there for a while.

Also, I forgot that D1 had two early wagons, both MSG and UT, so it's possible that any other scum were strongly distancing themselves from both scum wagons.

Here's the key incriminating post of mine.

I don't like the velocity at which MSG has become a "compromise" candidate. More often than not, when 75% of the players (my guess at the moment) compromise on someone who shows up in most of the lists, it's heading toward lynching a scummy townsperson.

I don't foresee myself moving my vote to MSG unless I see more substantial new evidence that incriminates MSG or if it's one day to deadline.

I am known to jump off almost every single wagon, though. Just noting that I'm jumping off before I'm even on it.

At that time the VC was TCS=2, KC=2, MC=2, MSG=1 (Jack)

In post 472, I offer TCS as a compromise candidate over MSG.

After that, Jack was the next one to express doubt over MSG. in 487. This is the point about TCS-KC distancing that Kelly talked about earlier.

Jack and TCS got in a fight, so I see why Jack ended up voting TCS actually.

Then C_D adds his vote to TCS at that time. Hmmmm...

Haha, I don't remember this, but I voted/unvoted TCS to get a claim, when he already claimed. Now I get it.

Then MSG hems and haws about needing to find reasons to lynch TCS. Well he could've as easily hammered the TCSwagon, but he wasn't going to do it without his purple tupperware. I mean if he was that interested in the merchandise at the party, he could've at least gotten her tupperware credit card out at the scene instead of lollygagging and trying to hammer prematurely. Methinks MSG didn't want to do it because of the bomb. Now if MSG put that bomb and only MSG put that bomb, this makes sense. Now, if a bomber-team collectively decided to put the bomb on TCS, well one, that was stupid because TCS was a clear lynch-candidate. and two, it tells us that the ones that came along at lynch minus one and didn't hammer might have been scum. In fact, what it tells us is that those pushing the TCS fast and hard might not have been scum, because scum maybe didn't want TCS or MSG to be lynched. And guess what, that actually points to me and Twito. Both of whom I consider to be very pro-town. But both of us went for the KC wagon. straight and hard. But then again, when MSG was the hot one, I was pushing for TCS - why would I as scum push everyone away from MSG toward TCS after the top 3 lists, especially when I was pushing hardest for a KC lynch?

In fact, I placed the TCS fifth vote, but was simultaneously pushing a KC wagon.

DR was pushing a neongrey wagon actually. But DR could've hammered but didn't.

MSG pushed the MC wagon. This makes me suspect BA less and less and less. Then again, I'm pointing this out as a scum strategy. Scum were moving away from both a MSG and TCS wagon with MSG being the least prefereable.

TCS then puts himself at lynch minus one in 564. I'm guessing those 40 virgins are what they're cracked up to be.

Everyone tells him to unvote pretty much.

Jack for some reason decides to quote MSG while trying to get TCS lynched in post 570

Subsequently, TCS and I try to mount a Jack-wagon, but we were cornered at the fifth plane.

HackerHuck enters at 588. Re-starts the MSG wagon. Therefore, completely pro-town.

Also, MSG pretty much settled for a MC lynch over a MSG or TCS lynch. I thin, it's safe to say that MC/BA is not a scum partner.

Okay, I'm dropping the case on KC. This post in 604 buys it for me. At least long enough where I'll avoid her until otherwise. I found her scummy yesterday, but really, I just can't support the argument anymore. She supported either MSG or TCS and it was the first definitive stance on an either-or lynch. I doubt scum would've taken that risk at that moment when there was enough to still get MC lynched.

Oh, that's why I find it a pro-town move. I did it too in the post thereafter.

BA joins the game by voting MSG in post 612

Jack said something nice by defending MSG in 616.

I still feel MSG is more likely to be plain newbie than newbie scum.

Also please check out C_D's 617. There's no explicit defense of MSG, but there's no commitment to TCS or MSG really in that post.

While Jack and C_D fail to condemn MSG at this time, TCS and I vote (623-624) for MSG. Take it as you want though.

The rest is basically MSG dying, so I'll just skip to the present.

I am going to

unvote, vote: chaotic_diablo

because I want to see pressure there, but I am strongly on board with a Jack wagon. I'm pretty sure last scum is one of those two, so I'm good with either. But right now, I believe that Jack is just way too obvious of a choice, and c_d was eerily non-present during the whole late D2 happenings but suddenly today during D3 he's very very present.

[pablito]

Twito, please vote c_d along with me.

[pablito]

Twito, I'd join you in voting BA/MC and all that, but looking back at MSG's behaviour yesterday, I think there's a very very low possibility that BA is scum. Unless of course if BA came into the game knowing to bus his partner and that MSG continued to bus his partner. If you can bring a feasible argument showing that, I could join. Otherwise, no.

[pablito]

See MSG was all about voting MC because he didn't want to vote TCS. Now TCS was such an easy scum lynch that I question why MSG would want to try to bus his partner over lynching their bomb. Because I think the MC wagon could have had momentum so MSG clamoring for a MC lynch would've been too risky. And I don't think it was an inevitable vote for MSG at the time that BA came in.

[pablito]

I think we shouldn't necessarily look at who was pushing the TCS lynch over the MSG lynch, but look at who was willing to stick to the TCS lynch while the MSG lynch built up.

I don't think KC should be a priority today, but I think that if three lynches down the road we still haven't found scum, she should be looked at strongly.

[pablito]

Although we've found out that PotS turned up town, is anyone else disturbed that we almost went to lights out because of the deadline?

[pablito]

The hell, how'd I end up in this thread. I'm not even drunk. I thought I left this thread already.

Anyway, I like this C_D wagon but I'm not sure I'm understanding the others' reasoning for sticking on him.

[pablito]

I'm annoyed.

Yes, we should focus on timing, and I thought I made that clearwhen I said -who switched wagons when MSG built up.

What makes you so sure there's a cop? (not cop)

I WAS NOT REFERRING TO ONLY YOU. If you want to single yourself out, then fine. But I had in mind Jack, you and KC at THAT time.

If you think scum defected at a critical moment, then state your case. There's a good one and it's called pablito StD and BA. If you want to think that scum defected TOWARD MSG at the critical moment. I'd rather focus on the timing of scum not defecting at a critical moment. After all, TCS and MSG were tied at four, I would think that scum would've stuck on TCS at that important time. I mentioned that before. What part of that does not mention timing. I'm confused. You misread me. You vote me for the most inane reasons ever.

[pablito]

Hmm...maybe I should've worded things clearly.

I think we shouldn't

necessarily

lexclusively ook at who was pushing the TCS lynch over the MSG lynch, but look at who was willing to stick to the TCS lynch while the MSG lynch built up.

How I categorized three people who didn't really seem to jump to move to MSG

KC - was very willing to move to MSG but also stated she wanted at least one of MSG or TCS lynched. IE: According to Twito, the TCS push-lyncher

Jack and C_D - both ended up on TCS, might've said they'd be more willing to see MSG hang, but neither had their mind explicitly made when the lynch was made and neither was advocating for anything strong in my mind. However, Jack made his point clear, in fact, in retrospect, he should look like scum based on his actions, however it looks too obvious. And therefore by process of elimination, I fell at C_D based on wagons and all.

Still, You're voting me because you thought I referred only to you? I'm trying to get Twito to move toward you, of course, but I never explicitly referred only to you. Maybe you're the only one who thinks that you "was willing to stick to the TCS lynch while the MSG wagon/lynch built up", but I don't think so.

In fact, it's even more telling that you think you're the only one to have done so.

[pablito]

Save the vanilla townies, save the world!

[pablito]

I think we might be a little too cautious right now. We should lynch lynch lynch.

[pablito]

True that. But I mean the lack of nightkills...plus knowing the bomber mechanic means that if there really is only one scumzors out there (as C_D implies), then we can still mislynch 4 times in a row and the scum would need to have placed bombs on exactly the four others. Right?

But still, perfect record sounds good.

[pablito]

Did you read my above post? That pretty much explains why I'm in a more-than-lynching mood.

Seriously. We're at two for two, DO WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO BE CAUTIOUS to still win the game? The answer is no. Show me with reason why we can't afford to mis-lynch at this point in time and then tell me I'm being too reckless for that reason only.

[pablito]

Oh, and if you need some ammo for your confirm votes, HackerHuck and chaotic_diablo, feel free to try to analyze my use of the word "mis-lynch".

[pablito]

I'm all for a perfect record, but I don't see any way possible that town can lose right now. I mean seriously, two scum down, two for two. We have a history of posts when we've seen wagon changes and attitude changes. We have enough already to examine. Some reason come deadline time, we end up in the right place.

Also, BA being scum is just a pipe dream, Twito.

I haven't moved my vote in a while,

unvote, vote: Jack

[pablito]

I want to doubt 4 bombers. 4 bombers who each get to place a bomb every night is overpowered.

I will concede to you c_d that we may have had 2 bombs already placed. That was an assumption I made.

However, I think there are enough seemingly-town players that I still think it's stupid that two people are voting me.

unvote, vote: Jack

to spite Twito who is very likely town but really hasn't thought things out in this specific game.

[pablito]

Okay, let's think about it, 4 bombers who each get to place a bomb. Mislynch D1 and D2 then the game is over. We should never be at lynch-and-lose by D2.

Let's think 3 bombers who each get to place a bomb...mislynch D1, 3 bombers, 3 bombs, 5 nonbombed. mislynch a nonbombed D2. 3 bombers, 6 bombs, 1 nonbombed. Then by D3 we lynch a bomber, we have two explode and we are left with 2 bombers, 4 bombs and the last nonbombed. That means game over already. I still think this is overpowered as is.

I do NOT think that bombers get to both 1) talk during night and 2) each get to place a bomb. I think it's either one or the other unless the town is supremely overpowered.

So C_D, if you're a vanilla townie, please explain how you came to the worst case scenario, because I could only see you making such an assumption if you were a power role. Even still, I don't know what to think of you in this game and your making mountains out of molehills.

I think the one thing we can take for certain is that we do not have 3 SKs in the traditional sense. The mafia do know about each other. Otherwise MSG would not have acted the way he did in regards to ubertimmy (unless it was all an odd coincidence).

I think we're in better terms than you two are portraying, but c_d taking a worst case scenario stance is kinda pro-town if you ask me. But the way he keeps on making odd logical trajectories out of the littlest things (exploding over "mountain over molehills" getting into it with KC over the defintion of OMGUS) is just confusing me. Normally I'd take that as a pro-town tilt, but c_d is just unlike what I've ever seen from him, that I can't read that as pro-town.

Nonetheless, I think this discussion is kinda important and I'd be willing to keep it going.

Also, because I feel like an ass,

unvote, vote: Jack

[pablito]

I said that bombers don't talk to each other at night if they each place a bomb, I don't think I ever said that they don't know of each other's existence, so pooh on you C_D for miscontruing such.

Okay, although there is a good argument for four bombers with one joint placement per night now that I see it.

If there are four bombers, I'd have to rethink my arguments too. But I refuse to unvote right now.

[pablito]

unvote, vote: Kelly Chen

I can go that way if there's a fourth bomber. If there's three bombers, the case against KC lessens.

However, I"m up for voting Jack again.

[pablito]

Because if there's four bombers, I can see why you were able to narrow down yesterday to either MSG and TCS with no regrets. If you were the third bomber, why would you narrow down the two lynches (or at least want to say so) to someone with a bomb or your scum partner? BUt if you were a fourth bomber, you could do so (narrow down to MSG/TCS) safely without any regret because that means you have another helper who still remains hidden.

[pablito]

Who's up for going back to voting Jack? I am!

unvote, vote: Jack

[pablito]

Twito, why?

[pablito]

I'd like to hear KC's response to my three-four bomber thing.

Anyone care to hypothesize why MSG (and/or the whole bomber gang) decided to put a bomb on TCS? Because to me, it wasn't really a smart idea.

[pablito]

Good point,

unvote, vote: Twito

[pablito]

Because I care:

345 - MSG lists:
1. pablito
2. MC/BA
3. TCS (a curious choice)

359 - c_d lists:
1. pablito
2. TCS
3. Twito

362 - Jack
1. pablito
2. MSG
3. KC

363 - KC
1. TCS
2. MSG
3. neongrey (HH)

415 - Dead Rikimaru
1. neongrey
2. Twito
3. chaotic_diablo

423 - pabs
1. KC
2. MSG
3. StD

435 - StD
1. TCS
2. MSG
3. Jack

441 - TCS
1. KC
2. MSG
3. StD

447 - Twito (although Twito has an amazing analysis post in 444, we should all look at it again)
1. MC
2. MSG
3. pablito/KC (really doesn't think there's four scum therefore half-heartedly places us there)

603 - HackerHuck (previously neongrey)
1. MSG
2. pablito
3. TCS

BA's list I think?
1. MSG
2. TCS
3. c_d

Okay, so of the top three lists (or four in Twito's case)
MSG - 8
TCS - 6
pablito - 5
KC - 4
MC/BA - 2
Twito - 2
neon/HH - 2
chaotic - 2
StD - 2
Jack - 1
Dead Riki - ZERO!!!!

Looking back on it all, I'm surprised that the pablito wagon never even initiated yesterday and instead starts today. Instead of the MSG wagon starting (which is very much due to my influence yesterday), TCS started I think mainly because of KC and me. Now I don't think either of us are scum. But I think scum may've been reluctantly starting onto TCS to avoid the MSG wagon. IF all scum knew that TCS had a bomb on him, they should have been a little hesitant to lynch him. This makes me feel that KC is town.

Now, It appeared that MSG was set on lynching MC instead of TCS. chaotic was second in line (he jumped the line) and lists TCS and me and Twito. I'm sure c_d wanted to jump line so that the game didn't lag, but at the same time. hm, the momentum was starting for a pabs wagon, but it never materialized. I mean, what the hell happened? Now I think scum were kinda forced into making their top 2 into what they already had been clamoring for mostly already, but there may have been some manipulation on putting their third suspect. What it all means? Hell if I know. I'm just spitballing here.

Also, I'm not dead set on putting HackerHuck into absolutely must be town pile. I thought that him starting in the game by voting MSG was indicative of him being town, but all other actions from him aren't putting me at ease. I know he's good scum too, so I wouldn't put it behind him either to bus MSG on his entry. And as he just entered, he wouldn't have known about any bombs on TCS I guess, so I have to think that the inclusion of TCS on his list is not really indicative of towniness (I previously posited that wanting both TCS or MSG dead was not a good scum move)

@Twito, I saw you dead set on wanting to lynch c_d yesterday during the top three business and today you haven't yet jumped onto that wagon. I'd like you to say whether you still have interest in seeing c_d lynched at all. I notice that you have bigger priorities (lynching either me or BA), but I don't remember if you've said that you don't think c_d is still scum, merely that he's fallen off due to process of elimination.

@Kelly Chen, what's your thoughts on HackerHuck? Since you were very suspicious of neongrey.

@Dead Rikimaru, where are you?

It seems that after every long analysis I've done today, I keep on coming back with Jack and C_D are most likely scum and that KC and StD's actions were fairly pro-town (KC was very early onto wanting either one of MSG-TCS dead, StD was set on wanting MSG dead). And C_D's top three list isn't comforting. (Jack's is, though) and Jack's kinda-defenses of MSG keep pinging for me.

unvote

- also, I'd vote c_d, but I want discussion and don't want to put him so close to lynch.

[pablito]

HackerHuck it was Speed Mafia where you were good scum, you got SK killed though for no real reason.

Also, I think Kelly Chen put on the fourth vote of C_D. I think we're at lynch minus one.

[pablito]

Ugh, I'm confused.

But I'm ready to put a fourth vote on c_d, but again, this is good discussion so I'll hold off my vote for now to prevent a quick lynch or self-vote.

[pablito]

Jack, are you that confident that you'll put the lynch - 1? Hm.

Well I'm not thinking about voting any time soon, anyway. I think DR needs to come back and reassert that he likes his vote where it is in light of recent activity.

[pablito]

I'm not ignoring it. I'm just choosing not to really care as much about as my wagon as I should.

Also, can I say that I'm still finding JAck and c_d to be my top two suspects, so if one votes the other and puts him at -1 even though I've previously said that I'd be willing to do that vote...well, yeah, I think I have every reason to question that vote at this moment.

[pablito]

Well in Speed Mafia I had a gut feeling you could be scum, but you were falling well into the background that I wasn't sure.

Also, I hate when people do what Jack did. I could've easily hammered c_d and I don't think many would blink considering what wagon hopping and suspcions I've laid upon c_d. And if the issues is my reticence, then hasn't it been consistent in this game that I've suddenly fallen off wagons once they reach great heights?

Now, if the issues is that I was previously going lynch lynch lynch and I didn't actually go through with it when the opportunity was readily available, then that's a reasonable case to put out.

Now Jack is actually starting to remind me of Sage in newbie 280 (who was scum). Pinged my radar but was too obvious and did a lot of things to try to go against me.

vote: Jack

for the moment, mainly because he kinda frustrates me.

[pablito]

unvote: Jack

meh. I really don't care about him actually, now that I think about it.

what the hell,

vote: chaotic_diablo

[pablito]

That post looked a lot like "see guys? If I was scum I would have hammered here! So I can't be, right?". Sure you could have hammered but the last bomber has to survive 4 lynches, he/she would need to appear as protown as possible.

And as a player (regardless of my alignment), do I care enough to appear as protown as possible? Nah, I hope that much is evident. Therefore, when thinking of me, remember that I'm not cricket down the sporting.

[pablito]

Hmmm, I think we're making too much discussion out of the "why place a bomb on TCS", so I agree with c_d on that point.

We don't know if bombers alternate placing, each places his own, whether one bomber usurped power and sent in a bomb placement before any one else could speak, whether it's based on voting patterns, etc. etc. etc.


That being said, I think c_d has acted foolishly in the past (OMGUS definitions being one, thief analogies being another, etc.) and his voting pattern in light of the MSG wagon is suspicious enough for my vote. I feel more confident about this and I keep on going back to c_d is scum when I think of this game. Early on c_d has tried hard to link MSG to Sherlock/me, which I find very interesting. Either c_d has an inflexible suspicious mind and can't get off of me, or he's scum for trying to push a link that he tried so hard to create before MSG was even lynched.

c_d's original post 89, since the below is only a snippet

Still, you defended sherlock and tried to lessen the impact. The main issue is that you didn't let sherlock defend himself. Although defending other people is fine, you must have at least a plausible reason to do it. In your case, you were trying to tell us sherlock's motive, which isn't something we can believe.

Thing is, c_d has a history with suspecting me, but I don't see much in that his current case, he seems to be focusing on me for odd reasons and hasn't pointed out anything about context. I think we should not be focusing on scumminess as a whole independent of others, but look at how people have interacted with both UT and MSG to find clues. I think his vote was because I wanted to do a wagon analysis without looking at the timing, even though in actuality I really was looking and focusing on the timing of it.

Here c_d talks about the mountains out of molehills (which Jack originally brought up)

Either that's the most contrived suspicion ever that one scum would try to breadcrumb a link with another scum, or he was so hypervigilant on me that he really thought I was doing something scummy.

FOS: Jack

I think chaotic_diablo voted MSG early on to distance himself, and then tried to link MSG to Sherlock (and subsequently me). But there's always the possibility that c_d had MSG early on his sights, saw a link between MSG and Sherlock (and then subsequently me) and rightfully suspects me because he's going back to what he saw first. The only catch in that is that c_d was on TCS yesterday rather than MSG. c_d could've easily stuck on MSG hardcore which would've made more sense in a logistical progression, but he didn't even put MSG in his top 3.

Then, c_d, what made you drop MSG from your top 3? It seemed like you found a link between MSG and me/Sherlock during D1 but you suspected me and not MSG...too curious for my tastes. Also, why choose Jack to go next in the top 3 list instead of me - your top candidate? I was very surprised when I was kinda late in the sequence DESPITE consistently being in the initial top 3 lists. And lastly you previously said "consistency isn't my strong point" - do you mean in this game or between different games?

But

unvote: chaotic_diablo

because my re-read in early D2 is giving me second thoughts on Jack again.

[pablito]

Yes, of course, good point. That's also why I didn't revote you once again. If you hadn't noticed, I have had a vote on you as default pretty much any time I switched away from someone. I have suspicions, but they still lean toward c_d.

but sure, I can

unFOS: Jack

for the moment because of the reasoning. And lately after reading early D2, I am getting a genuine feeling from you.

I still think c_d is a great bet, but I can also see how c_d as town could've made the same moves he did - so I wanna hear his defenses to my latest questions.

[pablito]

In my experience when you're scum you make every effort to appear town.

In just this game? If so, interesting find. If in all games? Well, I change my style for every game so don't read too much into meta-gaming me. Although there are some characteristics that do stick between games.

I think you've deliberately set yourself up so you can wagon hop and change directions without people calling you on it.

In general scum don't play as bold or aggressive as you--I think you know that.

Sure to both comments. More on the second one.

You're presence on the ubertimmy and msg wagons smells like scum lynching scumbuddy.

But, I really want to hear from C_D, who's lack of presence on the two wagons + things from my post I find much scummier.

If you want to think so.

And yes, c_d needs to comment, but also, do you, Jack, have any specific questions for c_d?

[pablito]

I feel the need to remind everyone that during D1 there were three people with votes before any wagons started, there was ubertimmy, MSG and neongrey. Now I put the third vote on ubertimmy, but it wasn't until Dead Rik put his vote that momentum actually moved to anyone at all.

But it's important because people are valuing tells on people who moved to ubertimmy during D1. Fact is, scum were probably screwed no matter what on D1 with a deadline and ubertimmy and MSG having suspicion, so any movement toward ubertimmy may have been scum trying to bus their least contributive member rather than anything strictly pro-town.

[pablito]

I'll put the maximum amount of time until I place a hammer vote at 48 hrs, unless there's reasonable arguments that show me otherwise.

[pablito]

I'm getting impatient.

So c_d, explain why or why not your top 3 has changed from your original top 3 and what lead you to those changes.

[pablito]

No takers on the unvote column?

[pablito]

Twito, I don't care if you want to hammer or not. But I will be adding a vote in less than 24 hrs unless there's some new substantial evidence. I stated my 48 hr warning and I'm still not reasonably convinced otherwise.

[pablito]

well c_d decided to post his notes instead of directly addressing my question. That's slacking off, which is typically scummy.

He even quoted my original question but failed to fully answer the question. His notes may make him look more pro-town, but he's intentionally procrastinating.

Apparently, what c_d decided to take from my question was "how did you get to your original top 3", which I thought was already clearly stated when he posted that. I didn't want that. I wanted to see how the old top 3 changed to his new top 3. c_d could've easily have said, "I don't know if my top 3 is still the same, let me re-read", but instead he was very vague.

And when I've already said, I will hammer at

maximum

in 48 hrs and in my next post say "I'm impatient", your make damn sure that your next defense is worthwhile and says something, or at least give an agenda or timeline of what to expect. c_d didn't. So I'm choosing to believe that c_d didn't truly want to defend himself. Of course, he did, and he did what he thought necessary. But not enough for me.

So if I don't want for c_d, oh well, he already had his chance in his last post.

[pablito]

No new top 3.

Feb 16th? sure.

unvote, vote: chaotic_diablo

[pablito]

vote: Jack

[pablito]

The hell, kids?

[pablito]

Good, because this feels better.

unvote, vote: HackerHuck

HackerHuck, you hinted at a "theory" late yesterday which you didn't reveal. Today, it seems that you have no intention of fleshing out the theory or even changing your idea of the theory. I need to hear your theory now. And why vote me so early, because if your theory or contribution could have helped prevent c_d's lynch yesterday, then why did you fail to act then?

Do you just want to keep me around so that I can force lynches and then in the end lynch me? Because right now I'm thinking that the bombers just love me. Why else would I get targetted early early D2 and somewhat early D3 and now early early D4. The bombers have clearly not targetted me because they think they can lynch me.

Why does "nothing has changed" suddenly implicate me?


If people have issue on the way I went on c_d, let me know, because I have answers.

Also,

FOS: dead rikimaru

for being gone.

[pablito]

Yay for honesty!

I read the notes, and they were incomplete. I was more annoyed and frustrated by how he neglected to answer any question and instead tried to initiate a magnamious case on his overall pro-towniness instead of point-blank answering a question. I liked the notes (in fact, pretty much thinking that it could've exonerated him), but I also felt that if c_d was daring scum (which he could've easily been), he could've just gone over the early early game and just created new notes that would've made it look like he's uber-townie. Furthermore, there was that inconsistency between his notes and his suspicions that was lingering. Or at least I thought so. But c_d posting the notes was pointing more to the past than the current phase. And pointing to a different time of the game I felt was scummy.

But really c_d failed to answer the question, and his overall style throughout the entire game was to shine a light on stupid insignificant "tells" and suddenly when he was called on the "procrastination" tell, he deflected.

[pablito]

I'm not playing dumb, I'm taking a big assumption that I don't have a bomb placed on me (ala TCS) and that I'm more of a lynch target, than a, I can forget about him for now.

With the bomber mechanic, scum have to take a different approach, they are ALLOWED to narrow down the choices and limit their suspicions. Normally, scum want to confuse the town and want to be able to keep as many lynch targets as possible. With this game mechanic, they're actually forced to protect townspeople because they want to keep them alive.

I'm not one of them, I'm one of their lynch targets. I'm pointing out the obvious, and this is why people like you and Jack keep suspecting me at the open of a day. I think narrow minded suspicions are more likely to be scum - this also explains why I didn't like c_d slacking off with his top 3. I think an inflexible thinking style is VERY scummy with this mechanic. It's because scum are forced to limit their suspicions in this game.

[pablito]

Also

FOS: BA + HH

for not calling me out before I lynched. I find it cowardly that you both failed to try to stop me before I lynched c_d. And I think I projected my intentions well well in advance of my actual action.

[pablito]

To clarify, I think scum are categorizing townsfolk in two categories:

1) These people are unlynchable, so I'll place a bomb on him/her so that when I'm lynched (because yes, to win, the final bomber must be lynched), he'll die.

2) These people are lynchable, so I'll just try to get him/her lynched instead.

There was a reason why the TCS wagon did not build up quicker than it should have. Scum were protecting TCS. They wanted TCS alive because he had a bomb on him. A person with a bomb on him is only of value if he stays alive near the end.

I am not one those in category 1, therefore scum keep trying to get me lynched. Therefore someone who quickly switches suspects (much like Twito in some senses) is more likely to be town, because he as pro-town, can afford to think about as many suspects as he wants. He has no interests in keeping certain people alive.

Therefore, the more townie a person appears, the more scummy a person may actually be.

[pablito]

Huh? I said that I'm not sold on the c_d lynch, which is about as much as I felt I should defend him.

You said you had a theory, but you failed to say anything. Blah. Failing to act when you had some information is withholding power, and that's scummy to me.

To clarify, I think scum are categorizing townsfolk in two categories:

1) These people are unlynchable, so I'll place a bomb on him/her so that when I'm lynched (because yes, to win, the final bomber must be lynched), he'll die.

2) These people are lynchable, so I'll just try to get him/her lynched instead.

Replace "place a bomb on" with nightkill and you have the standard scum theory.

I am not one those in category 1, therefore scum keep trying to get me lynched. Therefore someone who quickly switches suspects (much like Twito in some senses) is more likely to be town, because he as pro-town, can afford to think about as many suspects as he wants. He has no interests in keeping certain people alive.

I think that what you define as pro-town play matches how you've been playing this game.

NO, this not standard scum theory. In this game, scum cannot NK to get rid of some unlynchable or powerful players in the game. They have to sacrifice themselves to get rid of the movers and shakers in the game. (Well that actually would mean that scum may intentionally act scummy just to get rid of some players - point against me.) I would consider standard scum theory, 1. lynch some fool 2. NK someone obviously pro-town so that suspicion on me dies out or some power role.

In this game, it's more like 1. lynch some fool who doesn't have a bomb 2. bomb someone who I don't think can get lynched or a power role.

there's a significant difference in who scum have to target for their lynch suspects this game. it always has to be someone who doesn't have a bomb on them. Therefore buddying up is also a good tell in this game. I think HH kinda fits the profile.

But basically, if there were to be a strong obviously pro-town player in the game that nails scum 1-2 or something great and powerful like a sane daycop, the only way to get rid of this player is to

a) lynch him - which is likely impossible if he's claimed and generally seen as pro-town
b) place a bomb on him AND get bomber lynched

Thus, scum have extra work to do in this game. They have to make sure that no one listens to the pro-town players also while getting non-bombed players lynched. Scum have to worry about people being around, they just can't NK to get rid of their problems. Thus, you see that in my egotistical mindset right now, I'm getting attacked quite often and early because it would be good for scum if I get lynched...IE, option A. Plus, scum are not as likely to want to get themselves lynched just to take out someone UNLESS that person is so detrimental to the scum play that they would be willing to do a 1 for 1 or 1 for 2 payout.

Yes, that's intentional how I described what pro-town play could be in this game. So why are you still voting me then?

While I'm at it,

unvote, vote: StD

get posting you fool. I need people to come back and starting foaming at the mouth, not being uncontributive.

I'll read HH's latest post later

[pablito]

unvote, vote: brutal assassin

for a pressure vote

[pablito]

No, BA. No need to wait. Please do something. At least tell me why it's important for others to talk before you do. What is so contingent on their participation?

[pablito]

So you decide to lurk alongside them? Thanks, thanks for making this game fun.

[pablito]

I'd rather we lynch you instead.

[pablito]

Okay, so here's the thing.

I vote BA as a pressure vote so he can contribute.

He says "No, that's okay, I'll wait."

"Wait for what?" Says I

"For some prods"

I think to myself, "wait, so BA does pretty much nothing today, so I voted him, and now he responds with, yeah, I'm still going to do nothing. Hmm...scummy and f-ing annoying. Great. Let me make some sarcastic comment which is going to get him to respond and hope that he's going to start railing against me"

...later...

"Great, so he does. But now Jack does the same thing. Now the game is stalling and no one is saying anything except for HH and I despite me just absolutely hating the game. I start off the day just talking and talking and talking and talking and talking and no one wants to fight with me."

KC, please say something to deflect the focus off of me so that someone can care about this game again.

[pablito]

BA - I vote you for lurking in the traditional sense, or let me look at the wiki to see what it says.

When a player is intentionally (or even unintentionally) quiet during a game's Day, or misses their Night Choice, they sare said to be lurking. Generally seen as a poor strategy by other players (because it slows down the Day, gives other players less posts to analyze, and decreases the information gained during the Night phase), it can be helpful at times to both Pro-Town and Scum players.

I will say that StD, Dead Rik and Twito are relatively absent and inactive.

But BA is just plain lurking. You are purposely withholding information and WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT WITHHOLDING INFORMATION FROM YESTERDAY'S LYNCH?

Hackerhuck, would you like to tell them the answer?

YEA! GO TEAM! GO TOWN!

[pablito]

I'm going to triple post right now just to show how much I hate this game right now. No other reason. And also, to give scum some ammo in case they want to try to vote and lynch me today. Just because you know, when I get emotional and angry, I do stupid stuff.

[pablito]

And finally:

inactivity =/= lurking.

it angers me more when someone is here and purposely not contributing than someone who, for more than likely purposes, isn't contributing because of external factors which are not affecting the game.

If you think one of the inactive players is extremely scummy, lay out the case now or something. But I'm impatient, I don't see the case in withholding information or an argument for later.

[pablito]

I'm refraining from posting in this thread in honor of Obligatory Sappy Niceness Day. Because I don't feel that I can post in this thread in the near future and ever be nice.

[pablito]

There is a STRONG correlation with the events of posts 875 to 900 and the infrequency of posts.

unvote, vote: HackerHuck

and don't ask for a reason because I'm not giving one. I've got a theory and I just want to see how things turn out first.

[pablito]

Hm, well this really greys the cutting board.

I very much like the suspect list of HH/Jack that a lot of people are coming up with. I want both dead.

[pablito]

Hm, Jack plays craps with Cthulu and calls it yahtzee, doesn't he.

unvote, vote: Jack

[pablito]

Jack, a throwaway vote in light of deadline with little little support is scummy. Explain your case and go for it. No holding back your theory.

Jack, you're a replacement as well. In fact, everyone but Twito at this moment. So then, if the replacements are becoming a hindrance, then what is it about Twito that has been not so worthy to note? Also, what type of replacements are you talking about. Because if you're talking about the latest ones, then explain why or why not each one hasn't been helpful.

KC, you're not voting. Why not?

StD, why vote HH at this time, and where has any of your reasoning for anything been?

Twito, vote.

theo, nice to see ya.

BA, I still am thoroughly annoyed that you didn't do much until after the prods and replacements, but I like your latest posts. However, now that we have the prods and replacements, please help pressure the necessary people into making the appropriate answers and stuff like that. In other words, whatever you were holding back until the prods (if there was anything), please bring that out now.

[pablito]

Oh, and just so that I don't leave out HH, and make him feel bad - I just want him to know that there will be hippogriffs.

And HH,

to what does

Didn't think I lowered suspicion on Pablito here, but Pablito's comments prompted my theory.

refer? What comments prompted the theory - is that your theory on DR - and was that the theory that you were holding off on during c_d's lynch?

[pablito]

Jack, it's easy to keep track of who's town or scum when they keep getting replaced. Here's how I did it:

Step 1

I am pro-town. I have read my role PM and I know this to be fact. Otherwise it would be bastard moddery.

Step 2

TCS and c_d are town. One exploded (even though he was scummy) and the other was lynched.

Step 3

ubertimmy and msg were scum. This is because they have a color and bomber title.

Step 4

Everyone else still alive could be scum or could be town. There is no way possible to assert that s/he is town or scum because I could never know unless I'm a cop. And if I'm a cop, I'm not going to reveal anything unless it's necessary.


I get your point that it's hard to remember who I suspected earlier and who I didn't suspect earlier because people come in and out. However, except for HH and theo, no other replacements should have had a lasting impression on you. MC could have, but he was just being his same old self though and I doubt you should value anything that MC said. In my opinion everyone else has made enough of a statement to give you enough of an impression. If you believe that someone else has not given enough to get an opinion on that person, PLEASE call him/her out and try to find out what s/he's about then. Don't just wait around for the redheads to chase the boyband.

Nonetheless, the fact that you asserted a certain level of confidence in "who's town or scum" is treacherous. I wouldn't have taken you to be the guy who drives all the way out to Tuba City and only have a tambourine.

Your rationale on the StD vote is noted. But care to comment on what you think about StD's position during yesterday's lynch sequence?

Oooh, thanks HH. I get it now.

[pablito]

Oh, sorry, KC. Didn't see your vote.

Well, I don't have anything to address to you then. Thanks for putting your vote there! I should've kept mine there from the beginning of the day, eh?

Also, thanks Glork for the VC.

[pablito]

Your lack of musical analogies confuse me. And your lack of everything confuses me even more.

[pablito]

Care to claim, Jack?

[pablito]

Jack, just for you:

It's the way that you acted during the TCS vs. MSG wagons.

and of course, unvote, vote: Jack. I started reading Jack in late D2 and it's uber scummy. He was extremely apologetic on the behalf of MSG and he was also pushing TCS lynch very hard.

Also there's a bandwagon analysis on both you and c_d in this here post 699 and this 731

You should also try to look at post 362 where you gave your top three. In fact, after looking at everyone's top 3 on this post 788, you were the only one that ending up voting TCS but didn't have both MSG + TCS in your top 3. In fact you had MSG but not TCS on your list but it took a while for you to move to MSG.

Why is that significant? I doubt that scum partners would have put both MSG and TCS (the bomb) on their top 3. Maybe it's too much of an assumption though. Anyway, you moved away MSG later in the day and it's a curious thing how your progression went.

Oh and there's still the thing about how you made mountains out of molehills out of the phrase mountains out of molehills and I feel that it was a good distraction for the town to look at instead of everything else at that time.

That's a starter, but there's cases out there in people's posts in the past which you could address or re-address. It's not like we're scapegoating you for no reason. That would be like how I voted KC early in the game. So stop whining that there's no one bringing up a case. We actually did early on, just that your answers were non-existant or they never quelled our fears. I'm sure that KC also has a post on you early in D4 that you can answer. Also, your behaviour today in D4 is extremely scummy.

[pablito]

Jack you never answered to my satisfaction, if I were satisfied, I wouldn't have kept on voting you so many many times during D3 and starting to vote you on D4. I always said I'd be cool with a Jack-wagon. Apparently KC wasn't satisfied either. I don't think Twito is ever satisfied.

But really. Let's get things done since we have a deadline. Jack, care to respond and do as much research as possible. The onus is on you.

[pablito]

Why did you read msg's past games? Why do that instead of re-reading MSG thoroughly within this game?

[pablito]

Jack, I want to believe you, but then again, I don't. I just want you dead.

What happened to your vote on StD and your vote on me is curious as well?

If you're town, I can see why you'd want to vote me because I'm a bit tedious, but at the same time, it's a cop out.

How did you prove your innocence? And to me, the only way you can prove your innocence is through some confirmable role. And you don't want to claim, so I'm not buying it.

Lastly, why is no one else caring to actually try to uncover things before deadline?

Okay, some of you are on limited access, duly noted. But at the same time, no one is asking the pertinent questions at the moment. I mean, we went a whole day without a single post, that's pathetic. I mean some of you are trying, but it's just not amounting to much progress.

[pablito]

@Theo, earlier you said you'd "prefer to put me in the good guys camp" but there seemed to be some doubt that existed in your early stance on me. Now you're kind saying that the doubt has been removed. Has your stance changed on me and what was it that changed? Or does the doubt still exist and I just read you wrong.

And theo, you seem to put both HH and Jack equally on your list. Or is one higher than the other? Also, If you suspect HH, then why quote him in your last post like you just did?

And you really put a lot of weight on bird's interactions with people, but that was such a long time ago and Jack has created his own persona? Do you feel that Jack is such good scum that he's been able to cover up for bird's mistakes? Or is it some other reason why you seem to refuse to budge from Jack?

[pablito]

Twito, if you're going to put a lot of weight into how MC tainted your view of that role which BA now holds, then could you also analyze Sherlock, cardb0ardb0x, bird1111, Twomz, Dead Rik and neongrey so that we can see what your thoughts on replaced players were?

[pablito]

Thank you very much, theo, that makes a lot of sense.

[pablito]

Arrogance is a scum tell.

[pablito]

It's not an argument.

And I just realized that Jack's been at 4 votes all this time. I actually thought he was still at 3. Hm. That's good though.

[pablito]

Hammer, hammer, who's got a hammer?

Not Annie I hope! NO, not her!

[pablito]

To clear this up, I'm asking for replacement in all games I'm in (something I knew was going to happen months ago), so don't make more out of it than it needs to be.

I can still participate if you want.

[pablito]

Still think Jack or HH are the best lynch but being as KC pointed out we could be in lylo time for some thought. Maybe HH had placed a bomb on Jack thus the lack of a hammer, only a thought . . .

hrm. I think the main reason scum don't want to lynch bombed people is so that they can lynch someone else.

Jack and I covered that extensively in our early argument of D4. It ended up where I pointed it out and came out looking arrogant for calling myself pro-town because of this fact. Then others called me out and said statement for trying to prove myself pro-town through an argument I brought up myself.

[pablito]

A question to those who claimed to have wanted to hammered (ie: StD and HH)

StD - why didn't you just unvote, vote Jack? You unvoted, then planned to hammer later, but knowing your own inconsistent presence lately, if you truly wanted to hammer, you would've done it in the same post as your unvote? Why didn't you hammer and/or what were you waiting for? What is your current thoughts on Jack and others?

HH - what do you think about Jack's statement that he feels more inclined to believe that HH, StD and Twito are innocent? You're not following his logic, because you don't trust StD or Twito or what more do you want from Jack?

by the way, I'm totally leaning toward StD for an odd reason.

[pablito]

I was going to write a post on how I possibly suspected KC again. But then I realized that her analysis on the bomber to bombs to unbombed ratio was a hypothetical, as evidenced by "possibly lylo".

Well I think there's possibly 2 bombers, but I would say that they would be collectively bombing, because I still think that 4 bombers total is way beyond unbalanced. I think we might have 1 bomber and they've all been bombing separately without knowledge of who each other bombs, but they know each other's identity.

Then again, I think TCS having the bomb shows why we might think that the color bombers are collectively bombing, since no one seems to understand why MSG would choose TCS to bomb.

Also @StD - please tell us your current thoughts on Jack. And well that answers the question, you always give time prior to hammer. At least we can look at that in other games.

And where's BA? He coming around? Don't want to let him off the hook in crap and stuff.

[pablito]

My behaviour is indicative of someone who was told he vote-jumped and tried to ensure that it became self-fulfilled.

If there are three bombers, then yeah, I'd say we had at that point in that single post I made a long time ago. Although I'm pretty sure the only tool we have to eliminate bombers is to lynch them, and someone messed that up last time. But I do not advocate going after Jack today. Something feels awkward.

[pablito]

Would be sad to be on lynch or lynch.

For Twito, when he comes back. Please explain the above part.

I'm totally not feeling HH and BA again. Though, I highly doubt these two could be a scumpair (if two scum exist). Oh, and since someone will ask - it's because of the progression of the MSG wagon.

[pablito]

Turns out I'm not voting anyone. Sure, I haven't read the reasons why, but I think

vote: Save the dragons

will suffice for now.

[pablito]

unvote

probably best course of action at the moment.

[pablito]

I suppose before I go, I should react to someone calling on me:

Well in my defense that's what I always do. I think pablito can attest to my being a bit stubborn from the 101 game.

I was on the opposite side of you in that game. I did not consider you stubborn. I considered you to be willing to see beyond the obvious in that game. Relentless...maybe. Stubborn...no.

Have fun, everyone.

[pablito]

Yeah, if I was able to stick with the game, KC wouldn't have won. I would always keep going back to her like I did during most of my stint in the game. There was always the way that she nonchalantly brushed off my suspicions on her that made me think twice. I had trouble deciphering if it was a classic KC move or not especially since I have almost never suspected her in games I play with her. I think this was the first game I have ever gone on the offensive with her. I admire how she stuck to it especially after the other two bombers went 1-2.

I do regret pushing c_d too hard towards lynch in this game though. That was a big mistake. Also a big mistake was the town failing to lynch D4.

As for setup, I kept thinking that all vanilla was balanced while I was in the game. I truly thought there were no power roles when I was in the game.