Verbose Mafia 2 - Post or Perish (Game Over)

SpamWise · Post Post #47 (isolation #0) » Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:39 pm

SpamWise confirms that he has received his role, at the same time ignoring what everyone else is saying

.

OMG It's Turbovolver!

SpamWise orders some coke, as he is the designated driver for tonight.

So... how about that local sports team?

Just as a sidenote, who likes Stevie Ray Vaughn? I got some of his stuff today, and it's just incredible.

SpamWise · Post Post #74 (isolation #1) » Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:40 pm

I do quite enjoy the largess of our host with regards to the food and alcohol. And I must admit that I enjoy this "flying" experience. It's like being on the wings of Icarus himself.

May I request some eleemosynary assistance? My seat-belt belt is not buckling as it should.

Looking at our host and out the window, I note that it is ironic that we are flying through a mass of grey clouds with someone named Mr Grey.

SpamWise · Post Post #76 (isolation #2) » Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:21 pm

So what you're saying Adele, is that we can drink twice as much up here as when can if we were on the ground?

I believe that not even our dear masked friend Fritzler could imbibe that much. But I am quite worried about him. Maybe he is an alchoholic? It could be entirely possible that he can't help himself, he has to drink himself into a blind stupor.

That is only possible if ... if he is an alcoholic. He probably just likes his drinks. But, so do alcoholics. A difficult question indeed.

SpamWise · Post Post #94 (isolation #3) » Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:22 am

We can always unnominate. If none of us nominated anyone at all, we wouldn't get anywhere. I'm surprised you didn't notice that.

As for my nomination: Commodore Amazing hasn't done anything really suspicious so far. In fact, he hasn't done much at all yet.

I do like the feel of nominating Kelly Chen however.

Nominate: Kelly Chen

SpamWise · Post Post #97 (isolation #4) » Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:33 am

I believe I should learn to voice my ideas quicker. I agree with you however Pooky. I'd like to know what you think about those who have already nominated.

As for you idea about nominations, I think that everyone should use all their nominations. That would be the simplest and easiest way to stack the nominations in the town's favour. Or those looking to murder us could just not use their nominations.

SpamWise · Post Post #118 (isolation #5) » Fri Mar 03, 2006 3:26 pm

The point of agreeing to a a common number of nominations was simply so that the ratio of nominations by town/scum was in the town's favour. I believe that having everyone use all of their nominations would put the killers at a severe disadvantage. Judging from the actions of those on the plane, I would assume that there is at least one group looking to kill us all, maybe more. By using all our nominations, we ensure that we are not manipulated by the killers. As the one with the "Pooky" mask said before, the killers likely have enough numbers to tilt the nominations towards the innocent.

I could hazard a guess as to what your reasons are Turbovolver, but I shall hold back for now.

Nominate: Mathcam

SpamWise · Post Post #142 (isolation #6) » Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:20 pm

I know nought of this "spam" you mention Thok. I must warn of Macedonian encroachments however. They are likely to tear us apart, as the bombard us with information of little or no use to us.

Werebear, allow me to ask you a question. Are you reciting your recitals under the free will of your own free will, or is it because of other, more sinister reasons?

I shall make a note of what you have said "Silent Speaker" Clarify this point for me though. You stated earlier that "By definition the people going to the lynching block are the nominees, so the numbers have to be the same." Are you saying that the number of nominations given to each person and the number of nominees must be equal? Or something different?

Also, will you point me in the direction of the PetroluemJelly/DrippingGoofball saga?
Is it not possible that they both came to the same conclusions through entirely different means? And if they indeed were both part of an enlightened minority, is it neccessarily the same minority out to murder and otherwise maim us?

SpamWise · Post Post #143 (isolation #7) » Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:24 pm

I do not believe anyone is using their nominations in a useless way at all. Why do not nominations after the third or fourth matter? I am no mathematician, but I believe that if we all agreed to stop nominating people after the third or fourth nomination, then we would be at a stalemate. Which isn't all too productive.

Wouldn't you agree VitaminR?

SpamWise · Post Post #198 (isolation #8) » Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:52 pm

LoudMouthLee: I too found Turbovolver trustworthy. I was under the impression he was privy to information that the rest of us weren't, but that appears not to have been the case.

DrippingGoofball: I do not quite understand your line of thinking. I can not speak for the others, but so far I have only found two people I believe to be worthy of my nominations, one of which I have removed (mathcam). Your mistakes strike me as odd too. I believe your list simply was the more prominent players who had not used all of their nominations?

Also, I think how one uses their nominations needs to be taken into account. I am not quite sure of this line of thinking, but I believe there would be merit in analyzing how a nomination placed on someone who clearly will not garner enough nominations to reach the lynching block would affect the nomination process.

On the most superficial level, I believe it would give an illusion of pro-town appearance. To elaborate, what I am questioning is waht would happen if one person were to use all their nominations on players who were in no danger of being lynched, would that be indicative of whether or not they were killer killer?

But back to the point, your speech where you nominate Fritzler does not bode well for me. It is why I am going to nominate you.

Adele: "Now, since I am of the opinion that as many of us as possible gain sufficient nominations to be in harm's way at a later point (because I do not think we are ready to limit our options), I will nominate three of the individuals noted as having been previously overlooked."

This point eludes me. We have two days in which to finalise our nominations. I do not think that placing nominations on those who don't have them is incredibly productive. Also, the fact that there is nowhere for anyone to disappear, means that if we we re quickly required to change our nominations, then it would be fairly simple for the town to do so.

And Pooky's point about CES is something I hadn't thought of before. Whether or not I am doing the right thing by agreeing with him however, remains to be seen.

Un-nominate: Mathcam, Kelly Chen

Nominate: DrippingGoofball, Adele, CES

I am sorry I have been behind, my "brain" fried. Luckily I saved my thoughts. Now I must compose new ones. Apologies for any inconvenience.

SpamWise · Post Post #242 (isolation #9) » Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:26 pm

The devious way in which you changed your vote to Pooky appears very odious to me Turbovolver. And I am unimpressed with the way you ingratiated yourself with Tamuz. And in my opinion, the more data those of us innocent can gather, the more likely we are to flush out the killers amongst our midst.

PetroleumJelly: I too am quite surprised that I did not receive any nominations. I must be doing or saying something correctly.

SpamWise · Post Post #277 (isolation #10) » Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:41 pm

"SpamWise chose a rather cozy time to nominate the early bandwagon leader (Kelly Chen), just because, in his words, he liked the feel. Don't like that. Later, he says he could "hazard a guess" to what I'm thinking, and follows up my nomination. Considering he later mentioned he thought I had extra information, this seems like an outright lie. His nomination of Mathcam would be a guilt-free way to send an innocent to the lynching block, though."

Well, if you do not like the way I followed you into nominating mathcam, I do not like the way you gave the impression there was something you knew that the rest of us did not. I was not the only person confused by your words. In my eyes, the tenuous way you nominated for Mathcam in the first place, followed up with your excuse that "it was only a hunch" does not bode well with me. In your own words, it would be a guilt-free way to send an innocent to the lynching block. I would vote for you right now, but I do not know what your ability entails, and there is a chance it can prove your innocence.

At the time when I joined the nomwagon on Kelly Chen, I did not have a very positive read on her. At the moment I have a more positive read on her, but nothing can be taken for granted here.

And to discuss your comments about my "parroting" of Pooky dear Commodore, it's not so much that I am convinced that he is not a killer, but I think you'll agree with me when I say his reasoning so far seems very good to me, much like that of Pythagoras himself.

What I find interesting is that of the nine people on the lynching block, only five have received any votes. Most interesting is that of the four who have not received any votes, is the two who were leading the tally of nominations early on Kelly Chen and mikeburnfire. I am not sure how much stock to place in this. I believe it is because they have defended themselves sufficiently to not warrant any votes. Curious, curious indeed.

SpamWise · Post Post #278 (isolation #11) » Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:48 pm

Again I am undone by the lack of speed with which I speak. Well, as Turbovolver has admitted what he has done, it undoes my reason for not voting for him. But his most recent actions make me doubt the belief that he is a killer. To be honest, I find it rather eccentric. Although it is not a proof of his innoncence, I am not certain that it is an indication he is a killer. Again you target mathcam, this time with a vote. Can you be more specific about why you are voting for him this time Turbovolver? Or is it your hunch?

SpamWise · Post Post #301 (isolation #12) » Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:11 pm

Well no, I felt that the arguments for nominating mikeburnfire were tenuous at best. Although I never explicitly stated this, I do not think he is a killer. Of course, I do not know that he is not a killer for sure, nor do I know that he is one. It is entirely possible that Commodore Amazing and VitaminR know such things however. It also possible that none of us are killers, and in fact all the killers were on mikeburnfire's nomwagon, perhaps to create some associative distance between they and mikeburnfire.

Turbovolver, you accused me of being a liar. Now I am a "possible liar." Well everyone here is a "possible liar." At least to me. I have no way of knowing whether or not what you or anyone says is truth or not. And you have admitted yourself that you are a liar. If anyone has any reason to lie whatsoever, it is scum. I am going to vote for you, logic would dictate that it is in a killer's best interests to lie. I would like for more time to think about this, however thanks to Mr Grey I am short-changed in my currency.

Let us hope that logic wins over my feelings this time.

Vote:Turbovolver

SpamWise · Post Post #303 (isolation #13) » Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:10 pm

You are referring to this statement?

"Later, he says he could "hazard a guess" to what I'm thinking, and follows up my nomination. Considering he later mentioned he thought I had extra information, this seems like an outright lie. "

How is this contradictory? The guess I was hazarding (which turned out to be wrong) was that you did indeed have extra information. There were no two contradictory lines of thinking, they were both one and the same. The difference being I stated them in two completely different ways. Implicitly and explicitly.

SpamWise · Post Post #311 (isolation #14) » Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:18 am

By my sundial we have roughly nine hours left. Your address have to be very soon, otherwise you will be lynched. It is interesting that Pooky states you have not addressed all of his points. I am also of this belief. In my humble opinion you haven't really addressed my points, rather you've come up with accusations against me. Then you have conceded ground on your offensive defence. Draw what conclusions from that statement what you will, but that is how I perceive things between you and I.

SpamWise · Post Post #360 (isolation #15) » Mon Mar 13, 2006 9:56 pm

"I am gone forever." Exit, pursued by Commodore Amazing.
"Commodore Amazing prevents a bad marriage."
"Et tu, Brute? Then fall, Commodore Amazing!"

I am happy to recite your lines Commodore, but I would ask you explain to me why you have nominated me. And the silent speaker as well. I assume it is because of my involvement with the death of Turbovolver. That is unfortunate for me, as I stated earlier, I would've liked more time to think about where my vote was being placed.

SpamWise · Post Post #399 (isolation #16) » Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:02 pm

I apologize for missing the discussion.

I have performed my audition today. I believe it is time for I to place my nominations. I am going to nominate petroleumjelly, Adele and Cogito Ergo Sum. It is based not on any incredible logic on my part, but more on feelings I have.

And am I correct in assuming that at this rate, we will only have two candidates up for lynching?

Nominate: peroleumjelly, Adele, Cogito Ergo Sum

SpamWise · Post Post #428 (isolation #17) » Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:44 pm

Out of the three I have nominated, only one is on the lynching block. I am going to repeat my nomination, only this time with a a vote. If I had a second vote however, it would likely be placed on DrippingGoofball. I can see some merit in lynching VitaminR as well. But I am content to place my vote on Adele for the moment. These are my thoughts, for the time being.

Vote: Adele

SpamWise · Post Post #445 (isolation #18) » Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:25 pm

Do you want to die DrippingGoofball?

DrippingGoofball confuses me. I do not know whether she wants to be lynched because she is "useless" or because of a more sinister reason. Meanwhile her antics have taken attention away from the others up for lynching. Deliberate action, or (from the point of view of the others) lucky coincidence? Coincidence is my first instinct but there is always the possibility that DrippingGoofball's actions were pre-meditated.

Hmm hmm hmm hmm hmm.

SpamWise · Post Post #478 (isolation #19) » Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:22 pm

"I will address your points more clearly this time around, Adele's nominations prior to the day one nomination period ending were designed to maximize the town's options, something that she has been arguing for and something which has not been shown to be contrary to the interests of the town. "

I am now of the opinion that less is more. If you can understand my reasoning, I believe that having 3-4 solid candidates up for lynching is better than 6-7, many of whom are up there simply to "maximize the town's options." Something which does not happen anyway, as most of those offered up to be lynched do not receive any votes at all, or those that they do receive are redundant.

"MBF, I don't know where you get your info, but I am not so much "deadset on dying" as I am resigned to being eventually lynched."

I still do not understand this statement. In my opinion there is no clear reason as to why you will be lynched today. We are very short on time, something incredible would have to happen in order for you to be lynched.

SpamWise · Post Post #515 (isolation #20) » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:37 pm

I do not like CES's statement where he says "If I could see it, then they should have been able to as well. " It's clearly flawed logic in my opinion. I am not too sure about the satanic messages within his speeches. One would expect that a killer is a...a likely candidate for Satanism. But I am of the belief that because he must say satan throughout his comments, he is not neccessarily a Satanist, nor a killer.

Commodore Amazing has confused me. It is because of his linguistics. Or perhaps because of the enormity of what he has said, I perhaps just need some time to digest it.

"jesus as cat nm restriction" I believe that is the message hidden within the last paragraph of mikeburnfire's most recent speech. Even though he told us not to decipher it, I believe it needs to be said anyway.

SpamWise · Post Post #554 (isolation #21) » Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:48 am

I do not have much to say at this time. I have been thinking about the "memoirs of a geisha." I shall say more when I am in a better state of mind. There is a lot for me to take in. I shall soon be back.

SpamWise · Post Post #571 (isolation #22) » Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:23 pm

I do not see any merit in the Cogito Ergo Sum bandwagon. Firstly, I was under the impression mikeburnfire had confirmed Cogito's claim of mason. At least implicitly. And secondly it seems to me that most of the reasons for nominating him are based on stereotypes and expected behaviours. To me, it seems like a logical fallacy.

I am currently most suspicious of Fritzler. His posts feel hollow to me. Indeed, I have seen others similiar to him, in a game I once played called "Villagers vs Titans." It was a game of uninformed majority against informed minority. What was interesting was that the informed minority would say things to give the impression they were contributing. One of the other-Fritzler like person's tells was that when he was a Titan he would not contribute as much as he did when he was a villager.

Reading back: Commodore Amazing, you say I am all but 80% confirmed, yet you proceed to nominate me? And you then followed him the silent speaker, again the logic for this eludes me. This confuses me, as logic would suggest it would be better to target those who were not 80% confirmed; thus narrowing down our possibilities.

Nominate: Fritzler, Commodore Amazing

SpamWise · Post Post #573 (isolation #23) » Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:33 pm

Commodore, if you are saying that out of LML and I, one of us is a killer, then I will vote to lynch LoudMouthLee. I know I am not a killer, so therefore that would mean LoudMouthLee is, which is why I am joining the nom-wagon against him. But I've probably misunderstood you. Anyway, if you say there are people here who can confirm your claims, then I see no reason to keep my nomination on you.

Fiasco's latest comments are off-putting. He seems very eager for Cogito Ergo Sum to be a candidate for lynching, and judging by his language towards him it appears to me that he is very eager to have him lynched. Bloodthirsty almost. His reasons for nominating Cogito Ergo Sum contain a lot of "ifs", "buts" and "maybes." To me it looks like he's

manufacturing

reasons to nominate Cogito Ergo Sum, rather than

searching

for them. That is why he has garnered my nomination. Yes, yes indeed. Also he was very quick to change his opinion based on one thing: Cogito's statement "It just sounded so pristine and pure." To me this is very illogical.

I however disagree with the sentiments that simply because Napoleon was not reknown for his verbosity and oratorical skills precludes him from being a member on our island, based on the fact that neither was Grigori Rasputin.

Unnominate : Commodore Amazing

Nominate: Fiasco, LoudmouthLee

SpamWise · Post Post #595 (isolation #24) » Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:53 pm

"My case against specifically Fiasco rests on his actions early today."

What is interesting to note about Fiasco is that he has nominated Fritzler every day so far. Whether this is because he knows that Fritzler is a killer or because of other sinister reasons, I am uncertain.

"He completely disregards the point that the one with SATAN for a role restriction is the last person who should be suspected of being Satan, anti-beach, as typically those who are evil do not announce it every day first thing. Which is the crux of the argument in Cogito's defense, posted by me and others. "

To be fair, I sincerely doubt our host would have the capability or power to blackmail Satan. But still, if he did it's not as if we could expect Satan to be 'typically' evil. Or the killers amongst us either. And I believe the crux of Cogito's defence is not that he has commited acts atypical of what a evil person would do; rather that he has claimed to be in a brotherhood that is not of the killers.

And reading back, I believe that Fiasco's entire statement you are referring to was based upon the second assumption he made earlier. So you can't say he completely disregarded the assumption, only he never explicitly referred to it again. The problem is that it's a kind of circular reasoning, as if the second assumption is false, then the argument falls apart.

SpamWise · Post Post #605 (isolation #25) » Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:21 pm

Hmm hmm, I know nothing of aardwolves. The only thing similiar to them that I know of is the Chimera.

I am happy to see Fritzler lynched. Look at his posts. All he has done is follow others and state he is happy to see us killed. In my opinion, that is a very strong indicator he is a killer.

Vote: Fritzler

SpamWise · Post Post #633 (isolation #26) » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:50 pm

I am noticing DrippingGoofball's fondness of the statements "I don't know" and "I think." Is it to emphasis your point DrippingGoofball? Or something more sinister?

And I am missing the crux of the argument or arguments against Pooky. Is someone willing to give me a summary of what's the buzz there?

I am happy with my vote for now. I always say "small opportunities are often the beginning of great enterprises."

SpamWise · Post Post #676 (isolation #27) » Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:59 pm

I'm confused. DrippingGoofball has pointed out the incosistencies in LoudmouthLee's statements, everyone is now unvoting him based on what to me is a flimsy defense. Is it because of CES's plan that will confirm him? Is it because a better target has arisen? Is it because LoudMouthLee has hinted at something so radiantly good that he is untouchable? Is it because everyone has gained access to information that clears LoudMouthLee?

Why should we place stock in a plan that has a high likelihood of backfiring for the town? It would clear LoudMouthLee, but it has the potential to take us down a path that will ultimately lead to our ruin. Not to mention the confusion that is likely to be spread along the way. In my opinion we should either lynch LoudMouthLee or trust him explicitly. I'm for lynching him.

unvote: Fritzler

Vote: LoudMouthLee

SpamWise · Post Post #736 (isolation #28) » Sat Apr 01, 2006 8:39 pm

Personally, I do not see any reason to nominate anyone at this point in time. The people I would are already on the block. So instead I shall blabber on so Mr Grey does not get angry at me. And I will repeat what I said earlier. Small opportunities are often the beginning of great enterprises.

Yes, yes indeed.

SpamWise · Post Post #750 (isolation #29) » Sun Apr 02, 2006 10:26 pm

Fritzler and Tamuz would have been my opening nominations dear PJ my dear. It is based on my innermost feelings, but were they not on the block already, it's likely they would have been placeholder votes. Is that sufficient for you my dear?

Mike, the way you place my name against the "I do fault them...pushing a lynch on our claimed mason" implies that I was one of the persons who did. When I don't recall ever doing so.

Commodore: The only thing I notice about VitaminR is that he feels the need to SHOUT words. At least once every time he opens his mouth. Whether or not that is indicative of anything remains to be seen, but it will give us an insight into the face behind the mask.

SpamWise · Post Post #762 (isolation #30) » Mon Apr 03, 2006 12:43 pm

Werebear: What you say is not very helpful. At least in my opinion. Unless it's the reason why you are insistent on nominating Cogito Ergo Sum, then that refutes a main argument against you. From my point of view there is not much information to be extraploated from you pusuit of CES. It would be a very brave person who is willing to go after an almost confirmed innocent, and an either braver killer.

And I shall nominate Thok for lying to us. If we can't trust what he says when we're watching him, how can we trust him at night when we are all sleeping? I suppose when we learn whether or not we were right in trusting/distrusting Thok, we'll learn whether or not to trust Pooky. If that scenario ever arises.

Nominate: Thok

SpamWise · Post Post #769 (isolation #31) » Tue Apr 04, 2006 1:34 am

Well answer me this Thok, why were you falsifying your restriction? Technically you may not have lied as such, but semantics aside, your actions still clouded your identity. Which I do not see any good reason for a pro-town player to do. If you are a doctor or other pro-town role then possibly, but why go through all these lengths to give the impression that you have a restriction. Or if you have one, why would you set up a "red herring" of sorts to lead us away from the truth.

And I believe I was very justified in accepting that your restriction was truth. I have a restriction, Cogito has a restriction, MikeBurnFire has a restriction, the skeptic has a restriction. Which means that by definition, you were lying. You yourself have admitted it, at least partially. As well as casting blame on me by saying it was my own fault for noticing and accepting your false restrictions.

Also, out of all your "restrictions," it is noted that you left your semi-colon in your last post.

Nomination stands.

SpamWise · Post Post #789 (isolation #32) » Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:23 pm

At the moment I am inclined to vote for someone who has been unconfirmed by Commodore Amazing. I am leaning towards either VitaminR or Fiasco. I will make a decision later when I juxtapose their comments. I shall back off from Fritzler, as I would like to see his capabilities to prove himself. (Out of game: I sympathize with you Fritzler, it is always hard to lose a friend.)

And I realize I was over-zealous in my attack on Thok, thanks to Seol's enlightenment.

SpamWise · Post Post #796 (isolation #33) » Tue Apr 04, 2006 9:13 pm

I will vote for VitaminR. His voting patterns appear very much like something a killer would do. Although, I do admit the same argument could probably be used against I in some cases. The volume and the reasoning of Fiasco's posts are a point in his favour, but it does not prevent him from being a killer. Very, very good indeed. Yes, yes it is.

Vote:VitaminR

SpamWise · Post Post #830 (isolation #34) » Wed Apr 05, 2006 10:06 pm

The information that has come to light is heavy indeed. Give me some time to digest it. But I will say that I believe Seol for the moment. And I am patient enough to let him confirm himself. I..I shall unvote VitaminR for the moment, but it still is possible he's lying.

Unvote:VitaminR

SpamWise · Post Post #855 (isolation #35) » Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:18 pm

On superficial inspection, the masonry's defence amounts to little more than WIFOM. Especially some of the more important points that CES has said, such as the "if we were killers we would have thought of name-claims long ago." And I am also confused by MBF's "he killers can't keep us alive."Of course they can, for the moment at least. If they do keep youalive, by the time your powerbecomes effective, it may already be too late for the town anyway. Of course, if we lynch either of you, we diminish that power, assuming what you have claimed is true.

The problem that has put to town in, is that if they aren't killers, and assuming all other factors remain constant; we have no way of proving their innocence unless one of them dies.And the longer they stay alive, the more suspicion that is cast upon them. On the other side, if they are truly masons, the stronger their power goes.

I doubt either of them are killers, as no-one as come forth to counter-claim them. I don't think that the moves they've made have been "stupid", but neither are they brilliant. And I agree with the notion that claiming names now would make no difference as to whether or not they are innocenct. As we've seen so far, all of us have been notorious for commiting some act of evil, or at least demonstrating the capabilityto do so. What is of more concern to me is how outing their names would be detrimental to the interest of the town.

What I think it comes down to is whether or not the town is patient enough to see whether or not their claims are true, or at least a scenraio arises that greatly adds validity to their claims. The town has already stated that it's patient enough to wait for Fritzler and Seol, however they have claimed differently to what The Masons are.

The way I see it, bylynching one of them in the near future, we diminish their power for the end game, but we confirm someone for the moment. I think this is a dangerous move for the town, I'm of the opinion that we should wait, and assume that the killers will kill them if their claims are true, but they will stay alive if they are lying.

Of course, the killers would be likely to manipulate this by deliberately choosing not to kill either of them. But whether or not they are willing to risk the potential power the masons claim to have, or end up with later in the game, is a question that can only be answered by one of those two.

And I'm not quite sure what to hink of DGB's name-fishing. We have no way of confirming her innocene, only that we have made the assumption that Ingersoll is on our side. However, I'm not sure how many people would've believed Malcolm X to be on our side, yet were surprised when it was revealed that he was.

I'm not going to trust DGB for the moment, just as I am not going to trust anyone. But I have no evidence that Ingersoll is scum, only that if we are all typically "evil" characters here, than perhaps those who are out to kill us are those of a morally "good"nature.

And it's been stated before that several players have invented fake restrictions to hide the real one. I believe that is what MBF has done, but I'm not sure whether that increases the likelihod of him being either pro-town or a killer.

Hmm hmm hmm, hmm hmm hmm.

SpamWise · Post Post #859 (isolation #36) » Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:09 pm

You still came up with a way of hiding your real restriction. Which is what I meant. Not so much hiding it I suppose, but distracting everyone from your real restriction. That's what you were doing, which in a way is hiding your restriction.

The only other thing I have to say is that I shall go back a few steps, and vote for Fiasco.

Vote:Fiasco

SpamWise · Post Post #911 (isolation #37) » Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:08 pm

I don't believe Commodore Amazing is explicitly lying. He has said himself it's possible that he's misintepreting the information he has been given. That's all I can think of currently. I shall be back soon to give more thoughts. Yes, yes indeed.

SpamWise · Post Post #932 (isolation #38) » Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:42 pm

Seol's claim, and his subsequent confirmation are indeed quite weak. So one of my nominations shall go towards him.

The problem with Lord Sutch's claim is that there isn't really a good possible outcome for the town. In my opinion the best (and I use the term loosely) possible outcome would be for us to deliberately starve him of nominations. At least that way we do not lose a day, but it's possible we lose a townie. Which isn't the best move at this point in time.

Another possibility is if Gallileo investigates Lord Sutch, and tells us what he finds. Of course, that would require absolute trust in Gallileo. So for the moment, I am inclined to play it safe and leave VitaminR alone, so...so to speak.

Nominate:Seol

SpamWise · Post Post #950 (isolation #39) » Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:31 pm

Why are players nominating Werebear and Tamuz? They are already going to be on the lynching block. When it comes time to vote however, my vote will most likely be towards Tamuz. I have my suspicions about what Werebear might be, and if I am correct he is a valuable asset to the town. There is a great possibility I am mistaken however.

What interests me however is why Seol chose to use his one and only ability on Commodore Amazing, someone who in my opinion had been relatively cleared. So tell me Seol, why did you choose CA? If I recall correctly it you attacked him earlier on, but my memory is quite foggy. So did you revisit your suspicions, if they did or do exist, or was there another reason?

Even so, why did you not choose someone who still had a fog of illusion around them, like myself or Werebear. Or even someone who was likely to be tested today, like Screaming Lord Sutch or Gallileo Gallilei. You yourself cited the "uninformed majority vs informed minority", why was it that you did not take steps to rectify this problem?

That, that is all for now.

SpamWise · Post Post #962 (isolation #40) » Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:40 pm

I do not believe Werebear is scum. Looking at his posts I think I have a good idea as to what he might be. Of course I could be wrong, but I just do not feel that he is scum.

Mikeburnfire, you and Cogito made some terrible mistakes yesterday, and today. Werebear is nominating you not because of your claim, but because of the content of your posts. Were you not uncontested masons, my vote would most likely be towards you as well. A lot of your defence boils down to Wifom, and generalisations of the way scum and masons would typically play. Which is what Werebear sees wrong with your posts.

And my vote will go towards Tamuz. His posts to me seem hollow. I can't quite put my finger on it, but my gut instincts tell me this is so.

Vote:Tamuz

SpamWise · Post Post #978 (isolation #41) » Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:23 pm

It appears that the lack of conversation coincides with the traditional holiday of "Easter." I...I am happy with my vote for Tamuz. I ask that you take a look at his posts, and try and put in words what is wrong with them. They just feel wrong to me. I am very likely wrong myself, but my gut feeling says clock Tamuz. I don't know if I can convince you that I am right, or if anyone can convince me that I am wrong. Wrong, what an odd word.

SpamWise · Post Post #985 (isolation #42) » Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:14 am

We're two days away from a deadline. Seol is only three votes away from being lynched, if I count correctly. He's probably the safest lynch today. He just doesn't read scum to me. Maybe that's because he's hidden himself well or whatever, but I just need to be convinced more.

Hmm, hmm.

SpamWise · Post Post #990 (isolation #43) » Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:56 pm

We are two days away from our deadline. I feel that I have no choice but to vote for Seol. Unfortunately he has not made much of a defence for himself. We are fortunate in that (at least in my opinion) only positives can come from his death. If he has been honest, then we have confirmed Commodore Amazing, if he is scum then all the more better for the town.

Also, do Fiasco and Thok have the same restriction? Or a similiar restriction?

SpamWise · Post Post #991 (isolation #44) » Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:59 pm

It appears I forgot to vote. Oh deary deary me. So I shall do so now. I would rather not though, but I believe it would be in the town's interest. Also I just noticed that we are actually only one day away from our host's dead-line.

unvote:Tamuz

Vote:Seol

SpamWise · Post Post #993 (isolation #45) » Sat Apr 15, 2006 8:14 pm

It was just your "Vacant Marmots like Verbose Mafia" and Fiasco's "Etruscan Centaurs like Entropy Cops." that made me wonder. Fiasco really earned the scorn of someone powerful didn't he? Such powerful restrictions. Restrictions like that would probably be very hard to "earn", if that's the right term. I wonder if anyone has worked out my restriction?

SpamWise · Post Post #1003 (isolation #46) » Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:56 pm

I am not a huge fan of lynching someone who is unable to defend themselves. But we do not have much choice here I suppose.

Fritzler killed himself so he could confirm himself. He's a ghost, something which could be very useful in the next few days. It's like having an extra member amongst our "township" Except he can't vote or nominate anyone, but he can do the important thing. And that is think.

I fear my spirit shall be departing soon. I shall say that this has been a good experience, something that will last me for the rest of my lifetimes. If ever I am in the same scenario again, I think it shall be for the better.

SpamWise · Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:41 pm

Well, that was a most, MOST enjoyable nap. I shall probably be punished by Mr Grey for it. If someone would like to get me up to speed on what has happened so far that would be most appreciated. I shall endeavour to try and get up to speed by my own accord as well. Yes indeed.

SpamWise · Post Post #1165 (isolation #48) » Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:02 pm

Thok, I fail to understand your reasons for nominating myself or Fiasco.

Firstly, what am I being pressured to do? I am aware that I was unable to comment on anything yesterday, and luckily for me it seems that I have not been punished so far. But I can assure you that will not happen today. If there's a general consensus that I should claim, being one of the few who hasn't so far, then I will.

And secondly, what is wrong with the Pope theory? Theory that's all it is, which in my opinion is equally plausible, but if you think that Fiasco is deliberately spreading misinformation then that is a good reason to nominate. But that's not what you said. The way you worded it, it seems like you're nominating him simply because you think, or maybe you know, that the Pope theory is wrong.

I do not like the silent speaker's accusations against Commodore Amazing either. From my perspective, it looks like he is deliberately spreading misinformation, possibly to mislead us. Also I would not be surprised if he has always been planning to nominate myself Thok and Werebear. But not Commodore Amazing. Interesting, interesting indeed.

Nominate:Thok, the silent speaker

SpamWise · Post Post #1170 (isolation #49) » Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:05 pm

The Silent Speaker: Ahh, but Thok didn't

say

that did he? What's bleedingly obvious to one player isn't always so to another. It makes sense now you've stated that his nomination stems from the way he has divided the town up from his perspective, as you have. I didn't realize that at the time, perhaps because of my absence...mindedness.

All I can really do to convince you to not nominate me is ask you to read my posts and ask yourself if you think I'm a killer because of them. Apart from that all I can do is debate the arguments against me. Or claim, which I will probably end up doing today.

SpamWise · Mon May 01, 2006 12:16 am

I am Demosthenes, the ancient greek orator. I must stutter, or in otherwords repeat the same word twice in succession at least three times per day. Doing so allows me to use my ability, which is a one-shot investigation like Seol's. That's why I was reluctant to have Seol lynched, as I knew his ability was in the game. I did not speak out though, as I was afraid that I would be killed, and as it seemed we had few investigative/protective roles at the time, I thought it would be for the better if I stayed low. I have not used my ability so far in the game, I figured it would be best used in a situation like the one we are currently in. It was a gambit on my behalf, but I am thinking I will use my ability tonight. However, the surprising absence of night kills means that I could hold onto my investigation shot as long as possible, assuming that I am not lynched and/or one side doesn't win.

So what I probably need to work out is how many killers are likely to be left, and how many days we have left.

Hmm hmm, very thought provoking.

SpamWise · Post Post #1206 (isolation #51) » Mon May 01, 2006 9:46 pm

When I said "I fear my spirit will be departing" I was referring to my actual absence for a week, and was unsure whether or not I would be replaced. I have never, and currently do not have any way of knowing whether or not I will live or die.

So far it seems that we do not have a normal investigative role. Therefore it makes sense to balance the game by having several one-shot investigators. That's why I was reluctant to lynch Seol. I (mistakenly) nominated him based on they way he confirmed himself and I do regret his lynching. Especially as some people are saying Tamuz is likely scum, who I rather would have lynched in his place.

As for the masons, confirming them earlier would have been the optimal play in hindsight. But none of them were in much danger of being lynched, and it doesn't look like they will be today. Unfortunately it means that I have cost the town some unnecessary confusion, I apologize. I came into this game thinking "I should not waste my ability early", and that preconceived notion is what stopped me from fully reacting to what was going on around me. Also I was like "I'll be awesome and find scum with my only shot."

If I confirm someone tonight, it just means that we won't waste a lynch tomorrow. But it won't confirm myself unfortunately. Unless I hit scum, it which case I will appear better, but still unconfirmed.

Also, I am know as a prosecutor. If you know look at my history, you will see that my legal guardians defrauded me after my father, who left me well provided for, died. When I came of age I prosecuted them, retrieving some of my inheritance. I then turned to legal pursuits. This does not disprove or prove my innocence, but it does show what Perry Mason and I have in common, and why we would both be one-shot investigators in this situation.

Too bad I only just realized this now. I'm sorry I've taken the town down such an confusing and counter-intuitive tangent, but I can probably clear a lot up tonight if I use my ability.

SpamWise · Post Post #1207 (isolation #52) » Mon May 01, 2006 9:48 pm

Also, I am know as a prosecutor. If you know look at my history, you will see that my legal guardians defrauded me after my father, who left me well provided for, died. When I came of age I prosecuted them, retrieving some of my inheritance. I then turned to legal pursuits. This does not disprove or prove my innocence, but it does show what Perry Mason and I have in common, and why we would both

likely

be one-shot investigators in this situation, or at least have a similiar role.

Yes yes, that is remedied indeed.

SpamWise · Tue May 02, 2006 12:46 am

I am not capable of answering that question Fiasco. What Perry Mason and I do have in common is that we both pay claim to the legal profression, and we are both known for our public service. To me, it makes sense to have lawyers in a group of people reknowned for their verbosity. What makes even more sense is having

lawyers

as under-powered investigators. Of course, none of this is conclusive proof of my innocence, and there's no real way I can truly confirm my ability. All I can do is speak my mind and hope that you see the truth behind my words.

SpamWise · Post Post #1224 (isolation #54) » Tue May 02, 2006 5:25 pm

Well, you've pointed out how it makes sense for Perry Mason to be my counterpart. He was involved in defense, I in prosecution. Why wouldn't I believe there to be more than one single-shot investigator? If I was simply told that I was a cop, I would have been more skeptical of Seol's earlier claim, to the point of counter-claiming. To me it would be very odd if I were a cop, and another player was randomly claiming a one shot cop. But with the knowledge that I was a one shot cop, it would make far more sense to have another, one shot cop. Which is why I was inclined to think Seol was telling the truth, a point I've stated earlier.

As for your little tidbit: so all up you're saying that four people nominated alongside a person that they were also nominating? And that because Loudmouthlee was one of those pesons, I am more likely to be scum? I don't see any logic behind this. Firstly, it is too small of a sample to be called an accurate tell. Secondly LoudmouthLee's alignment is still unknown. It's very likely he was scum, but the possibility exists that he wasn't. Finally, you have not told us who the other two are, nor what their alignment is.

So I have no idea what the purpose of that tidbit is, I'm guessing it's to cast more doubt upon me. Something I'd think scum would be more inclined to do.

Vote: Thesilentspeaker

SpamWise · Wed May 03, 2006 12:31 am

Wait, I thought The Silent Speaker claimed to be the post restrictor?!?!

Either way, that claim has very little bearing on my stance against him. I am of the opinion that the ability to give additional restrictions could either be a scum or town ability. Others have hinted that each member of the scum faction has their own ability. A post restrictor could be an ability if that assumption is correct. Being able to spread confusion like that and silence others would be a useful ability for scum.

But if the killers do have to work out player's post restrictions in order to have them killed, then a post-restrictor could work as some kind of pseudo-doctor. And forgive me if my memory disserves me, but wasn't Adele a post-restrictor and (suspected) town?

Interesting, interesting, interesting.

SpamWise · Wed May 03, 2006 10:42 pm

Silent Speaker, you can read 'The Guide' and it will explain how I am simultaneously an orator yet have a stutter. However it will require you to disbelieve the laws of time. Something which seems to have been broken here anyway.

As a child I had a speech impediment. Remnants of that remain, hence my stuttering.

mikeburnfire: Fiasco is not eligible to be lynched. You can only choose to vote for myself, the silent speaker or Werebear. But I do not see how Werebear's distrust of the masonry makes him more likely to be scum.

I will use my ability tonight to confirm the masonry, however you will have to lynch me tomorrow for this to occur.

SpamWise · Post Post #1254 (isolation #57) » Thu May 04, 2006 9:29 pm

I don't have much to say. Only that Fiasco is defending me a lot, but I agree with most of what he has said. I don't know if there are scum on tss's wagon, and if so how many. We have no way of knowing how many scum are left. And silentspeaker's reasons for not claiming flavour are similiar to Lml's. Same restriction for the same family anyone?

Anyone object to me investigating the masonry tonight?

SpamWise · Fri May 05, 2006 12:51 pm

"The Prosecutor!" is my role descriptor. I shall investigate one of the masons tonight, but I'm not sure who yet. Yet have no fear, we still have a chance. I believe day is almost over. If you don't mind me pointing out the obvious. I do hope we are correct in assuming that the scum roles do not have any shots left, but am I being too selfish in asking that you protect me tonight just to be super-safe Werebear?

SpamWise · Post Post #1283 (isolation #59) » Mon May 08, 2006 8:01 pm

PetroleumJelly is innocent. To truly confirm this you will probably need to lynch me. I have no problems with this, as long as we are not placed into a lynch or lose situation. I do not know the alignment of the other two. There is the possibility that petroleumjelly is a always-innocent godfather. I will cast my nominations later. Later, but not too much later.

SpamWise · Post Post #1292 (isolation #60) » Tue May 09, 2006 8:09 pm

Cogito said it. My choice was completely random. I too am thinking of nominating those who have not been "cleared" so to speak. That is Thok, Fiasco, WereBear and VitaminR. I support the idea of testing VitaminR, but if he is telling the truth we may be digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole we can't get out of. I will nominate him for the moment however. WereBear is already on the block, so I shall not waste a nomination on him. I fail to see why others are so eager to do so.

Nominate: Fiasco, Thok, VitaminR

SpamWise · Post Post #1306 (isolation #61) » Wed May 10, 2006 6:54 pm

This is just a quick check in. The masonry has not been cleared by me, petroluemjelly has. Stop talking in absolute terms. I am in general aggreance with WereBear. I shall try and give more ideas and thoughts tomorrow. But the masons would make a good lynch. However I am probably a better lynch, as is WereBear.

SpamWise · Post Post #1317 (isolation #62) » Thu May 11, 2006 8:50 pm

I'm sorry if my comments confused anyone. I just think that everyone is seeing the subjects as black and white, when it is a big grey area. The reason I said the masons would make a

good

lynch is because of the way my information was delegated. What I got on petroluemjelly was a "pure" statement. It would just confirm that their flavours are true, but would probably be a waste of time. I still think that myself or WereBear would make a 'better' lynch, at least over the masonry. I do like the case building against Fiasco as well. I'm still unsure who to lynch, all five of us have good cases against us, and would make good lynches.

Vote Vote Vote!

SpamWise · Fri May 12, 2006 12:55 pm

I'm still unsure who I should vote for. I will see what happens when I mentally juxtapose the four others up for lynching. For now this is just a placeholder so you all know that I am alive and well. This will require deep thought on my behalf. Unless someone is willing to come out with a great Philippic to convince me.

SpamWise · Sat May 13, 2006 11:47 pm

I don't think WereBear is scum. Of course, he could very well be playing me for a fool. But that's not the read I got on him. The read I do have, and always (well not always, but when I did get one) did have on him was that he was a doctor, something Commodore Amazing picked up on as well. Thok however has jumped up on my scummy radar, for his latest vote on WereBear. So I shall vote for him. I still believe I would be a better lynch than WereBear however, but the town is after his blood. And I'm hardly going to advocate my own lynching. We could go for no-lynch, but all that would do is delay something that is inevitable. It would allow Fiasco more investigations, but as he hasn't any access to them, it would be a fairly useful exercise in pointlessness.

My fence-sitting on the masons has caused some doubts, which I'll try to rectify. From the masons point of view, they are 100% totally cleared. From my point of view, they are something like 90% cleared. I can think of many situations where the information that I have received would be false. As such, I will not close my mind to the possibility that they could be scum. I stand by my comments that they would be (and this is highly, highly subjective) good lynches but I have always, always maintained that there are better lynches. The players up for lynching right now are better lynches, I am probably the best lynch of the lot.

Vote: Thok

- I was suspicious of you early on, you have reaffirmed my suspicions with your vote, and most likely lynching of WereBear.

SpamWise · Post Post #1349 (isolation #65) » Sun May 14, 2006 9:20 pm

Thok: I had suspicions of you early on, but did not deem them sufficient enough to pursue. Also, at the time we were all pursuing LoudMouthLee. He was scummy enough to overshadow you. If you are Freud as you claim, you should be able to perfectly understand my mental state. And as far as I'm aware I'm perfectly sane. Sane enough to realize that I am one of the better lynches, if not the best lynch today. Of course, that would imply that I am insane wouldn't it.

MBF: If you truly felt WereBear was innocent you would not be lynching him at this point in time. I too have had moments where I've felt that someone was innocent, but they were still the best lynch anyway. Sometimes our feelings are more intuitive then our logic.

SpamWise · Post Post #1372 (isolation #66) » Thu May 18, 2006 9:04 pm

I'm going to assume that there's been enough discussion to being nominating, as everyone else is doing so. My nominations are quite easy as well. Thok and Fiasco. What I'm still wondering about is will there be two deaths today, assuming VitaminR is telling the truth? Truth, that is something I am looking forward to finding out. Out there it lies, waiting for the right moment ro be revealed.

Nominate: Fiasco, Thok

SpamWise · Post Post #1378 (isolation #67) » Fri May 19, 2006 3:12 pm

PetroluemJelly, now is the time where we make judgements based on the way people played, rather than their role claims. Claims are often difficult to jude. Interesting to note is the lack of nominations from Cogito Ergo Sum and HalfMan. I know HalfMan advocated that we do not nominate until we've had some discussion, I'll have to assume CES agreed with him.

Just a question PetroluemJelly, why do you place all your words in inverted commas, otherwise known as speech marks? Marks of nothingness?

SpamWise · Post Post #1382 (isolation #68) » Sat May 20, 2006 3:34 pm

We do not know whether VitaminR will die immediately at mid-day. Or if he will die at the end of day. Or even first thing tomorrow. That is of course, assuming all his claims are true.

I too advocate a deep analysis of everyone's posts in the games. My only fear is that it will be long and tedious, due to the restrictions forced upon us by Mr Grey. That will not suit me at all. Perhaps if we did try to all analyze everyone's statements, then we should try and equally distribute the analysis. So for example, we would as a group decide allocate every one to another person, then each person would carry out an individual analysis of everyone else.

There are several flaws with this though, but I know there are ways around them.

SpamWise · Post Post #1386 (isolation #69) » Sun May 21, 2006 5:59 pm

This is just a quick check in. Seems to me like we're just playing the waiting game at the moment. That's fine, but I'd rather we started thinking ahead. If I had to vote right now it would come down to a random decision between Thok and Fiasco. I'll try and meditate on his issue later.

SpamWise · Post Post #1392 (isolation #70) » Sun May 21, 2006 9:56 pm

I need to stutter three times per day. It is a weak restriction compared to others yes, in that I do not have to include my stutter in every post. But it exists. The repetition of my words need not be grammatically incorrect. Incorrect it is not, such as in this post. But it is I suppose, if my improper sentence is any indication. I have not failed my restriction at all, otherwise I (assume) I would have been placed on the lynching block the next day.

SpamWise · Tue May 23, 2006 12:40 pm

HalfMan was shown innocent by Seol. If we lynch Fiasco today, then I think HalfMan should pursue either myself or Thok (Thok hopefully). I'm going to vote for Fiasco. The list is a factor weighing upon my mind, as it is with CES's. I hope you understand Fiasco.

Vote:Fiasco

SpamWise · Post Post #1413 (isolation #72) » Tue May 23, 2006 2:37 pm

Random thoughts from the mind of Demosthenes: We could always vote no lynch and see what happens to VitaminR. I don't see any reason not to, other than the "we can't win unless we lynch" suggestion. Who knows, it may even give you access to your results Fiasco. The only problem would be if he was saved due to Thok's intervention. Because the current paradigm is that Thok is going to attempt to save VitaminR tonight, then Thok is immune from lynching. Unless we change that plan. But that would confuse me, and I'm certain many others as well.

My suggestion (and that's all it was) was that if HalfMan did choose to pursue someone as a bear he'd best be pursuing one of the unknowns (obviously).

I have no objections to being lynched today (I'd rather not mind you, but if that's the general consensus I can dig it). Actually, now that I think more deeply about it, lynching me would be quite beneficial to the town. Of course, that would not help Fiasco (assuming he is truthful). It would help PetroleumJelly.

SpamWise · Wed May 24, 2006 12:18 pm

Thok, I believe that I am a good candidate for lynching in the same way that you and Fiasco are. I was not suggesting that everyone suddenly turns around and lynches me, only that I would not object if that's what would have the best outcome for the town.

I am however becoming slightly disturbed by the blood-thirstiness of the town. I can understand everyone's grievances with the time frame, but why are we risking two deaths today? Our problem earlier on was that we were rushed through our days without enough time to think. But we do not have that problem now.

In fact, I think I shall make a stand with HalfMan.

unvote

SpamWise · Post Post #1461 (isolation #74) » Sun May 28, 2006 7:37 pm

Damnit! I'm sorry town, I played pretty poorly. Well played scum, it was your great claims that won it for you. I do believe that I am a better player having played this game, not something I could say about many games.

SpamWise · Post Post #1498 (isolation #75) » Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:32 pm

CA played all of us like violins. We should've realized that Shakspeare's restriction would have something to do with Elizabethan English or sonnets or something. The most valuable lesson I've learned from this is to always question everything.

SpamWise · Post Post #1502 (isolation #76) » Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:32 pm

I'm making it a point of mine to play in every game mith mods.