Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[charter]

/confirm

[charter]

vote CF Riot

He's got the same chance of being mafia this game as last game. So there's a 1/4 chance he's mafia this time. I don't like your misleading statistics. Though I do agree with your assessment of the input of Farside and Gurgi.

Also, you voting for me would in no way be random haha.

ON A SCALE OF 1-10 RANK BB'S SCUMMINESS!!!!!!

[charter]

That 1/4 is assuming there's 3 mafia... Which I am assuming for this game.

[charter]

Sorry for triple post, but Riot, how did you already assume there were three mafia again? Have some knowledge the rest of us dont?

[charter]

All about the Riot wagon!

[charter]

Wow I can't spell

All aboard the riot wagon!

[charter]

The person who first brings up a SK is more likely to be the SK supposedly.

[charter]

I don't believe this. I think of something right after I post (twice) and now I'm scum.... I'd say this is an even weaker case than you guys brought against me last game.

Riot, casinos are rigged so that you lose. Trying to justify your faulty statistic with useless trivia? Tsk tsk.

Anyhow, I say we lynch Had just in case he's mafia again (sarcasm) Also, I'm sad Netlava isn't on my team anymore

[charter]

Which are the two posts where I change my mind?

[charter]

21-22. Not exactly changing your mind, more like contradicting yourself.

Ah, I see what you guys are saying now. I used the words 'change my mind' because that's what Gurgi said I did.

[charter]

Is there any reason you're voting for me now rather than when I first said I'm assuming there's three mafia? I don't understand why you waited so long if that's your reason for voting me.

Fishing for pro-town roles to drop hints that you can pick up? Makes me wonder, why do you care who the pro town roles are?

Note liking Had's waiting so long to vote for me. Also not liking Riot's misleading stat trying to make us think there's very little chance Had is scum.

[charter]

It IS misleading. If someone wasn't good at statistics and just read over it and didn't think about it, they would assume there's a tiny (~5%) chance that Had is scum again, based on your statement. You failed to mention me in there which makes me think there's a reason for that.

[charter]

Waiting for your answer Had.

unvote
vote hadfang

[charter]

Oh jeez. I really hate to pull a "yeah what he said" but Mac read my post exactly the way I meant it. I should've quoted you or something Tinsley but I assumed people would know why I mentioned Had for my stat. I didn't try to leave Charter out, it's just that no one had voted for him and that was my point. The only reason I joked about voting Charter is because we sort of had a feud last game and I ended up being right. Like I said though, I don't joke vote, so voting for him based on that goes against my game morals. The stat wasn't meant to change anyone's minds once real voting started, I just thought of all the people you could random, I wouldn't choose someone who was mafia last game.

Alright, assuming you weren't trying to mislead anyone, I still have to question why you were so quick to defend Had when there had been a whopping five posts before yours. Why did you feel the need post about him?

[charter]

Going back and doing a little rereading, and look what I find.

Hmmm, My thoughts so far are that the SK thing is a bit of a wierd thing to do, but I can't really see anything in Charter's assumption thing really, if i'm honest.

Then later in 66

There could be cult leaders or survivers though, that's not above possibility. Tbh, speculation on 3rd party roles offers us no help at all, until someone makes a hint at their role if they are pro-town. Having said that Lord Guri's post was that there are likely to be either 3 scum or 3 scum and a SK, it was Charter that brought up the speculation about it.

Vote:Charter

I will be interested in seeing who the next person to vote for Had is (assuming someone does.

[charter]

THe first comment on the SK thing meant I thought that the speculation on teh SK was weird, but I didn't think Charter's assumption mix up had much in it at the time. Re-reading it, Charter was the one that made a comment on teh SK speculation first, which in turn began more open spculation about it.

False, the only thing I've said this whole game about a SK is post 42, where I say "The person who first brings up a SK is more likely to be the SK supposedly." in response to Battousai's question of why is it bad to bring up the SK in the early game. I don't speculate about having one anywhere and I won't until at least tomorrow.

Charter seems to be pushing for a lynch quite eagerly at the moment and it's only page 3.

Also false. I voted for you, but all I've done is pointed out that you flip-flopped and that you took a very long time to vote for me. If I was 'pushing' there would be more arguments.

Also, I'm a cop with an unknown sanity. Of course its up to you as to what you think of that.

Convenient claim to make on D1 when you're at L-3....

[charter]

For now,

strong FoS on Hadhfang

, waiting for the rest of the town's opinion on how to go about testing this claim. Battousai I'm also waiting for you to come in and clear your name.

Don't lynch him today and if he lives through the night lynch him tomorrow. Of course the mafia could always not NK him, but I see that as much more unlikely than him actually being mafia (if he lives). Saying this, there's no point in lynching him today, as there are probably two others, so I'll go ahead and

unvote had

However Had, you would do well to explain the discrepancies in your posting as pointed out by several of us.

A good place to start

vote blackberry

because I didn't get a super kickass role.

[charter]

You say Tinsley will look scummy if Had turns up scum, would the opposite hold true? Say if we lynch Tinsley today, would you then think Had is scum regardless of his claim tomorrow (if he lives through the night)?

[charter]

Well with Charter's statement did was exactly this: Now it will be WIFOM. If Had is NK, If Had is scum, If, if, if. It's really too soon to say any of that and I think talking about it gives the scum ideas (if Had isn't scum) what to do about the situation. The worse part about Had's claim is he doesn't know if he is sane or not.

Yes, it was all my fault. No one else possibly thought that, or was going to think that tomorrow. If I hadn't said anything, scum couldn't have thought of that and would still be in the dark.

I think you trying to pin this on me is scummy. What does everyone else think?

[charter]

I don't buy Had's claim at all. It's exactly what scum would claim. I don't know about my read of Tinsley + Had, I could be completely wrong, as I haven't actually read this game yet, lol.

The fact that you already have two targets in mind before reading the game seems scummy.

QFT

However, cop claim on day one is a very easy claim for scum to make. I'm not saying Had's claim is false, but there's virtually no proof he actually is or isn't the cop, but no one wants to lynch their cop.

[charter]

CF Riot's post 71:

I'd also like to add that I'm eating the most delicious apple right now. So good.

I saw it as a doc breadcrumb, with apple being the trigger word, except for the fact that it makes no sense for a doc to breadcrumb whatsoever. From my (limited) experience as mafia, I have been tempted to drop fake breadcrumbs, before realizing that doc breadcrumbs make no sense.

What if he really was a doc and it was a real breadcrumb? Then if the scum wasn't observant you just outed a town power role. What do you think should happen if CF is found dead tomorrow as the doc?

Why are you asking other people what they think should happen if Riot is found dead tomorrow and is doc? Why don't you say what you think will happen? What good can you hope to gain from this question? I ask these because you seem unwilling to drop the Riot being doc thing, even after he explicitly said he wasn't dropping hints at his role.

[charter]

I think it's a scummy thing to do and I'm calling you out on it. It doesn't matter who it's directed to. Netlava is still free to answer it, I haven't given my opinion on the matter. I hesitate to say 'loaded question' but your question is very WIFOM with the what do you think should happen tomorrow.

I was actually wondering if you were going to say I was defending him. You didn't quite, but you still didn't answer my questions to you.

[charter]

You brought it up. Why? Do you really think the scum will be thinking in those terms?

Yes I did. Obviously or I would have kept it to myself if I didn't think that everyone in this game wouldn't have thought of it too. I think it would be an extremely obvious/easy scum play to let Had live (since most likely the doc would protect him anyway) and then push for his lynch tomorrow if he doesn't hit one of them tonight. I honestly can't believe that everyone else in here didn't come to this exact same conclusion. I know there's a million other things that can happen, but whenever someone claims cop D1, this always goes through everyone's head.

If you now say that I'm further directing people, I'm going to explode. I'm not telling anyone to do anything, just explaining what I assumed obvious and that everyone thought.

[charter]

@Macavenger: charter is talking about lining up lynches, but the hypocritical part is he is talking about whether Had is still alive, then calls out another player who did exactly as he did.

Yeah, I'm not seeing that. In one I'm "lining up lynches" and in the other I'm questioning Bat. I don't see how they're connected either.

[charter]

@SG, were you even in the last game? References to it completely flew over your head, I don't know why you'd point them out and put trivial comments on them.

I'm going to do a reread when I get back from this weekend with my current thoughts, I'll be

V/LA

until monday probably.

[charter]

Was away, don't have much time now, but I'll address this now.

@SG, were you even in the last game? References to it completely flew over your head, I don't know why you'd point them out and put trivial comments on them.

I'm going to do a reread when I get back from this weekend with my current thoughts, I'll be

V/LA

until monday probably.

Yes... I was in the last game.

Can you elaborate on these 'references'?

The whole BB is odd... There were two or three obvious ones that weren't serious you quoted in your post and treated them as serious.


@Had, I'll get to your post later tonight/tomorrow.

[charter]

I will be interested in seeing who the next person to vote for Had is (assuming someone does.

Why is this? What information would it have given you?

It wouldn't have given me any more than everyone else. I simply would have found it interesting.

Don't lynch him today and if he lives through the night lynch him tomorrow. Of course the mafia could always not NK him, but I see that as much more unlikely than him actually being mafia (if he lives). Saying this, there's no point in lynching him today, as there are probably two others, so I'll go ahead and
unvote had

How come you spent so long to unvote? You didn't like how I waited to vote you, so why did you wait to unvote me?

You were still very suspicious (and still are).

Well with Charter's statement did was exactly this: Now it will be WIFOM. If Had is NK, If Had is scum, If, if, if. It's really too soon to say any of that and I think talking about it gives the scum ideas (if Had isn't scum) what to do about the situation. The worse part about Had's claim is he doesn't know if he is sane or not.

I think you trying to pin this on me is scummy. What does everyone else think?

how is it scummy? he isn't really trying to pin anything on you Charter, He's just pointing out what you did.

Way to come up with something original. It's not that scummy, I was wrong before.

Your post here seems like a desperation attempt to save yourself. I don't know why you're not in much danger of being lynched today.

[charter]

Post 222 isn't even by Netlava...

[charter]

I agree with Mac here. As an example, if we focus steadily on Netlava I am sure we can get enough votes on to lynch him. After about 20 pages of playing with him I would say that his style is unorthodox enough to make enough people suspicious of him even if he were a vanilla townie. Does this mean that I think Netlava is guilty or innocent? Neither, simply that it would not be a useful test. On the other hand, if we continue to talk about every player, it becomes a case of "Is he the best person to lynch today?", which is quite different.

While I increasingly think it may be justified, as I said earlier (in post #218), it seemed to me a foregone conclusion that if we focused on Netlava it would most likely end in him being lynched.

I'm not really liking this post. All you did when pointing it out the first time was set yourself up for a "but I was right about Netlava, listen to me" defense in case we lynch netlava and he's town. Now you seem to be reiterating it which I don't understand. If he is scummy, there shouldn't be any problems with lynching him. I won't lie, I've been biased towards him this game because he helped me out the most last game, but I'll do a reread without this bias.

Had, you've been awfully quiet recently, what are your thoughts on this matter, or any other matter?

[charter]

Did a reread, here's my thoughts on what I saw.

Batt in 37, put's a horribly justified vote on farside
Seeing an LG - Batt connection possibly
Riot in 48, Points out Batt
Walnut in 63, massive derailing of town
Had in 66, still cant shake this...
Walnut in 79, MORE extra curricular role speculation
by post 92, Walnut has said absolutely nothing new and constructive to the town and jumps on board Had
Riot in 99, wants the rest of the town's opinion on how to test Had's claim. He's testing the waters because you never lynch an unclaimed cop day 1 (or it's at least idiotic barring extreme circumstances). At this point I'm leaning towards Had actually being the cop.
Batt 102, says he was lurking on purpose...
Walnut 137, Defends himself against BB even though there is no need to. No one listened to him since he even said he had no interest in playing.
Walnut in 137, Seems to think lynching BB is not only acceptable, but a good idea. Says that BB was deliberately trying to draw votes when pressure was building. Two things wrong with this. First I think that was BB's first or second post, so it being timed seems very unlikely to me. Second, he 'knows' BB was drawing votes away from someone else...

At this point, I stop and just read all Walnut's posts+context.
145, wishy washy about BB after Netlava questions him.
Riot in 173, I don't understand why you seem to drop all suspicion of Walnut here and set your sights on Netlava. I don't find it scummy, but why did you drop Walnut?
LG in 176, bandwagons, screams scum to me.
Walnut in 187, defends me. Don't know why. Possible scenario is because he thinks I'll go and get myself lynched like I almost did last game, flip town, then he'll be in a good spot tomorrow.

Stopped around here. The whole game, up until here, Walnut only contributes useful opinions when questioned. His posts since then have been ok, but his early posts seem really scummy. Go ahead and string me up for this,

vote walnut

[charter]

You seem awfully concerned with my thoughts, especially since I mentioned you just once and said a whopping four words about you. I said your vote was a bandwagon vote because your reason for voting him was "Until you provide some decent explanation for yourself, Unvote, Vote: Netlava". It was the second (I believe) vote on him, with not too steller justification. There's no actual argument there, just you casting suspicion upon Netlava.


I'm not saying anything about how scummy Netlava is or isn't. I actually commented on five players, and formed opinions on others, however, me revealing them now will NOT help lynch scum, so don't ask for them. It doesn't "seem" like I had tunnel vision, I clearly did when I said that I was only going to continue reading Walnut's posts/context. Despite saying that, I still read and commented on other players when something caught my eye. I know you noticed this fact because one of those comments was about you.

I don't like Netlava's posts either, but I don't think they are neccessarily indicitive of him being scum, but I don't think they're indicitive of town either.

[charter]

No, if I say something about you that you disagree with, you should definately voice your concerns. I was expecting you to ask me to elaborate on my thoughts about you, but I wasn't expecting it in the manner you did, because all I said was "bandwagons" and "screams scum to me" neither of which is descriptive in the least (it wasn't meant to be, it was just me jotting down my thoughts). I don't think your reaction was unjustified, but I don't understand the need to tell me "There are other players in the game, why not look at them?". Obviously I haven't forgotten this.

I don't want to argue whether Netlava did or didn't justify accusations brought against him, or argue about his playstyle.

Argh, I have to go, this thought isn't complete. Will finish later.

[charter]

Completely forgot what I wanted to add to my previous post, so I'll say it's complete.

[charter]

Charter I haven't dropped suspicion of Walnut. I pointed out that I still find him scummy in 252. I think Netlava is far scummier. You said in 250 that you've been too biased in favor of Netlava this game and are going to reread intending to be more neutral. Did that happen? You don't mention Netlava in your recap of the game anywhere.

Ah, I thought that since the whole post you questioned Netlava. I see now that you didn't drop him, my apologies. I haven't done that reread yet, I doubt I can today, hopefully this weekend. I didn't mention Netlava, but I didnt mention a lot of others either.

@Walnut, regardless of what questions you were answering, your post got a few people off topic for a while. I'm not arguing that what you said was or wasn't justified, just that you did say it, and it did derail the town.

You're right about the 137 though, don't know where I got defend from. More like fruitlessly attacks. I assumed no one listened to him, since there were very few posts that talked about BB or what he said. Also noted, how you group Tinsley in there with responding to BB but no one else. Walnut, you really didn't defend yourself against my accusations. You corrected my improper use of words in a few cases, but you didn't try and refute much.

Plus your latest post is taking a very noncommittal stance on netlava. You even say so yourself. It seems scummy, like all that needs to happen is netlava needs just a little more support, then you'll add your vote.

[charter]

I figured camn actually did have a wild role because of the way she basically said 'drop my role discussion' as soon as she came in. Coupled with BB's "kick ass role" and I thought it might be true.

I don't know what your role is camn, but if you think its better for the town to know then not, then you should claim now.

[charter]

I'm inclined to believe you. As some of you have noticed, I just say what I think, so I say we keep you around for a little, if need be, we can lynch you later, but I don't think you would have claimed like that if you were scum. Do you know if the mafia's kill would still go through on you? AKA a one for one trade? (not that I would mind that)

[charter]

I really don't see a walnut/Riot link. Can you show me?

[charter]

BB kind of ruined that with his kick ass role claim too.

[charter]

Thanks

[charter]

SG, do you have any actual thoughts on anyone? Suspicions on anyone? That last giant post, while appreciated, didn't actually say anything.

@Riot, I'm working on my Netlava reread.

[charter]

About to do my Netlava read as I have time during work today, I'll be looking for this as well and point it out when I see it.

The way you focus on me without voting me, and the way you voice suspicion of other people (like Charter) without actually questioning them or commenting on their tells appears to me like trying to get someone else to start the wagon so later you could jump on without taking the heat for a mislynch tomorrow.

Bah, was going to ask a question regarding eventually lynching Camn, but realized it would cause pointless talk today to explode, so remind me D2 if I forget.

[charter]

I know this is about netlava, but Walnut's post 92 contradicts his being hesitant to vote for someone that he's pulling now.
Read Riot's post 99. Had, if you investigate a good town power role tonight (aka doctor) please just say they're a normal townie.

Finally get to some Netlava stuff worthy of comment.
113, I actually think he picked out a non-connection between Batt and Riot. I however, don't understand the way Riot talks to Batt in those two. It's like they're both on the same team, but I can't see Riot doing something like that if he's scum.
144, Netlava says he's not sure whether Had is scum. A few posts earlier he said he thinks he is still, and throws out the idea of lynching him anyway.
150, I really don't like Batt's "What if" here. It seems like an opportunistic way to attack Netlava and make himself seem useful. (after this I'm going to look more closely at Batt, and particularly a Batt-Walnut connection). I commented on it before, but going back, Riot had already said it wasn't a breadcrumb, and Netlava had said before that that it's entirely pointless to breadcrumb as a doc. I agree with Netlava, the doctor is only good if they are completely hidden, so dropping ANY clue that you're the doc, is idiotic.
173, Riot sums up everything about Netlava. Honestly I think he's got it set in his mind Netlava is scum at this point and trying to get him lynched.
175, Netlava accuses LG. I think the putting LG at number two scum is very OMGUS, but I think his point is valid. I also agree with the rest of his post too. Plus, farside doesn't question LG like she did to me (in respect to the not answering questions. She didn't pioneer the ones on LG like she did with me though...)
176, Bad post by LG
193, Very odd that he didn't post this earlier, or at least didn't give a reason for not like "I'll respond to Riot's post when I get more free time" or something in his post 175. Not a stellar defense, but adequate.
195, I actually think Netlava has a case on LG. LG does change around the reasons he's voting Netlava from tunnel vision to flip flopping.
204, I think Mac's bit at the end of his post about netlava (about 'tempt') is true.
211, Walnut defends me, no reason for this. Think I already pointed this out though.
214, I agree with Netlava.
225, Bad post by Netlava, should have said it differently.
228, Farside agrees that Netlava did not OMGUS vote LG, I agree
276, Batt questions my remaining vote on walnut
277, LG FINALLY answers the SK speculation questions when no one even remembers them anymore
293, Netlava jumps on the walnut wagon.
312, Had flips on me AGAIN. Now I'm aggressive town, whereas before I was scum. I'm honestly about willing to lynch Had regardless of his claim... Also Had, there's nothing we can question you on your claim with until tomorrow.
325, Dont know what to make of his suggestions. I actually had him at number 3, but this post with its absurd amount of speculating puts him at 2.

Anyways, my top three scum picks
1 - Walnut
2 - Batt
3 - LG

Walnut I've explained.
Batt - A LARGE number of his posts serve no purpose but speculation.
LG - I think Netlava's case against him was justified, plus LG has been wagon hopping whenever it seems like someone new is coming under fire. His entire play this game has been extremely opportunistic.

Netlava - I don't think he's scum. I think Walnut is the best lynch for today.
Now to see if there's any Batt - LG - Walnut connections

[charter]

I have no problem voting LG, Batt, or Walnut today to make sure one of them gets lynched at deadline.

[charter]

Batt, why are you defending LG?

[charter]

LG, why did you not either 1- reiterate what Batt said (as in he defended you correctly) or 2- set everyone straight? You STILL manage to dodge answering while 1- shifting blame elsewhere and 2- Looking like you're concerned (I say looking because I'm pretty sure you're scum by now)

My new list is LG then Walnut then Batt. Still willing to lynch any for the deadline.

[charter]

I have no problem voting LG, Batt, or Walnut today to make sure one of them gets lynched at deadline.

That reminds me- why are you voting for me Charter? After you posted a list of accusations I answered them. My sense of that was that I had clearly explained myself and shown that your arguments did not hold water. To go back to your response to that (post #274)

Voting for you because you have yet to do any scumhunting. At first you posted a whole lot of nothing, and now that you've got some votes, all you're doing is defending yourself. Still no scumhunting.

@Walnut, regardless of what questions you were answering, your post got a few people off topic for a while. I'm not arguing that what you said was or wasn't justified, just that you did say it, and it did derail the town.

According to you, I answered questions, which may have been justified. What is the point here? Even if you believe the answers "derailed" the town and someone in this process was scummy, would it have been the person who asked the question, not the one who answered it?

I think both actions were scummy. I don't point out everything I find scummy.

You're right about the 137 though, don't know where I got defend from. More like fruitlessly attacks. I assumed no one listened to him, since there were very few posts that talked about BB or what he said. Also noted, how you group Tinsley in there with responding to BB but no one else.

I have explained my stance on BB previously. He needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly, or he was scum. I am not sure how I am responsible for whether other people post about him or not- if I attack him and no one else does it is not deliberately fruitless and therefore scummy, as you seem to be saying here.

You've decided from two posts that BB is scum? Pretty bold statement there. Personally, I think his actions were brilliant (assuming he was town) because his claim would have easily drew mafia attention.

Why do I group Tinsley in there and no one else? Because Tinsley also responded at that time, and no one else did. Again, I am not getting your point in this accusation. Equally, if I had attacked someone that other people were pursuing, would you have called me scummy for getting on a bandwagon? I believe some people did for my vote on Hadhfang.

You give a one liner for voting Had, based on your gut and put him at L-2. It was your reason and your manner of jumping on Had's bandwagon that drew suspicion towards you.

Walnut, you really didn't defend yourself against my accusations. You corrected my improper use of words in a few cases, but you didn't try and refute much.

When the improper words were the key to your arguments, that seems significant. I thought I had pointed out conclusively that your accusations were baseless. Please tell me what I have missed.

The main reason for suspecting you, not scumhunting.

Plus your latest post is taking a very noncommittal stance on netlava. You even say so yourself. It seems scummy, like all that needs to happen is netlava needs just a little more support, then you'll add your vote.

Nope, needed a deadline My point was that if we focused only on Netlava he would be lynched, and we would miss the opportunity for more Day 1 converstion. Do you feel that you have benefited from the last few pages?

Greatly.

I know this is about netlava, but Walnut's post 92 contradicts his being hesitant to vote for someone that he's pulling now

I explained that, just a few posts earlier:

That post is actually what attracted charter and I's attention. We're saying it's a contradiction - there's really no way you could be as certain as you're now claiming you want to be that early in the game. The fact that you hadn't even posted anythign about him before jumping on him to L-2 is pretty much the opposite of someone being careful with their vote.

I think here you are confusing posting with analysing the game. Scumhunting is not just about asking your own questions and having them answered, it is also reading all of the conversations going on. Whether I had posted about Hadhfang or not before voting for him is irrelevant. I felt, and do feel, pretty confident about Had. Only time will prove whether my confidence was well founded or not.

You understand that no one else has any way of knowing what you think unless you post it. If that's the reason we're suspecting you, you might want to post more thoughts.

Other than in recent games I have a 100% success rate at being a mafia target on night one- my ghost will mouth it silently

Has nothing to do with this game.

It certainly does! It makes me very conscious that if I don't say something on Day 1 I may not have the chance to say it on Day 2.

Other games have nothing to do with this one.

[charter]

Hey Fark!

[charter]

Haven't forgotten about this game.

My top three list [in no particular order as of yet]
o. Battousai
o. Walnut
o. LG

I'm keeping my eye on:

*Had : What with the cop claim and all.

Have you forgotten about your vote? You're currently voting me, but do you no longer find me suspicious?

I ask because the deadline is fast approaching.

[charter]

What I was getting at is do you find anyone suspicious enough to vote for them?

[charter]

You're right about the 137 though, don't know where I got defend from. More like fruitlessly attacks. I assumed no one listened to him, since there were very few posts that talked about BB or what he said. Also noted, how you group Tinsley in there with responding to BB but no one else.

I have explained my stance on BB previously. He needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly, or he was scum. I am not sure how I am responsible for whether other people post about him or not- if I attack him and no one else does it is not deliberately fruitless and therefore scummy, as you seem to be saying here.

You've decided from two posts that BB is scum? Pretty bold statement there. Personally, I think his actions were brilliant (assuming he was town) because his claim would have easily drew mafia attention.

Wait, what? Two things wrong with your statement here Charter.

1) You seem to ignore the fact Walnut stated "[BB] needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly..." It seems you are trying to make Walnut look scummy instead of finding scummy things Walnut has done.

I don't agree with this. First, regardless of his disclaimer, he still made the statement "you are scum" after BB had made two posts which I feel he shouldn't be able to make. Second, I'm not making him look scummy in that post, you're saying that for me. I first questioned his assertation, then said that was a bold statement considering BB made two posts.
Way to go on defending Walnut...

2) The play was not brilliant. What if an investigative role targeted BB first. Hell, that's what I would have done if I had an investigative role. Then we would be done both the cop, and BB (the mafia got to him after the cop). Your using hindsight with BB/camn's UNCONFIRMED role.

Here we go again. More "What ifs?". The "What ifs" do nothing to help find scum. Regardless of how good or bad it's been done and there's nothing we can do about it. I don't know why you bring this up, all that will happen is an argument gets stirred up and we waste the time before the deadline.

[charter]

Still in the middle of my reread. Can someone post a link to the "other game" that keeps being referenced in the early pages? Not sure if I will read it, but I'd like to give it a quick look so I know what everyone is talking about.

viewtopic.php?t=8599

Long story short, Me Had and acidmix were scum. Riot (and a bunch of others) were positive I was scum. I was lying through my teeth. Mac and Netlava were ready to slit each others throats. Acidmix then ruined the game. We didn't make it out of day one.

[charter]

Camn, you do realize I'm voting walnut and not you, right? At this point it only makes sense to have your vote on who you want lynched...

[charter]

@Camn, Ah I see that I was on there twice, but my real vote is on Walnut.

Hello Thesp. I'm not a fan of this "Let's all defend LG" fad, but I don't know what I can do to stop it.

What is the point of this post again?

@Thesp, your reason for suspecting farside/Fark is lack of scumhunting (396). What are your thoughts on Walnut and his lack of scumhunting?

I don't like Netlava's reaction to Thesp's declaration he's scum.

I agree with Mac in 404. How do you know that farside didn't scumhunt because she didn't have much time? She did have to get replaced. I know I sound like I'm defending her, but I don't think she's scum right now.

@Walnut in 408. Oh dear... I wasn't attacking you in half those quotes, no need for you to respond to them as they were my thoughts, not something debatable. You don't need to defend yourself anymore, I'm already convinced you need to be lynched. This is why you don't have time to scumhunt, you spend too much time defending.

You not living past night one has NOTHING to do with this game. Period. There's no reason to throw that out there.

Walnut, I'm not pushing arguments, you're going out of your way to defend yourself, and your accusations on me and Mac seem OMGUSy.

[charter]

Fark, just because there's no counterclaim only means the real cop might not be an idiot. It certainly doesn't mean Had is town. However, I agree that that post by Netlava is terrible.

[charter]

SG, once again, thanks for letting us know you're here, but that post said more nothing than most of Walnut's. Do you have any comments on the people not voting Netlava? Or want to point out someone who isn't about to be lynched.

[charter]

Charter one thing in 409 is bad. It's okay to be confident in your vote but to tell someone there's no point in defending themselves is wrong. This could be okay for a role based confirmation, like cop investigation or tracking someone etc., but not just because you refuse to change your mind.

My point was that Walnut was defending himself when I wasn't asking him questions or accusing him. It came out bad.

[charter]

Walnut, you continue to not scumhunt and just defend yourself. I'm not going to further discuss this with you because it will only prolong the scumhunting more.

I explained about the "don't need to defend yourself" bit. I misworded it horribly. This is a better way of wording it "You don't need to continue defending yourself against statements, not arguments, I'm making. I'm already convinced you need lynched."

For the record, I still think a Walnut lynch is the way to go today.

[charter]

vote walnut

Thesp, who did you investigate? Why? Why shouldn't we lynch you?

Walnut is definate scum. Another tell is asking Thesp what he thinks now...

[charter]

Tempted to vote Tinsley...

Tinsley, speculating as to why Batt was NK'ed is the absolute dumbest thing we can do. ALL of it will be WIFOM and will lead to arguments the mafia will get townies lynched over.

Please, no one answer his speculation question.

[charter]

Sorry, didn't realize Camn was in on the Batt speculation. Didn't mean to single out Tinsley.

[charter]

I'm voting Walnut for the exact same reasons as yesterday, not for asking Thesp anything. Nothing has changed except Batt has left my LoS.

Thesp had better claim his results and had better have a good reason for investigating who he did. Had was horribly scummy, and Thesp isn't as clever as he thinks he is.

Speculation is HORRIBLE for the town. It just leads to confusion, and possibly assuming scum killed Batt for a reason that isn't right. Scum could have been trying to frame someone, thought Batt had a power role, randomly killed, the list goes on. I can't possibly know motive until we've got at least one scum dead, so speculating now is pointless. If you want more explaination on this, I will be happy to provide it.

[charter]

So you agree that speculating is the absolute dumbest thing we can do, but then don't like it when I say no one answer his speculation question? How does that work?

[charter]

That's fine if you don't want to argue, but then shouldn't you be doing something other than nothing (by that I mean just commenting on stuff)?

[charter]

I'll just requote my posts from yesterday... Prepare yourself.

Did a reread, here's my thoughts on what I saw.

Batt in 37, put's a horribly justified vote on farside
Seeing an LG - Batt connection possibly
Riot in 48, Points out Batt
Walnut in 63, massive derailing of town
Had in 66, still cant shake this...
Walnut in 79, MORE extra curricular role speculation
by post 92, Walnut has said absolutely nothing new and constructive to the town and jumps on board Had
Riot in 99, wants the rest of the town's opinion on how to test Had's claim. He's testing the waters because you never lynch an unclaimed cop day 1 (or it's at least idiotic barring extreme circumstances). At this point I'm leaning towards Had actually being the cop.
Batt 102, says he was lurking on purpose...
Walnut 137, Defends himself against BB even though there is no need to. No one listened to him since he even said he had no interest in playing.
Walnut in 137, Seems to think lynching BB is not only acceptable, but a good idea. Says that BB was deliberately trying to draw votes when pressure was building. Two things wrong with this. First I think that was BB's first or second post, so it being timed seems very unlikely to me. Second, he 'knows' BB was drawing votes away from someone else...

At this point, I stop and just read all Walnut's posts+context.
145, wishy washy about BB after Netlava questions him.
Riot in 173, I don't understand why you seem to drop all suspicion of Walnut here and set your sights on Netlava. I don't find it scummy, but why did you drop Walnut?
LG in 176, bandwagons, screams scum to me.
Walnut in 187, defends me. Don't know why. Possible scenario is because he thinks I'll go and get myself lynched like I almost did last game, flip town, then he'll be in a good spot tomorrow.

Stopped around here. The whole game, up until here, Walnut only contributes useful opinions when questioned. His posts since then have been ok, but his early posts seem really scummy. Go ahead and string me up for this,

vote walnut

Charter I haven't dropped suspicion of Walnut. I pointed out that I still find him scummy in 252. I think Netlava is far scummier. You said in 250 that you've been too biased in favor of Netlava this game and are going to reread intending to be more neutral. Did that happen? You don't mention Netlava in your recap of the game anywhere.

Ah, I thought that since the whole post you questioned Netlava. I see now that you didn't drop him, my apologies. I haven't done that reread yet, I doubt I can today, hopefully this weekend. I didn't mention Netlava, but I didnt mention a lot of others either.

@Walnut, regardless of what questions you were answering, your post got a few people off topic for a while. I'm not arguing that what you said was or wasn't justified, just that you did say it, and it did derail the town.

You're right about the 137 though, don't know where I got defend from. More like fruitlessly attacks. I assumed no one listened to him, since there were very few posts that talked about BB or what he said. Also noted, how you group Tinsley in there with responding to BB but no one else. Walnut, you really didn't defend yourself against my accusations. You corrected my improper use of words in a few cases, but you didn't try and refute much.

Plus your latest post is taking a very noncommittal stance on netlava. You even say so yourself. It seems scummy, like all that needs to happen is netlava needs just a little more support, then you'll add your vote.

I know this is about netlava, but Walnut's post 92 contradicts his being hesitant to vote for someone that he's pulling now.
Read Riot's post 99. Had, if you investigate a good town power role tonight (aka doctor) please just say they're a normal townie.

Finally get to some Netlava stuff worthy of comment.
113, I actually think he picked out a non-connection between Batt and Riot. I however, don't understand the way Riot talks to Batt in those two. It's like they're both on the same team, but I can't see Riot doing something like that if he's scum.
144, Netlava says he's not sure whether Had is scum. A few posts earlier he said he thinks he is still, and throws out the idea of lynching him anyway.
150, I really don't like Batt's "What if" here. It seems like an opportunistic way to attack Netlava and make himself seem useful. (after this I'm going to look more closely at Batt, and particularly a Batt-Walnut connection). I commented on it before, but going back, Riot had already said it wasn't a breadcrumb, and Netlava had said before that that it's entirely pointless to breadcrumb as a doc. I agree with Netlava, the doctor is only good if they are completely hidden, so dropping ANY clue that you're the doc, is idiotic.
173, Riot sums up everything about Netlava. Honestly I think he's got it set in his mind Netlava is scum at this point and trying to get him lynched.
175, Netlava accuses LG. I think the putting LG at number two scum is very OMGUS, but I think his point is valid. I also agree with the rest of his post too. Plus, farside doesn't question LG like she did to me (in respect to the not answering questions. She didn't pioneer the ones on LG like she did with me though...)
176, Bad post by LG
193, Very odd that he didn't post this earlier, or at least didn't give a reason for not like "I'll respond to Riot's post when I get more free time" or something in his post 175. Not a stellar defense, but adequate.
195, I actually think Netlava has a case on LG. LG does change around the reasons he's voting Netlava from tunnel vision to flip flopping.
204, I think Mac's bit at the end of his post about netlava (about 'tempt') is true.
211, Walnut defends me, no reason for this. Think I already pointed this out though.
214, I agree with Netlava.
225, Bad post by Netlava, should have said it differently.
228, Farside agrees that Netlava did not OMGUS vote LG, I agree
276, Batt questions my remaining vote on walnut
277, LG FINALLY answers the SK speculation questions when no one even remembers them anymore
293, Netlava jumps on the walnut wagon.
312, Had flips on me AGAIN. Now I'm aggressive town, whereas before I was scum. I'm honestly about willing to lynch Had regardless of his claim... Also Had, there's nothing we can question you on your claim with until tomorrow.
325, Dont know what to make of his suggestions. I actually had him at number 3, but this post with its absurd amount of speculating puts him at 2.

Anyways, my top three scum picks
1 - Walnut
2 - Batt
3 - LG

Walnut I've explained.
Batt - A LARGE number of his posts serve no purpose but speculation.
LG - I think Netlava's case against him was justified, plus LG has been wagon hopping whenever it seems like someone new is coming under fire. His entire play this game has been extremely opportunistic.

Netlava - I don't think he's scum. I think Walnut is the best lynch for today.
Now to see if there's any Batt - LG - Walnut connections

I have no problem voting LG, Batt, or Walnut today to make sure one of them gets lynched at deadline.

That reminds me- why are you voting for me Charter? After you posted a list of accusations I answered them. My sense of that was that I had clearly explained myself and shown that your arguments did not hold water. To go back to your response to that (post #274)

Voting for you because you have yet to do any scumhunting. At first you posted a whole lot of nothing, and now that you've got some votes, all you're doing is defending yourself. Still no scumhunting.

@Walnut, regardless of what questions you were answering, your post got a few people off topic for a while. I'm not arguing that what you said was or wasn't justified, just that you did say it, and it did derail the town.

According to you, I answered questions, which may have been justified. What is the point here? Even if you believe the answers "derailed" the town and someone in this process was scummy, would it have been the person who asked the question, not the one who answered it?

I think both actions were scummy. I don't point out everything I find scummy.

You're right about the 137 though, don't know where I got defend from. More like fruitlessly attacks. I assumed no one listened to him, since there were very few posts that talked about BB or what he said. Also noted, how you group Tinsley in there with responding to BB but no one else.

I have explained my stance on BB previously. He needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly, or he was scum. I am not sure how I am responsible for whether other people post about him or not- if I attack him and no one else does it is not deliberately fruitless and therefore scummy, as you seem to be saying here.

You've decided from two posts that BB is scum? Pretty bold statement there. Personally, I think his actions were brilliant (assuming he was town) because his claim would have easily drew mafia attention.

Why do I group Tinsley in there and no one else? Because Tinsley also responded at that time, and no one else did. Again, I am not getting your point in this accusation. Equally, if I had attacked someone that other people were pursuing, would you have called me scummy for getting on a bandwagon? I believe some people did for my vote on Hadhfang.

You give a one liner for voting Had, based on your gut and put him at L-2. It was your reason and your manner of jumping on Had's bandwagon that drew suspicion towards you.

Walnut, you really didn't defend yourself against my accusations. You corrected my improper use of words in a few cases, but you didn't try and refute much.

When the improper words were the key to your arguments, that seems significant. I thought I had pointed out conclusively that your accusations were baseless. Please tell me what I have missed.

The main reason for suspecting you, not scumhunting.

Plus your latest post is taking a very noncommittal stance on netlava. You even say so yourself. It seems scummy, like all that needs to happen is netlava needs just a little more support, then you'll add your vote.

Nope, needed a deadline My point was that if we focused only on Netlava he would be lynched, and we would miss the opportunity for more Day 1 converstion. Do you feel that you have benefited from the last few pages?

Greatly.

I know this is about netlava, but Walnut's post 92 contradicts his being hesitant to vote for someone that he's pulling now

I explained that, just a few posts earlier:

That post is actually what attracted charter and I's attention. We're saying it's a contradiction - there's really no way you could be as certain as you're now claiming you want to be that early in the game. The fact that you hadn't even posted anythign about him before jumping on him to L-2 is pretty much the opposite of someone being careful with their vote.

I think here you are confusing posting with analysing the game. Scumhunting is not just about asking your own questions and having them answered, it is also reading all of the conversations going on. Whether I had posted about Hadhfang or not before voting for him is irrelevant. I felt, and do feel, pretty confident about Had. Only time will prove whether my confidence was well founded or not.

You understand that no one else has any way of knowing what you think unless you post it. If that's the reason we're suspecting you, you might want to post more thoughts.

Other than in recent games I have a 100% success rate at being a mafia target on night one- my ghost will mouth it silently

Has nothing to do with this game.

It certainly does! It makes me very conscious that if I don't say something on Day 1 I may not have the chance to say it on Day 2.

Other games have nothing to do with this one.

[charter]

I really think it was the mafia’s plan all along to make Netlava the target on D1 because of his play style. While all members of the scum team may not have voted Netlava, I feel confident that one or two did.

Tinsley, if you aren't scum, you need to stop talking. How can a townie possibly know the mafia's plan? What makes you so confident that one or two did?

charter – If there was one member of the scum team who didn’t vote Netlava, I think it’s him. While many of us were suspicious of Netlava, he continued to trust him without providing a good reason to.

Whoa there. No where did I say I trusted Netlava. I said I thought the case against him was bad and that Walnut was the better lynch.

Maybe he knew Netlava was innocent, and sided with him to make himself look good when Netlava turned up townie.

I had my suspicions that Netlava was town. Another speculation on Tinsley's part.

I’d also like to know why it’s a scum tell for Walnut to ask Thesp what he thinks, but it’s not when charter does the same. I agree with CF Riot’s argument on the NK speculation, how can it hurt? While Batt might not have been the likely lynch, he was suspected by myself, camn, ShadowGirl, charter, and Mac. While that may not have been enough for a lynch, it would have helped to draw suspicion away from scum.

Ok, first off, my reasons for voting Walnut are the same as yesterday. I don't ask Thesp what he thinks. I ask him who he investigated and why, and why we shouldn't lynch him. I'm not terribly interested in his opinions. Walnut's question of "What do you have to say for yourself at this moment?" I interpreted as "You were wrong about Netlava being scum and you're my number one scum suspect, what do you have to say for yourself at this moment?" Going back, I can see how what I said created confusion.

Most of Tinsley's most recent post is placing suspicion on others. I'll probably do a reread.

[charter]

For speculation, I know we could come up with a scum-motive that's wrong. But that also means we could come up with one that's RIGHT. I'm not saying we should try to start a

lynch

based on motives, but I think we should take a look at them because they could give us a step in the right direction.

So what if out of ten theories, one happens to be the actual correct one? You still have to pick it out. Can a townie do that? Not without knowing for certain who one of the scum is.

[quote="Riot"I also think it's interesting how Tinsley comes up with some info to start cases on, then you (A) tell him to stop talking altogether and (B) point out he's laying down his suspicions as if it's a bad thing.[/quote]
Where I tell Tinsley to stop talking, is where he claims to know "the mafia's plan all along". Can you explain to me how he could know it? The info to start cases you speak of is his SPECULATION.

This on top of asking no one to give opinions on who would kill Batt. You're trying to shut down conversation. This seems remarkably like how you tried to block the flow of information in game 1 when I asked your opinions on BB. (Reminder for replacements, Charter was scum game 1.)

If you want to SPECULATE on why Batt was killed, go for it. Pretend I never said don't speculate. We'll see where it goes...

Here, I'll start you all off
Batt was killed because -
-Mafia picked a person at random
-Mafia thought Batt was the doc
-Mafia wanted to frame XXXX
-Mafia thought Batt was a threat
-Batt had the mafia pegged

Now it's like a carnival game, might as well just throw a dart and go off where it lands.
Nice how you single me out in not wanting to speculate on the NK...

[charter]

Can you provide evidence that fark is scum? You know, more than your assertion from yesterday...

[charter]

That's not evidence that fark is scum...

[charter]

I mean all you did was ask rhetorical questions, not cite examples of scummy behavior. You'll have to excuse me if I don't blindly follow your assertions.

[charter]

So then your case against fark is me answering questions?

[charter]

How much probative scumhunting did farside22 do? How many posts did she have that looked like they were useful, but went nowhere? How often did she go on tangents away from the centerpoint of discussion?

Not much, a few more, a few less.

Now, why does fark get singled out when SG has done NOTHING this entire game. Why are you not suspicious of Walnut who has done zero scumhunting the entire game? Farside at least tried it on me, if only to give up very easy. Beside's camn/BB's claim, what have they done? What have YOU done in the terms of scumhunting or posts that were useful? Decreeing Netlava to be scum? That turned out well... What about Gurgi? All he's done is build a BS case against Netlava.

The reason why I didn't answer these questions before... He singles out Fark when they apply to half the people here. Why do you all jump on me for trying to figure out why he's singling out Fark? Why don't you ask him why he singles people out?

[charter]

It is so painfully obvious Walnut is scum.

[charter]

Thesp, what makes you so sure SG is town. Comment on the rest of my questions.

[charter]

All aboard.

[charter]

Tinsley, I'm think I know what you mean but your wording on one thing confused me. Just to be clear:

"Could it be possible that [Camn's] role is scum oriented?"

Are you just saying, "Is it possible she is scum?" or do you mean something else?

Yeah, someone brought up the idea that Walnut may be the mafia version of a PGE. Couldn't it be possible that camn is the PGE working on the mafia side?

If the mafia have someone who kills whatever cop or doc or whatever that targets it, then this game is HORRIBLY unbalanced and we must have some ridiculous town power to compensate. I'm just not seeing it.

@Tinsley, Thesp is either the cop or brilliant scum. If he was just normal scum, he would have claimed an innocent on a townie to get them to subconsciously trust him and give strength to his claim. Coupled with no counterclaim, and no one hinting that he isn't the real cop, I believe he is. I also buy (for now) his reasoning for why he investigated Batt. If it happens again tonight, I'll probably change my mind.

[charter]

@Charter: Thesp calling innocent on a random townie would have been easier, but there are also ways for him to still be caught lying that way. (This is assuming he's scum.) Claiming no result whatsoever on a dead body is unchallengeable.

Charter who do you find most suspicious after Walnut?
Walnut who do you find most suspicious after Charter?

Exactly my point. No one can challenge him if he's scum (hence why I say only brilliant scum would have pulled it off). I'm not too interested in lynching Thesp right now, but if his non-production becomes a habit, I might change my mind.

Still finding Gurgi the next suspicious because his case against Netlava is still BS.

[charter]

Ok, Fark wanted a condensed case of why I think Walnut is scum. So I take a few of my posts that show this and requote them. I took his asking for my case to mean not quoting them all. He was really vague with asking, and when I gave him what I interpreted him asking for, I'm scum. Camn, I didn't quote those posts for you, I didn't quote them for LG, or Thesp, or Mac, or anyone but fark. If you want me to give a summary of why Walnut is scum, ask me and I'll do it. I don't know why you say something like

The insane part is RE-quoting yourself. If I didn't get it the first time... One should rephrase. It would be like me posting the EXACT same thing in response to YOUR question!

When I'm obviously not directing them at you. I don't know if you actually think I'm scummy, or you're just looking for the easy bandwagon.

Wishy washy... like this:

I don't like Netlava's reaction to Thesp's declaration he's scum.

BUT

I had my suspicions that Netlava was town.

Not totally scummy on its own.. but in contrast to his assertions like this:

It is so painfully obvious Walnut is scum.

..
It seems wishy washy to me.

Ok, so I wasn't sure about Netlava yesterday, and I am about Walnut. How is that wishy washy? I wasn't positive Netlava was town yesterday (like I am with Walnut) so I'm not going to make assertions that he is. You are trying to take your being wrong about him and twist it to make me look bad.

And Short comments seem suspect IN LIGHT of him calling out others for the same

That's fine if you don't want to argue, but then shouldn't you be doing something other than nothing (by that I mean just commenting on stuff)?

Ummm, I'm already voting someone. This isn't the same situation.

Jeez, Mac is like my knight in shining armor haha.

It seemed scummy to me because it is a resigned way of saying, 'Screw this, there's nothing I can do, why do I even bother.' That is in no way pro-town. Neither is self-hammering.

Fark's big reason for voting me was that I quoted some of my posts. Other reasons are all like "I don't like how charter does this" or "charter said something scummy on page 5".

I think I might actually be ok with a Fark lynch if anyone else but thesp thinks he's scummy, or an LG lynch. Else I'll just stick with Walnut. However, I'm not sure if Fark making a poor case against me is scummier than LG and camn's jumping on it with even poorer reasoning.

[charter]

It was more condensed than my case day one where I spent pretty much the whole time after the deadline was announced gunning for Walnut.

You didn't respond to my original questioning of how I'm wishy washy. I threw that in my last post to see if you'd jump on me for it. I've stated numerous times that I find LG scummy, in fact, I believe it was even in the four posts I quoted for fark.

I wasn't aware that I was supposed to be helping you with that post. In fact I don't see the point of needing to do it all. I would have assumed Fark did a reread when he replaced and he would have seen my posts. I could have summed up the reason to vote Walnut in one sentence, but that's not going to convince anyone if I don't cite examples, which I did in the quoted posts.

[charter]

The charter wagon is very blatantly scumpowered and seriously needs to be disbanded ASAP. Walnut started it, so there's one scum on the wagon immediately. Ironically, he's actually made the best case of anyone on the wagon - everyone else is pretty much just jumping on. fark's reasoning is quite poor, and is starting to make me agree with Thesp's assessment. LG hasn't even posted a case, just hopped on the wagon very blatantly. camn is for some reason still on the wagon even though I just shot her case apart, and she agreed with my counterpoints? Seriously, what's going on here?

FoS: entire charter wagon

This is exactly what I wanted to say, but I couldn't cause two more people would jump on me for OMGUSing.

[charter]

Walnut is scum because he misdirects the town rather than scumhunting.

[charter]

You didn't respond to my original questioning of how I'm wishy washy. I threw that in my last post to see if you'd jump on me for it.

So.. was it, like, a trick? Is that how you play... by writing things that are intentionally confusing in order to trick people? What exactly was the point of writing this?

Still dodging? It was to see how defensive you were going to be. There was no reason not to answer my question, but you keep refusing to.

I wasn't aware that I was supposed to be helping you with that post.

It's not about helping me IN PARTICULAR.. but helping the town as a whole actually see your points.
The fact that you weren't trying to help was very obvious. And is why my vote is still on you.

I want to see you as town.. but your tone is so unhelpful it is hard for me to do that. Why are you so angry ? [/quote]

I think I figured out your case against me. I answered Fark's question, but not in the manner most helpful to the town, so therefore I am scum.

And besides, Best way to find the buddies is with a wagon

c

Yes, you've found a buddy of the town, Mac.

[charter]

Did you go back and read my posts from last game when I was scum?

[charter]

Yeah, Fark seems scummier with each post he makes. Why would rereading the Walnut case make me less scummy? He gets called out for putting up a crap case against me, so he moves on to the person he thinks is the next easiest to get lynched (that isn't his scumbuddy known as walnut), Tinsley. There's plenty of stuff you could have brought up against me, but you just gave up. Not to mention your latest contradiction you use as evidence agaisnt Tinsley. I just reread LG's posts, and he did the exact same thing yesterday to Netlava. He seemed quite sure I was scum, but once the Netlava train starting moving and mine slowed down, he jumped right on.

My LoS:
1 - Walnut, LG, Fark
2 -
3 -
I'm pretty sure those are the three scum with about equal certainty, it doesn't matter to me which one gets lynched today.

Fark gives no reason for unvoting me, but does so after myself and Mac say the case on me is crap. There also seems to be a lot of trying to appeal to Thesp from Fark.

[charter]

Your saying Tinsley puts forth stuff that's mostly useless but don't see why people are voting Walnut right after doing a reread of him. Not to mention how you wait until AFTER you get called out for voting me, but all your reasons for voting Tinsley aren't very recent.

I don't need to comment on your case against Tinsley, you're scum for reasons other than poor cases against people.

[charter]

Amazing

[charter]

I'm worried about camn condemning charter and now deciding that he's crazed town.

I'm worried about LG throwing suspicion onto camn when it's clear my wagon is disbanding.

[charter]

Fark has two votes, you put him on there twice.

Like I said before, I've no problem switching from Walnut to Fark or LG.

Also, when should we decide what to do with camn? I don't think we can give her a free ticket through the rest of the game, especially when she's not doing a stellar job at scumhunting.

[charter]

charter, you suspect a lot of people. Can I ask you who your top townie is and why?

Looking for someone to kill off tonight? There is absolutely no reason you need to know this, but I know that I have no choice but to answer all questions directed at me. It's been Riot for quite some time. I only suspect three people, I think I made that pretty clear in my post 567, not the "lot of people" you put in my mouth.

[charter]

I'm pretty sharp. You need to get up earlier than that to pull a fast one on me Fark.

[charter]

Ehh, I'm leaning towards Fark being horribly wrong in his assessment of things, but wrong as town now. He's definately not out of the woods yet, but I'd prefer a Walnut or LG lynch today now. I don't have proof of this, just my feelings.

[charter]

Voting Walnut is the best way to move up...

[charter]

The only reason I believe Camn's claim is because of BB. I still maintain he was brilliant, whether scum or town. She might not have done anything scummy (that you see) but she has done NOTHING pro town, or am I missing it?

She'd be more voteworthy if she didn't hide behind the eclipse of Walnut and LG. I don't think we need to lynch her right now, but I don't want everyone assuming she's town unless she actually starts acting pro town.

Fark, all suspicion will magically drop from you if you vote Walnut. (Joking. Or am I?)

[charter]

Can we get a votecount please?

[charter]

Walnut + LG
I'm really not sure who the last one is, but at this point I'm over 99% sure LG is scum.

I want to ask everyone not voting walnut or LG why you aren't voting for one of them?

[charter]

Wonderful.

unvote, vote LG

[charter]

I'm also expecting a vote from charter on his next post.

WHOA. I honestly did not see this until after I voted.

[charter]

As with your reread knowing Netlava was town, would you consider his "very scummy" play sinister if I was lynched and came up town? Out of curiosity, how do you defend yourself unjustly?

Are you sure that's directed at me? I don't think I said I was going to do a reread today. Also, I know for a fact I never said he was very scummy. I don't even understand that last question.

quote="Lord Gurgi"]

I'm also expecting a vote from charter on his next post.

WHOA. I honestly did not see this until after I voted.

Are you admitting to not reading my post?[/quote]
Seriously? I read it.

[charter]

LG, I'd suggest using other stuff I said to build a case against me. That's not going to fly. All your question was was a desperate last ditch effort to try and make me seem like I don't know what I'm talking about. I think I'm about to post a coherent case against you.

Obviously I read your post, as I commented on it. I didn't read it before I voted you however, I saw Fark's post and I got all excited. I actually had a big speech questioning Fark, but decided I'd just take the vote for you and not care about his justification. Fark's vote is horrible, but I will deal with that later (after you are lynched).

[charter]

I actually had a big speech questioning Fark, but decided I'd just take the vote for you and not care about his justification. Fark's vote is horrible, but I will deal with that later (after you are lynched).

I'd still like to see that speech. Charter - with the recent developments between LG and Fark, do you still think they are both scum? I think this is more proof that Fark is trying to get any lynch besides Walnut, but it's making me wonder whether or not LG is scum.

I deleted it, but it was mostly questioning why he waited until I make my statement (which I didn't back up at all) to vote LG. I doubt he read my reasons from yesterday for suspecting LG because he needed me to repeat them for walnut. Like I said, I have no interest in questioning Fark about this until after LG is lynched. I think at least two of LG/Fark/Walnut are scum.

I'm about to go back and reread LG and put up a case against him.

[charter]

LG reread.

33, throws out the SK speculation
69, asks farside why bringing up the SK is bad, this has already been answered quite well by Mac
140, basically just lets us know he's alive

174

, sets himself up for voting Netlava

175

, Netlava is exactly right. Everything in the entire post is golden.

176

, votes Netlava with terrible reasoning.
188, no point of this other to just remind people that Netlava did something that can be considered fishy
212, Netlava is right again, by this time Mac has taken over lynching Netlava duties, convienently leaving LG's hands virtually clean
215, LG defends himself some more
221, THAT'S wishy washy camn...
258, by Netlava

Lord Gurgi:
- Did not answer what the point of bringing up the SK discussion was (avoids this question a second time later)
- Votes Charter way back, clings to this vote, affirms his suspicions of Charter multiple times, yet does not push the bandwagon
- Post 174 -

Hmm, I really want Netlava to defend himself first. He might be continuing on a suspicion from the last game. (I have suspicions about a number of players doing this) Did he hound you last game?

In this post, he pretends to want to hear my defense and then subtly attacks my accusations of Riot.
1. "I really want Netlava to defend himself first" - False concern as it should be obvious that I'm going to defend myself. What he's really trying to do is make his intended bandwagoning less obvious.
2. "(I have suspicions about a number of players doing this) " - And just how did you get these suspicions? I'm guessing you skimmed the thread of the last game. So why ask "Did he hound you?" when you already know the answer? Set-up! You could have just stated it outright.
- Disguises the post as "giving me a chance" and "due turn"
- Votes me "until I provide some decent explanation." More like until I get lynched and hopefully no one notices right!? Doesn't push my wagon.
- Dissapearing act enables him to dodge a bunch of my accusations so that I have to summarize them again for him.

I want to hear

LG's

response to this since you never responded yesterday.
265, I addressed this in my post 266
277, finally answers why he brought up the SK, when it's obvious Netlava has attracted all attention from the rest of the town
278,

Mac

, you say you think LG is probably town, do you still feel this way? Why or why not?
317, his first useful content filled post. However, is there any content in there? He lists suspicions about everyone, and very little is original. However, something is worth noting, the only thing he says about farside is that she completely ignored the apple discussion. This leads me to believe two things, Fark and LG are not scum together. This leads to some interesting questions, such as why was Fark so hesitant to vote Walnut today?
384, camn has both her scum candidates wrong...
399, another good post by Netlava
419, LG defends Thesp, has been buddying up to him in a post preiously as well
421, lol
434, anxious to lynch a townie

448

, this is worth looking into
451, STILL anxious to pull off the lynch before something can happen
497, blatent directing unfounded suspicion at me and still clings to his poor reasoning
535, votes me and gives no new reason, why didn't he do this in his first post of D2? Oh, I had no one voting me at the time so he couldn't latch on to someone else's case.
577, I addressed this in my 579
634, "Unvote charter cause everyone else is so I need to blend in, but I'm still just as suspicous of charter and will revote him in a heartbeat if he gets votes again."
642, gross overreaction to suspicion of him. This happened once before when I said a mere "screams scum" to one of his posts. Also, since I've said I'm 99% sure he's scum, his daily posting has basically tripled.

In short, LG latches on to other's arguments and does nothing to further wagons. His play is very opportunistic. Does zero scumhunting. His posts do nothing but cast unfounded suspicion on whoever is the leading vote holder at the time.

Honestly, I can see Thesp as being scum now, unless he actually gives reasons for suspecting who he does, I can't see any reason for him not to suspect LG while suspecting the others for the same reasons which makes me think they could be buddies.

I don't see my vote changing off of LG. I will clarify/elaborate if someone does not understand something I am saying. If I was LG's scumbuddy, now is when I'd start bussing him...

[charter]

CHarter, it looks like you read the quote before, not the one following the colon:

Charter, you have not answered this question from post #623:
Quote:

A couple of people have given up on voting for you because they think you are playing too badly to be scum. I have not heard you disagree- are you swallowing that distasteful argument because it coincides with them unvoting you?


This is not being facetious or insulting- it is a genuine question for you.

I never saw a point in responding. What am I supposed to say? No, in fact I am scum?

[charter]

Wow camn you sure seem brilliant, why don't you do something besides comment pointlessly on all my posts?

[charter]

Replacement. Definately.

@camn, walnut is right, just because someone is being extremely town, doesn't mean a thing. Suspecting Mac based soley on that is scummy.

@Riot, if you go back and reread Netlava's and LG's posts from yesterday, and take into account knowing Netlava is town, LG plays like he knew it yesterday as well. All LG did yesterday was put his votes on the most popular lynch candidates and never offer anything productive to finding scum. Pretty much all of Netlava's arguments against LG were perfectly good, but Netlava had already dug himself a grave. Posts 174-176 in particular are what make me most suspicious of LG. Also, why do you think he's all of a sudden started posting more since he's been called out?

[charter]

Ok, the only things LG has done that you could consider productive is feebly push mine and Netlava's lynch, so from my point of view, he's done nothing to help the town.

And yes, I have found scum, this is the same as last game where everyone had found me, except now it's LG. Walnut is still very high up there and I'd gladly take a Walnut lynch if no one else votes LG. But if part of my case is bad, let me know and I'll clarify.

[charter]

Tinsley, you're doing the exact same thing. You've said barely anything about LG, and now you're ok with his lynch? Did I just miss some of the posts where you were suspicious?

The only thing I see that's different between what you're doing and what he did to Netlava is that Netlava is definately a townie, and LG is most likely scum. But like I said with Fark, I'm not too interested in people's justification for voting Walnut or LG today.

[charter]

Tinsley, your last post says you don't think Fark and LG are scumbuddies, but your one before it says you'd be ok with a lynch of one or the other. Which is it? If you think it's just one of them is scum, which one?

[charter]

@Mac, hope you get better.

[charter]

Charter, I'm just not seeing it. I agree that everything you're saying about LG is true, but it's just that none of the things you're saying are very strong evidence. It's all very circumstantial. For instance, wouldn't anyone who's been called out (scum or town) start posting more frequently? I'm not saying I think LG is especially town, I just don't see any real reasons to see him as scum yet.

He's now shown us he's capable of posting quite frequently, but why was he not when he wanted Netlava to be lynched?

[charter]

Bah, it seems the LG wagon has lost all hope. I STILL think he's the most definate scum, but I'll settle for Walnut.

unvote, vote walnut

Fark, trying to play off your frequent wagon hopping with legitimate reasons ("There's nothing scummy about being strategic with your vote to make sure that scum gets lynched (especially since we haven't even lynched one of them yet)") certainly isn't helping you in my mind. I would just use the defense, "I know I'm town, so I'd rather someone else scummy get lynched". It would have been much more believable than your trying to supply actual reasoning for the votechanging.

[charter]

I keep flipping back and forth between Fark being town and scum. I have no problem with him being lynched because he has been quite scummy, but I'm not sure if he's scum or just scummy, but I would much rather prefer LG or Walnut. I would first like to do a reread of him before he does get lynched though (if we go that route).

[charter]

Walnut is scum. LG is scum. LG also sucks for killing me in EBHOBANOHAR before I even knew the thread was up and for knowing I was scum in it.

Walnut contradicts himself in his last post. He says "you can say 'I agree with that argument'" but then gives this as his reason for voting "My view of Tinsley as misguided townie is tending more towards scum as the day wears on" which is essentially trying to give his own reason for his vote rather than just agreeing.

I'll do a reread of Tinsley when I get a chance and see if I can support this bandwagon.

[charter]

So then you're whole reason for wanting to lynch Tinsley is his misguided townie is TENDING to give you scum vibes? That's a pretty weak reason on day two to lynch someone.

[charter]

After a reread of D2 (day 1 is too long for me right now) I don't want to lynch walnut today. There's reasonable doubt in my head that he's scum. There is no reasonable doubt that LG is scum in my head. I've also switched back to fark being scum and would be ok with his lynch.

I don't think Tinsley is scum. This is based largely on the end of post 565 and my assumption that LG is scum and Walnut stands a good chance of being scum.

I don't like how Tinsley doesn't vote fark in 573, Tinsley, why did you not vote Fark then?

Ok, LG's post in 577. He is trying to place suspicion on Camn right after she gets off my wagon. He doesn't do this to Fark either, just Camn...

Tinsley brings up a good point in 597. I'm happy with lynching Fark today.

Riot, in 629, you suspect five people. Five!

Fark in 623 - "I'm leaving my vote on you for now, but I'm going to keep looking." Oh dear.

unvote, vote Fark

Yes I think Fark is scum, and No I don't think Tinsley is scum.

[charter]

Me not suspecting Tinsley has not much to do with you Fark. It's largely because I am positive LG is scum.

I'll gladly revote LG if anyone but Fark is willing to.

[charter]

I interpreted this as: "I think Walnut is scum with Fark, but I'm not as certain on him as I am on Fark and LG." Is that right?

I'm positive LG is scum. I'm pretty sure Fark is scum. I'm pretty sure Walnut is scum, but on my reread I found things that made me doubt whether he actually is scum or not, hence why I'm now not so eager to lynch him.

[charter]

Someone else vote LG and I will switch over to him. Don't care about your reasoning, make something up if you must.

[charter]

Fark, I already tried following you on an LG wagon and it went nowhere, I'm not going to do it again since I don't see how it will be any different this time around. Unless someone else is willing to vote LG, my vote is much better placed on you.

[charter]

What about Fark? Would you lynch him today? (Or ideally LG?)

[charter]

@Riot, if we lynch Fark and he's town, what will you think of LG?

[charter]

Actually,

unvote Fark, vote LG

LG has once again gone to non-contribution as soon as he's not in danger of being lynched, I'd like to urge him to contribute some more.

[charter]

Actually,

unvote Fark, vote LG

LG has once again gone to non-contribution as soon as he's not in danger of being lynched, I'd like to urge him to contribute some more.

I've posted more recently than camn. Thoughts about that? I have been contributing for a while since I was wagonned.

ONCE AGAIN, LG is throwing unfounded suspicion camn's way. Camn's case is different, she's been minimally posting all along, you post much more when you have some votes on you.

Yes, quite sure LG is scum.

[charter]

I wanted SG replaced a long time ago, I still want her replaced. If she comes back she will be a plague of non-helpfulness.

But you don't deny that this is twice now you've tried to throw suspicion at camn with no reason? My point was that you get very defensive when you're voted. You're doing it again now, even though it's just me and Fark voting you again and it's pretty much a consensous that Fark is the scummiest, and no one listens to me. This was going to be the same dead-end wagon, but now you've upped your posting again as soon as you get a few votes.

[charter]

What are you talking about? You asked about my thoughts on SG, and that's what I think. Are you really going to argue she's been helpful this game?

I would think it's scummy of anyone who tries to do it to the same person more than once. I'd think it scummy if they did it once too.

[charter]

Try and subtly cast suspicion on someone else.

[charter]

When I say subtly I mean not outright accusing them, as in "I think so and so is scummy because..."

[charter]

I never said you were suspicious of camn, I'm saying you're trying to get others to be suspicious of her. I'm suspicious of you for subtly casting suspicion onto camn and for posting more only when you come under fire. Camn isn't guilty of either of these, so as far as I can tell it is universal.

(I'm suspicious of you for a whole mess of other reasons, not just those two)
(I don't think I can type suspicious for a while after this post)

[charter]

I don't think arguing this any further is going to be productive. Still convinced you're scum.

[charter]

No, I don't. My jigs up. Damn.

[charter]

No, it was right the first time.

[charter]

I think Walnut is scum, and a few people have suggested Fark could be his buddy. I'm not sure about that but I could see it happening. Because of this, I think it is sort of damning for Fark to say he merely skimmed a well laid out case of Walnut only to keep his opinion where it was. You would think if he thought Walnut was scummy like he claims, he'd take a closer look at what others think about the matter.

This is actually a good point. Something I didn't realize until you brought this up, was when Fark asked me for my case against Walnut, he then immediately voted me and that's when my wagon started up. Quite suspicious of Fark. I would be happy moving my vote back onto him (or Walnut) if either gets to L-1 unless you have a good explaination for this Fark.

Also Riot, while Netlava's points about people might not necessarily be correct, we at least know his intentions were to find scum. I can see I'm not convincing anyong that LG is guilty, but I'll try again another day I suppose.

[charter]

Vote LG.

[charter]

That was telling the Fark wagon to vote for LG, not me placing a vote.

[charter]

Thesp, who are your top three picks for scum now?

Also, I see this as a prime opportunity to look closer into LG's recent vote for Fark, I'll see if I can find anything useful.

[charter]

Same question to Riot. Who are your top three picks for scum?

[charter]

Didn't find anything about LG, but I did on Tinsley. I'd be Ok with a Tinsley lynch. Coupled with most of the town's suspicion of him and his post 654, he's not looking too good anymore.

I actually had a big speech questioning Fark, but decided I'd just take the vote for you and not care about his justification. Fark's vote is horrible, but I will deal with that later (after you are lynched).

I'd still like to see that speech. Charter - with the recent developments between LG and Fark, do you still think they are both scum? I think this is more proof that Fark is trying to get any lynch besides Walnut, but it's making me wonder whether or not LG is scum.

I didn't read too much into this post before, as I was willing to take any and all votes for LG without caring the reason for them. Fark fell pretty much right under this category.

His post is trying to get me to pick Fark over LG. Coupled with my strong belief that LG is scum (which I stated a few posts before Tinsley's) and Fark's recent claim, this statement by him is incredibly manipulative.

Mac, would you be willing to lynch LG over Walnut today?

I'd like to revise my LoS
1- LG
2- Tinsley
3- Walnut/most everyone else
I'm not so sure Walnut is scum, I think we might have gotten bamboozeled into thinking that.

More things pointing to the LG + Tinsley pair.

Something I noticed: Nobody is against Farklynch excluding Fark. Tinsley I would vote for only as a last option. Walnut is maybe.

LG would first prefer to lynch Fark, who I'm believing is town, then Walnut, and Tinsley as a last option. It makes sense if Tinsley and LG are a scumpair.

[charter]

I'm looking for scumpairs. You and Tinsley are fitting nicely together. I don't see other people acting towards each other how you two do, so yes, I'm assuming you are scum and how you're acting then makes perfect sense.

[charter]

Talking about who you're going to protect is idiotic. Now that you've done it, you have to protect Thesp. Tinsley isn't a RB, there isn't one. Without talking about your night action, you would make a whole slew of WIFOM for the mafia.
However, protect Thesp, you stand a good chance of getting killed. This will confirm Thesp to be town.

Gah, I just went and did a whole mess of speculation. Shoot me.

[charter]

Why are you all of a sudden so suspicious of Mac? When I said that we might be getting manipulated into thinking Walnut is scum, he was the one I was thinking was doing it, but I never said that until now.

Why did you suggest I vote Fark over LG in that post of yours I quoted?

[charter]

unvote

My entire perspective on reality has been thrown into question by these recent events.

[charter]

I want Tinsley to answer some questions first. They need to be addressed before anyone gets lynched.

[charter]

I don't like Riot's last post, particularly his Thesp=cop and Fark=doc scenario. There is no roleblocker if Thesp is town. There's no way scum would have chanced him investigating one of them if they could have avoided it.

Honestly, I don't think Mac's wagon is scum heavy yet. I don't really see the case on him, other than pushing Netlava and Walnut.

Waiting on Thesp's top three...

[charter]

Charter if there is a roleblocker then they could just block Thesp when they needed to and there wouldn't be a chance he investigated one of them. There's really no reason to think there is one yet but there's not a reason to think there isn't one either. How are you so sure there's not one?

They would have blocked Thesp last night. They didn't know who he was investigating.

I'm either way on a massclaim, I doubt we have much, if any, more town power, so I don't see it doing us any good or harm.

[charter]

Oh... You're right. I forgot that he didn't get anything because he investigated the dead guy. Mizzy confirmed that that would happen so I assumed that was the reason why. Never occured to me that he could have been blocked too.

Scratch all my no RB speech.

[charter]

Why are you all of a sudden so suspicious of Mac? When I said that we might be getting manipulated into thinking Walnut is scum, he was the one I was thinking was doing it, but I never said that until now.

Why did you suggest I vote Fark over LG in that post of yours I quoted?

I've been keeping Mac in the back of my mind since the start of D2. I was surprised to see him survive the night seeing as most here saw him as town.

More speculation, that's a terrible reason to suspect someone. Living through N1?? I think you might actually be scum Tinsley.

vote Tinsley

I'd still like to see that speech. Charter - with the recent developments between LG and Fark, do you still think they are both scum? I think this is more proof that Fark is trying to get any lynch besides Walnut, but it's making me wonder whether or not LG is scum.

Why did you suggest I vote Fark over LG in that post of yours I quoted?

Where in that quote did I suggest that you vote Fark over LG? I honestly wanted your opinion on the possibility of Fark and LG both being scum, then provided my interpretation of that argument.

You're casting doubt as to whether LG is scum or not. Coupled with the both of them are unlikely to be scum you hint at with your question, the only thing for someone to infer is that Fark is more likely to be scum and LG is the pick for town. This is the manipulative post I was referring to (there could be others, I haven't gone back over Tinsley too thoroughly).

I'd like to revise my LoS
1- LG
2- Tinsley
3- Walnut/most everyone else
I'm not so sure Walnut is scum, I think we might have gotten bamboozeled into thinking that.

I interpreted this as LG or Tinsley or both are bamboozling us into thinking Walnut is scum.

You interpreted it wrong, Mac is the only person I thought might have been doing the bamboozling.

I actually think LG and charter are onto something, not the fact that LG and I are a scumpair, but that we could be getting bamboozled into thinking Walnut is scum. Charter look who has been pushing the Walnut bandwagon the hardest - Mac. If everyone is being "bamboozled" into believing Walnut is scum, isn't Mac the one that's doing it?

Charter - if you believed we were being bamboozled by Mac, why didn't you say so? Do you think we are being bamboozled by a townie?

I purposely didn't say who I thought was misleading us (I'm not going to type bamboozled anymore). I had no case against Mac, and nothing to show that he was purposely misleading anyone about Walnut. I'm not even sure that someone is misleading us, but the more I think about lynching Walnut, the less good the idea sounds. This leads me to believe that the original case against him (back on D1) was weak and fabricated. Me and Mac were the ones gunning for Walnut yesterday (was Riot too?).

It's ironic you mention wanting to avoid WIFOM at the end of your post after how you opened up day 2 today. Not funny ironic, scum ironic. Yes, I am all for the Tinsley lynch after his less than stellar answers.

[charter]

Tinsley's at L-1

Didn't realize when I voted him, but it doesn't change my read on him.

[charter]

That post is quite damning. I believe I provided other reasons in my post as well. It's assuring that you try to discredit me rather than refute my points though. It makes them seem like they're right.

If you'd like, I can go back and "fit some of your posts to make my case" as LG calls it.

[charter]

Thesp, what do you now think of SG?

[charter]

I stated that I think that not ALL the scum were on the Netlava wagon. Some of them must have voted elsewhere.

Want to try and back that up?

[charter]

Camn is already voting Tinsley. Why are you in such a rush here Fark? I certianly want Thesp to post again before night comes.

I'd like to ask no one to hammer until Thesp posts again.

[charter]

Why are you in such a rush here Fark?

[charter]

Why are you in such a rush here Fark?

He should just request a deadline

That's the reason I wanted to know. He jumped all over you for requesting a deadline, and now he's trying to quicklynch.

[charter]

Rich

[charter]

If anyone but Tinsley wants me to answer anything specific in his posts, quote for me what you want me to answer and I'll do it.

[charter]

However- Tinsley, most of the examples you have used there that related to Charter attacking me are things that I pointed out earlier. Why did you not agree with them at that stage, but instead were voting with Charter against me as recently as post #808? None of the examples you mention are based on things Charter has done since his wagon disbanded, so if they are good reasons now, why were you not his wagon then?

Because Tinsleyscum doesn't actually believe them.

[charter]

Gurgi, how is me answering EVERY question going to be productive? It's just going to be another eye bleedingly long wall of text that no one is going to want to read. You actually want me to respond to everything Tinsley wrote?

If you're going to vote for me regardless of my answers, save me hours of time and just vote me anyway. If me answering could change your vote to Tinsley then I'll do it, but please just tell me straight up.

[charter]

I'll answer, but I won't have time tonight or this weekend (maybe sunday).

[charter]

There could be cult leaders or survivers though, that's not above possibility. Tbh, speculation on 3rd party roles offers us no help at all, until someone makes a hint at their role if they are pro-town. Having said that Lord Guri's post was that there are likely to be either 3 scum or 3 scum and a SK, it was Charter that brought up the speculation about it.

Fishing for pro-town roles to drop hints that you can pick up? Makes me wonder, why do you care who the pro town roles are?

Post 67 questions Had for flip-flopping on charter’s posts 20-22. The quote above is another example of charter twisting someone’s word against them. How was Had fishing for pro town roles? He doesn’t vote Had here, but waits until post 82 after Netlava and Walnut have expressed suspicion, and Mac voted Had.

He mentioned power roles, hence I thought he was trying someone to hint that they had one. I didn't twist words, I asked him two questions, so I really don't see how that can be construed as word twisting. Now I know that he was hinting that he had one.

I will be interested in seeing who the next person to vote for Had is (assuming someone does.

Post 94 – This is a nice vague comment. He may have been setting himself up to trust/accuse someone here.

So it is vague, how is that scummy?

Post 101 – Everyone knows about this post too (Let Had live, if he isn’t NK’d we lynch him tomorrow). Votes BB for his semi-claim.

Did I even mention lynching Had today? No.

I think you trying to pin this on me is scummy. What does everyone else think?

Post 117 – Reacts to Farside’s reaction to post 101 by thinking she’s scummy for pinning it on him. Fark (I think) nailed this, it’s an appeal to everyone else.

How is it an appeal to anyone? I thought farside's action was scummy. Asking everyone else was pointless (though did set me straight).

Post 154 – Calls out Batt for his “What if Riot turns up dead as Doc?” question to Netlava regarding Riot’s “Breadcrumb”. I actually thought it was a good question, but I’m noticing that charter has definitely trying to spread suspicion among nearly everyone. I think someone mentioned that as a scumtell in this game. The only people I don’t think he has cast suspicion toward were Netlava (whom many here thought was the scummiest D1), Mac, and I think Shadow Girl (but I’m not certain on that one).

Show me where I've tried to spread suspicion among nearly everyone. If by that you mean ask lots of people probing questions, then yes, I probably have.

Post 156 – Further defends Netlava on Batt’s question “hesitating to say loaded question”

I clarify why I questioned Batt. There's no defending anyone there.

If you now say that I'm further directing people, I'm going to explode. I'm not telling anyone to do anything, just explaining what I assumed obvious and that everyone thought.

Post 172 - The first case of charter becoming aggressive towards others when they accuse him in this game. You shouldn’t play this game if you can’t handle answering questions.

So I'm aggressive, how is that scummy? Thanks, I'll quit MS now...

I didn’t catch this in my Mac analysis but he defends charter in post 182 when Farside is questioning him.

Ask Mac.

Post 235 – Had questions charter on his “I’ll be interested in seeing who the next person to vote Had is” comment. Charter replies with “It wouldn't have given me any more than everyone else. I simply would have found it interesting.” So why ask the question?

Because I was interested! I thought it would be interesting! Why is that scummy?

On to the next post.

[charter]

A little more on charter (up to page 15):

Regarding Netlava:

I won't lie, I've been biased towards him this game because he helped me out the most last game, but I'll do a reread without this bias.

Post 250 – Trying to justify why he hasn’t been suspecting Netlava, and a horrible justification at that.

Next time I'll just not take a stance on Netlava or I'll just keep my bias towards him. How is it scummy instead of truthful?

Post 264 – The results of his “unbiased reread on Netlava.” Strangely enough returns nothing on Netlava. Instead he admittedly stopped reading all posts but Walnut’s at 137. Note that at this point Walnut has been taking some heat for sitting on the fence regarding Netlava. Charter votes Walnut.

Not the results of my "unbiased reread on Netlava". Nice try though. Post 331 chief. How is this scummy?

Regarding LG’s questioning of his reread:

I'm not saying anything about how scummy Netlava is or isn't. I actually commented on five players, and formed opinions on others, however, me revealing them now will NOT help lynch scum, so don't ask for them.

Why not?

Because it would have distracted the town unnecessarily. How is this scummy?

Here’s something very interesting:

Charter I haven't dropped suspicion of Walnut. I pointed out that I still find him scummy in 252. I think Netlava is far scummier. You said in 250 that you've been too biased in favor of Netlava this game and are going to reread intending to be more neutral. Did that happen? You don't mention Netlava in your recap of the game anywhere.

Charter responds with this:

I haven't done that reread yet, I doubt I can today, hopefully this weekend. I didn't mention Netlava, but I didnt mention a lot of others either.

Was this an example of one scumbuddy nudging another on a mistake he made?

No. You can take any interaction and ask your question.

Post 289 – Suggests camn claim when we’re at L-3…for Walnut.

No. I tell camn that if she thinks her role is better for the town to know, then claim. How is it scummy?

Do you know if the mafia's kill would still go through on you? AKA a one for one trade? (not that I would mind that)

Post 294 – Asks camn if a mafia kill would still go through if they targeted her. Interesting question for a townie.

How is this scummy? OMGZ! YOU WILL BE INTERESTED...

Post 331 – The long awaited “unbiased Netlava reread” contains the following statement

312, Had flips on me AGAIN. Now I'm aggressive town, whereas before I was scum. I'm honestly about willing to lynch Had regardless of his claim... Also Had, there's nothing we can question you on your claim with until tomorrow.

How did charter not catch any crap for this?

About willing is not willing. Why didn't you give me crap when I said it? Why wait this long?

His analysis of Netlava basically amounts to: Some good posts, some bad posts, I don’t think he’s scum. Great analysis.

Thank you. How is this scummy?

Regarding LG speaking up about Batt defending him:

LG, why did you not either 1- reiterate what Batt said (as in he defended you correctly) or 2- set everyone straight? You STILL manage to dodge answering while 1- shifting blame elsewhere and 2- Looking like you're concerned (I say looking because I'm pretty sure you're scum by now)

My new list is LG then Walnut then Batt. Still willing to lynch any for the deadline.

Post 347 – Charter loves to do this. Passing off his interpretation of comments/actions as facts.

I looked back, but I couldn't find where he was shifting blame. I don't see where I state it's fact though.

I have explained my stance on BB previously. He needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly, or he was scum. I am not sure how I am responsible for whether other people post about him or not- if I attack him and no one else does it is not deliberately fruitless and therefore scummy, as you seem to be saying here.

You've decided from two posts that BB is scum? Pretty bold statement there.

Post 357 – Another example of charter twisting someone’s words.

Not another example of charter twisting someone's words. I asked a question. Walnut said he thought BB was scum, and BB made two posts.

I thought this was very interesting too:

Batt regarding charter twisting Walnut’s words:

Wait, what? Two things wrong with your statement here Charter.

1) You seem to ignore the fact Walnut stated "[BB] needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly..." It seems you are trying to make Walnut look scummy instead of finding scummy things Walnut has done.

I don't agree with this. First, regardless of his disclaimer, he still made the statement "you are scum" after BB had made two posts which I feel he shouldn't be able to make. Second, I'm not making him look scummy in that post, you're saying that for me. I first questioned his assertation, then said that was a bold statement considering BB made two posts.
Way to go on defending Walnut...

I went back and looked, and I didn’t see where Walnut said “you are scum” unless you were referring to the quote above in which case you’re still twisting his words.

Ok, I twisted his words.

Sorry that I sounded like a broken record in here. But I didn't see how most of what he brought up was relevant to anything but my playstyle. I didn't see how it was scummy of me.

[charter]

@Thesp, your reason for suspecting farside/Fark is lack of scumhunting (396). What are your thoughts on Walnut and his lack of scumhunting?

This was in post 409, based on the logic in his post 856, charter was trying to get Thesp to vote Walnut.

Yes, so what? How is it scummy if I try and get people to vote for those I think are scum?

Fark in Post 411

I think had is scum, judging by the way he claimed. Maybe we should lynch him today anyway. Besides, the worst case scenario is losing an unknown sanity cop, which isn't that bad, is it? I'm sure my excellent scum hunting abilities will make up for it.

Can't believe we were not going to lynch the guy who suggested lynching a claimed cop. A claimed cop with no counter-claim.

Charter’s response in 412:

Fark, just because there's no counterclaim only means the real cop might not be an idiot. It certainly doesn't mean Had is town. However, I agree that that post by Netlava is terrible.

Now’s a good time to look at charter's quote in post 331 (“The Unbiased Netlava Reread”) How can the post by Netlava be horrible when you said almost the exact same thing?

We both made a horrible post.

Post 415 – Criticizes ShadowGirl for not contributing anything new, comparing her to Walnut. He’s done this a few times to SG to this point, which falls in line with my theory that scum came into the game targeting Netlava, Walnut, and ShadowGirl for lynches.

Is there an argument in there? How is it scummy?

Start of D2

Post 464 – I’ve already covered this, but he asks Thesp who he investigated and why we shouldn’t lynch him, but Walnut is scum because of this quote:

Thesp, you are both a claimed cop and my number one scum suspect on Day 1. What do you have to say for yourself at this moment?

I told you already, I interpreted Walnut's post differently.

Post 467 – This has been covered as well. I asked for ideas on why Batt was NK’d. Charter wanted to shut up all discussion on it. Now’s a good time to look back on the exchange between Batt and charter that I posted above.

Tinsley, please do all the night speculating you want. All you'll do is waste time and make this thread even pointlessly bigger than you've already made it.

Post 476 – Also been covered – Fark asks for the case on Walnut and charter just posts a huge block of quotes.

Already answered this. Why do you bring up all this stuff now after I vote for you?

I really think it was the mafia’s plan all along to make Netlava the target on D1 because of his play style. While all members of the scum team may not have voted Netlava, I feel confident that one or two did.

Tinsley, if you aren't scum, you need to stop talking. How can a townie possibly know the mafia's plan? What makes you so confident that one or two did?

I can somewhat see your point on speculating on the NK, but what is wrong with my statement here?

I'm really getting frustrated with all these crap quotes of my posts and trivial comments on them. You are making unfounded accusations trying to appear pro town by saying stuff that sounds good and people might believe, but townies can't know if it's true. You're misleading them and I'm trying to stop it.

Walnut's question of "What do you have to say for yourself at this moment?" I interpreted as "You were wrong about Netlava being scum and you're my number one scum suspect, what do you have to say for yourself at this moment?" Going back, I can see how what I said created confusion.

Post 479 – This is the defense of his comment about Walnut in post 464. I still don’t see how Walnut's comment was a scumtell.

How does this make me scummy?

Tinsley, where is there an actual case? All you do is give your two cents on my posts. There's been like three or four posts of mine that are scummy, and WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THEM! Where were you when that was going on?!?!? Oh, that's right, I wasn't voting you then, so I wasn't scum then...

[charter]

Everything up to page 26:

Now, why does fark get singled out when SG has done NOTHING this entire game. Why are you not suspicious of Walnut who has done zero scumhunting the entire game?

The reason why I didn't answer these questions before... He singles out Fark when they apply to half the people here. Why do you all jump on me for trying to figure out why he's singling out Fark? Why don't you ask him why he singles people out?

Post 503 - Another case of charter setting up an SG lynch and getting irritated when being interrogated.

This argument is so bad I laughed. How is that setting up a SG lynch? It isn't.

Thesp, what makes you so sure SG is town. Comment on the rest of my questions.

Post 510 - Again singling out SG.

How is this scummy? SG hasn't contributed hardly anything orignal this whole game. She needs to start.

Post 540 – This is camn’s post. She calls out charter for being wishy-washy using a one of charter’s quotes about not liking one of Netlava’s posts (he made several posts like this) and then another where he stated he had his suspicions that Netlava was town. I thought this was the key to the wishy-washy comment. She also used a charter quote saying it is painfully obvious Walnut is scum. Camn makes another good point about charter making small pointless comments (All Aboard!) while calling out others when they do it.

Camn's post was wrong, and was already shot down. Go back and read it. How is making small pointless comments scummy?

Ok, so I wasn't sure about Netlava yesterday, and I am about Walnut. How is that wishy washy? I wasn't positive Netlava was town yesterday (like I am with Walnut) so I'm not going to make assertions that he is. You are trying to take your being wrong about him and twist it to make me look bad.

Fark's big reason for voting me was that I quoted some of my posts. Other reasons are all like "I don't like how charter does this" or "charter said something scummy on page 5".

Post 548 – Here he completely avoids the keys to camn’s and Fark’s arguments. How can you find so many bad posts by Netlava, but have suspicions he’s town? “I don’t like how charter does this” was actually the fact that said if Had lived to D2 we lynch him. “Charter said something scummy on page 5” was actually charter’s appeal to the majority when Farside called him out.

Bad posts don't equal scum. Oh wait, did I try and get Had lynched today? In fact, I think I said the opposite. Yes, quite sure I did. You're making stuff up here Tinsley...

Post 552 – Mac FOS’s the entire charter bandwagon. I agreed at the time due to how quickly it filled up. Now I think this could be evidence of a charter/Mac pair.

This is ridiculous. You're just saying whatever you can to try and save your own ass. Obviously Mac was right because the wagon disbanded immediately because it was filled with non-existant arguments. How is this scummy? It isn't (I'm going to just answer that question I ask of you after practically every post).

This is exactly what I wanted to say, but I couldn't cause two more people would jump on me for OMGUSing.

Post 553 – If you’re town, shouldn’t you be more concerned with pointing out scum than getting lynched? You’ve made a few comments like this that make me think you’re worried about being lynched.

Yes, but how can I point out scum if everyone who votes for me has an equally non-existant to terrible reason? If I was lynched from that wagon, I doubt anyone could have pinpointed the scum. Isn't everyone worried about being lynched, so how is that scummy?

Walnut is scum because he misdirects the town

rather than scumhunting.

Post 555 – Oh the irony!

That was me trying the opposite of posting a lot about Walnut and just posting one line saying why he's scum (which I said a few posts before wouldn't convince anyone, so I was trying it because my trying an actual case didn't work).
Thank you once again for your pointless comments Tinsley!

Yes, you've found a buddy of the town, Mac.

Post 559 – Another post suggesting a possible Mac/charter relationship.

How is it scummy? It isn't.

Yeah, Fark seems scummier with each post he makes. Why would rereading the Walnut case make me less scummy? He gets called out for putting up a crap case against me, so he moves on to the person he thinks is the next easiest to get lynched (that isn't his scumbuddy known as walnut), Tinsley. There's plenty of stuff you could have brought up against me, but you just gave up. Not to mention your latest contradiction you use as evidence agaisnt Tinsley

Post 567 – This post makes nearly the same case that I made on Fark. Yet I’m the one about to be lynched for making a crappy case. This also falls in line with what I think Mac and Riot have been doing, buddying up to me.

Is this even related to me? How is it scummy?

Post 569 – Charter again defending me.

Not charter defending you. Charter telling Fark he's scum and his case against you was bad. How is this scummy? It isn't.

charter, you suspect a lot of people. Can I ask you who your top townie is and why?

Looking for someone to kill off tonight? There is absolutely no reason you need to know this, but I know that I have no choice but to answer all questions directed at me. It's been Riot for quite some time. I only suspect three people, I think I made that pretty clear in my post 567, not the "lot of people" you put in my mouth.

Post 592 – This is an incredibly scummy post, it’s got a couple charterisms. We have another example of charter being aggressive when someone asks him a question. Also for those of you that never read the trainwrecked game, charter brought a lot of suspicion on himself as scum by not answering a question. It looks like he’s trying to point out that he’s answering the question, even though he doesn’t like it, just so people won’t lynch him. Claims Fark put the “lot of people” statement in his mouth, when at this point he’s cast suspicion on: Walnut, Fark, LG, Thesp, Tinsley, camn, and SG.

I tend to get more aggressive when people make crap up against me. I don't see the need of anyone asking someone who is their top townie pick. How about you tell me why someone needs to know that, Tinsley. You're putting lot of people in my mouth again, I said in 567 the three people I was suspicious of. You know that who you're suspicious of can change, right? It doesn't have to stay the same throughout the whole game.

Ehh, I'm leaning towards Fark being horribly wrong in his assessment of things, but wrong as town now. He's definately not out of the woods yet, but I'd prefer a Walnut or LG lynch today now. I don't have proof of this, just my feelings.

Post 608 – So what made you change your mind on Fark? By the way this is Wishy-Washy.

His recent posts. Yes, that is wishy washy, how is it scummy though? It isn't.

Tinsley might actually BE town, which is why he took a stand, allbeit on a lost cause.

Post 611 – This is camn’s quote about my case on Fark, but I thought I’d bring it up again, I like it even though it has nothing to do with charter.

This is just more Tinsley trivial commentation.

Post 644 – Votes LG. LG predicted this in the post prior to charter’s vote, made a couple hours earlier. Yet charter didn’t even see the comment.

Already explained this. How is it scummy? It isn't.

As with your reread knowing Netlava was town, would you consider his "very scummy" play sinister if I was lynched and came up town? Out of curiosity, how do you defend yourself unjustly?

Are you sure that's directed at me? I don't think I said I was going to do a reread today. Also, I know for a fact I never said he was very scummy. I don't even understand that last question.

Post 651 – Charter once again twisting people’s words. How many examples is that now? Is 3 right?

Cute. I answered the wrong thing, which is why I was confused. I later answered what Walnut wanted me too. And no, we're not at three.

Post 653 – LG has called charter out for not reading his post before voting. Charter says that’s not enough evidence to build a case on him. Do we have enough now? Charter also admits he voted before reading LG’s post, but got excited when he saw Fark had voted for him and decided to vote for LG too. He says he had a big speech questioning Fark on his vote, then he goes on to call Fark’s vote horrible.

You haven't found a single new thing on me and did anything but comment on it. You haven't showed how what I've said is scummy, probably because most of what you quoted isn't. How is this scummy by the way? What's that? It isn't? Nope.

Post 655 – I tell charter I’d still like to see that speech, but he deleted it. Isn’t that convenient? You can’t retype it?

This is ridiculous. I summarized what it said and I did delete it. I already went over this, I didn't care why Fark voted LG. I planned on getting LG lynched, then calling Fark out on it tomorrow. You can come up with your own questions for Fark, I don't have to do it for you. How is me deleting it scummy? It isn't.

Sorry if I'm sounding abrasive or sarcastic. I'm just fed up with answering this massive commentation on my posts. It's getting really old (to me anyway).

[charter]

Finally! The end to the charter analysis:

Post 657 – Charter posts an LG reread analysis

140, basically just lets us know he's alive

That’s funny, going back and looking, LG speaks out against a BB lynch. He also supports a charter lynch. But I guess by posting he did let us know he was alive.

How is this scummy or even an argument against me?

175, Netlava is exactly right. Everything in the entire post is golden.
176, votes Netlava with terrible reasoning.
188, no point of this other to just remind people that Netlava did something that can be considered fishy

That golden post 175 by Netlava calls out LG for not pushing charter’s bandwagon. Yet when LG does push for a Netlava bandwagon in post 188, there’s no point to it.

How is this scummy or even an argument against me?

212, Netlava is right again, by this time Mac has taken over lynching Netlava duties, convienently leaving LG's hands virtually clean

Now I do like this one. As long as you replace Mac’s name with Thesp and Fark, then replace LG’s name with Mac. I'd also like to mention that charter's given out some blame to Fark, LG, and camn for Netlava's lynch, but never Mac, even though Mac put a lot of suspicion on Netlava.

How is this scummy or even an argument against me?

317, [LG’s] first useful content filled post.

I strongly disagree here. He may be guilty of tunnel vision and lurking early on, but his early posts did provide his opinions. I did notice LG has been suspicious of charter right from the start, which makes charter’s efforts to have LG lynched seem OMGUS.

I've also been suspicious of LG from very early. How is this scummy or even an argument against me?

434, anxious to lynch a townie
448, this is worth looking into
451, STILL anxious to pull off the lynch before something can happen

While I agree that LG seemed anxious to hammer Netlava in 451, he certainly was not in 434. He was responding to SG’s misunderstanding that CF Riot’s confirm vote had hammered Netlava. All LG said was “we’re waiting for Thesp to hammer.”

How is this scummy or even an argument against me?

@camn, walnut is right, just because someone is being extremely town, doesn't mean a thing. Suspecting Mac based soley on that is scummy.

More evidence of a possible charter/Mac relationship.

How is this scummy or even an argument against me?

@Riot, if you go back and reread Netlava's and LG's posts from yesterday, and take into account knowing Netlava is town, LG plays like he knew it yesterday as well.

How did LG play like he knew Netlava was town? You played like you knew Netlava was town, so you're scum?

LG never tried to further the Netlava wagon but always made sure it was known he was on it and supporting it. Townies generally try and make arguments against those they find scummy. LG doesn't generate anything new against Netlava. No, I didn't play like I knew Netlava was town yesterday. If you think I do, then show me.

Fark, trying to play off your frequent wagon hopping with legitimate reasons ("There's nothing scummy about being strategic with your vote to make sure that scum gets lynched (especially since we haven't even lynched one of them yet)") certainly isn't helping you in my mind. I would just use the defense, "I know I'm town, so I'd rather someone else scummy get lynched". It would have been much more believable than your trying to supply actual reasoning for the votechanging.

Post 701 – Charter calls out Fark for his vote changes. How many times have you changed your vote today? Nevermind...I'll get to this later.

Difference is, I only changed it between the three I thought were scum (Fark, Walnut, LG) until I voted you. How is that scummy?

Riot, in 629, you suspect five people. Five!

Post 716 – You have VOTED four people. Four!

Another pointless comment. How is this scummy?

I'm pretty sure Walnut is scum, but on my reread I found things that made me doubt whether he actually is scum or not, hence why I'm now not so eager to lynch him.

Post 727 – You’re being wishy-washy again.

Yes, this is the second time I've done it. What Camn said was wishy washy isn't. How is this scummy?

Someone else vote LG and I will switch over to him. Don't care about your reasoning, make something up if you must.

Post 738 – I don’t think this one even needs an explanation. Post 744 is more of the same.

Yes it does need an explaination. How is it scummy?

Actually, unvote Fark, vote LG LG has once again gone to non-contribution as soon as he's not in danger of being lynched, I'd like to urge him to contribute some more.

I've posted more recently than camn. Thoughts about that? I have been contributing for a while since I was wagonned.

ONCE AGAIN, LG is throwing unfounded suspicion camn's way. Camn's case is different, she's been minimally posting all along, you post much more when you have some votes on you.

Yes, quite sure LG is scum.

Post 766 – Another case of charter twisting someone’s words. I think this is number four. He continued to insist that LG was casting suspicion for the next several posts.

How is that not LG trying to deflect onto Camn? It's pretty much the definition of deflecting. How is what I said scummy?

Didn't find anything about LG, but I did on Tinsley. I'd be Ok with a Tinsley lynch. Coupled with most of the town's suspicion of him and his post 654, he's not looking too good anymore.

Post 817 – So all game you’ve insisted that I’m town, but now that I’m the most popular lynch, I’m scummy? Seriously though, look at “most of the town’s suspicion”:

Thesp – Early reason for suspecting me was that I popped up whenever my name was called. I believe that’s all he’s provided
Fark – My “crappy” argument on him (Pretty close to the argument that you made) + OMGUS (Fark’s words, not mine) vote on Fark
Camn – Voted me to pressure me to answer a question.
Walnut – See Fark’s reasons

Then he looks up one quote from me, twists my words (I think that’s five times now) and decides that it’s good enough reason to vote me.

I never insisted you were town. I know because I didn't insist anyone was town. (I said I thought Netlava was, but I never insisted that or tried to convince anyone of that). I didn't twist your words, I saw the light.

I'd still like to see that speech. Charter - with the recent developments between LG and Fark, do you still think they are both scum? I think this is more proof that Fark is trying to get any lynch besides Walnut, but it's making me wonder whether or not LG is scum.

I didn't read too much into this post before, as I was willing to take any and all votes for LG without caring the reason for them. Fark fell pretty much right under this category.

His post is trying to get me to pick Fark over LG. Coupled with my strong belief that LG is scum (which I stated a few posts before Tinsley's) and Fark's recent claim, this statement by him is incredibly manipulative.

Going back and looking at D2 charter voted: Walnut, LG, Walnut, Fark, LG, Tinsley

I think charter’s “job” was to try to bring out the doc today, by vote hopping. He never does put a vote on Mac, Riot, or SG (I think the two former are possible partners, I’m not sure why he never placed a vote on SG – maybe cause she wasn’t drawing any suspicion), or Thesp and camn (already revealed their roles.)

My "job" is to lynch scum. More unfounded accusations by Tinsley. Either show that my "job" was to bring out the doc or don't say it.

I also think he’s trying a little too hard to look protown. I’m not sure how many rereads he said he did, but I’d bet it was somewhere around 20.

Yes, quite sure charter is scum.

I believe I've done maybe 5 total/partial rereads. I don't know where you get 20 from or why you'd say that.

Discuss.

[charter]

Someone with a longer attention span than me might want to count the times charter says: "How is it/this scummy?"

Do you disagree that what he said about me didn't show that I was scummy?

@Town, please lynch Tinsley before he does that two more times. Go ahead and say I'm defending Riot or whoever. It is no fun and pointless to respond to all that. Based on Riot's playstyle, he isn't going to give one liners to everything like I did, and we will have to sift through a dozen pages of this crap. I don't want to do that and I know it won't help me.

@Camn, please tell me you have something else to say besides that.

[charter]

Someone with a longer attention span than me might want to count the times charter says: "How is it/this scummy?"

Do you disagree that what he said about me didn't show that I was scummy?

[charter]

In other news, SG has done a complete 180 on who she wants to vote for since she came back and posted her thoughts on everyone. It also looks like she was willing to vote for all those that were popular vote getters back then, and now it looks kind of the same.

Surely Tinsley's 'case' didn't persuade you that much... What changed your mind completely SG?

[charter]

I don't understand how that works, but whatever.

[charter]

My brain's turning to mush, but here's a list of all the people currently in the game and whether I see them as suspicious/see them as an appropriate lynch in order
LG: Maybe-Yes
fark: Maybe-Yes
Walnut: Maybe-Yes
charter: Maybe
Thesp: Pending tommorow's result.
Mac: No-Maybe
Tinsley: No
CF Riot: No
Camn: No

What happened to LG, what happened to Walnut? Why are you now so eager to lynch me and Mac? I'm in the middle of the pack here, but now I'm at the top. Mac was quite close to the bottom, but you're voting him now.

[charter]

In other news, I like Mac's argument for CF. I'm looking forward to hearing his response.

I do too.

Still planning on getting to a Riot reread later today.

Please don't quote every post of his. Just quote ones that are scummy and then explain why they are scummy.

It's not like charter hasn't been defended by 'too scum'.

Hey, LG is still breathing. Damn. I see that there's a possible Mac and Fark vote for LG, anyone else? Tinsley?

[charter]

I don't want a self hammer, but I think you're bluffing. Regardless, I don't buy Tinsley's reasoning since he thinks I'm scum.

Thesp, please make your investigation count tonight...

[charter]

Tinsley, did you ever claim?

I might be willing to switch my vote. Don't self hammer, lots of things can change in a few days, and self hammering to end the day faster is not protown.

[charter]

unvote

[charter]

Don't really know how Fark could have satisfactorily answered that question. It's quite incriminating. My thoughts on this. Fakeclaiming weak doctor is (in my opinion) entirely safe for this day, I don't see it getting counterclaimed. Plus, Fark had his breadcrumb to Thesp. I basically accepted his claim entirely.

However, I don't buy Fark's reasoning, he didn't need to Fos Thesp, especially since he DID vote me. He could have just made a little point about Thesp, then moved right on to me. I certainly wouldn't have found it suspicious.

vote Fark

I will change this before deadline to ensure a lynch.

[charter]

What do you mean? You either slipped up bigtime or are lying about your role. In this case, I see no protown reason for either. I will gladly change my vote to ensure we get a lynch at deadline (when exactly is deadline?).

[charter]

How is it silly?

[charter]

I don't think I agree with a Mac lynch at this point.

unvote, vote Tinsley

I do think that Mac (and SG) should weigh in on this new evidence against Fark.

[charter]

No I didn't realize, that votecount was very convenient and told me so.

[charter]

Actually, if Tinsley is scum it doesn't make sense for him to unvote Mac. WIFOM or not, if he was scum, I see no reason other than a wild play for him to unvote Mac. Of course if they're both scum this doesn't apply, but then we'll be doing pretty good.

Of course this isn't really evidence that Mac is scum, but in my head it gives Tinsley lots of townie points (coupled with his evidence on you Fark).

[charter]

Yes, but I'm not going to sit back and contribute to a useless deadline lynch. I'd rather lynch one of them even if I'm wrong and then justify it tomorrow.

[charter]

SG, would you please post your updated thoughts on all players and why they're at where they are.

[charter]

SG, would you please post your updated thoughts on all players and why they're at where they are.

Does anyone else read this as, "I need to know whether or not to kill you tonight"?

I was asking it because, once again, SG says a whole lot of nothing with her post. She hasn't said a damn thing the entire game. She flip flops on who she suspects whenever a new bandwagon forms. I won't comment on the whether or not she might die part, as it could possibly help scum and not town.

I think it's LG, Fark, and SG possibly. I'm still absolutely sure LG is scum. Fark's slip up there is also quite damning. I'm not really that sure on SG, as she doesn't say anything. If LG flips scum, I then think it's Mac based on their interactions from day 1.

If we can get enough Fark or LG votes, I'll move my vote back over to one of them.

[charter]

Would you be willing to vote LG? Would you Tinsley? Fark? Mac?
I certainly am, but unless we get a couple more yes's there's not much point.

[charter]

So you're more suspicious of LG but refuse to vote him before you know if he's lynchable or not? Explanation?

[charter]

Well, I don't see any downside to this. Tinsley's unvoting Mac makes no sense if he's scum. Mac could be scum and we lynch him. Mac flips town and we lynch LG tomorrow.

unvote, vote Mac

[charter]

That was hammer? Time for twilight spam then.

So is Mac your buddy then? I'm too anxious to wait!

Also, I must say I'm suprised at camn.

[charter]

Wait, did Mac ever claim? Not that it does a bit of good now.

[charter]

vote LG

obvscum

Look back to yesterday how he votes for Mac, then 'is worried' because Mac gets votes. If you're voting for who you want lynched, you aren't worried like he was.

[charter]

LG, you are scum. You can argue against it all you like, but even if I get lynched today, you will go tomorrow before everyone even posts. I'm fine either way.

You're still defending Mac in that last post, which is dumb because he was scum.

[charter]

And also, when you "were worried" was when Mac got three votes, which didn't even make him the leader. Not even remotely close to a quicklynch. Plus, now today, you don't even get on camn for HER quicklynching. You go straight to me. She basically said 'me too' to my reasoning and then hammered before a claim. Since quicklynch is not good for the town, how come you don't even mention her today? I don't think camn is scum, and I'm actually happy she quicklynched so we didnt get a claim from Mac and then not lynch him based on it.

[charter]

No, you're applying the logic that this quicklynch was bad, but you're ignoring everyone but me who had a hand in it. I wasn't the hammer, I wasn't one of the ones who hopped on initially and then justified it later. In fact, I was the one who first suggested that Walnut was town and that we were being lead astray.

The only reason I got on, is that Tinsley basically proved his was a townie to me with his unvoting Mac, and in my head I'm sure Tinsley is town, so therefore Mac was the better lynch. I already got yelled at by everyone else for trying to start up a new wagon, so I had no other option. Like I said yesterday, deadline lynches are about as bad as no lynches and I have no problem justifying my vote today.

I don't see where I'm ignoring your rebuttals. Your rebuttals don't even make sense. You say quicklynch was bad, but talk about me like it was my fault for doing it.

[charter]

1. I don't think it's a good idea to hammer without a claim normally. I don't say it's scummy to hammer. Here though, it leads me to two things. Camn is not scum, Tinsley is town. We still had a few days left before deadline, so it was a quicklynch.

2. Mac went from L-2 to lynched in under two hours. That is a quicklynch. Since we in fact did have a quicklynch, you have ignored camn's role in it and honed in entirely on me.

3. I disagree with everything you've said in this game.

4. Go ahead and lynch me and prove it, then lynch LG tomorrow. By then I'm sure Thesp will have found the last scum.

5. I expressed doubt and stopped pushing his lynch before I knew he was town. Tinsley also did this. I don't really see any incentive for me doing that when I did (as in well before the Macwagon started I believe) if I was scum, therefore, the reason I did it is that I actually believed what I was saying.

6. Like I said, Tinsley earned some huge townie points with me, to the point that I'm pretty sure he's town (almost as sure as I am of you being scum). Once again, Camn did the same thing, and once again, you completely single me out. I believe the reason for you singling me out like this is because I am so vocal about you being scum.

[charter]

@camn, suprised that you made a move that bold. You've been fairly hesitant (in my opinion) on a lot of things so far in this game.

[charter]

I said "I actually believed what I was saying" not that it "makes me more town".

LG, I don't know if you've noticed, but I overstate a lot of my suspicions. You are right, the execption is you.

[charter]

Trust who? Tinsley and camn?

[charter]

No one else trust's them. I don't see why you're so worried about my suspicions since I convinced no one about you (or really anyone else) yesterday.

[charter]

What?

[charter]

LG, I've scrutinized your actions quite closely. It's the manner in which you were part of the Netlava wagon that initially made me suspicious of you. When Netlava turned town, it all made sense, ONLY IF you were scum. This goes back to assuming you're scum and proceeding from there. I think it's evidenced with my "wishy washy" stance I took on Walnut midday yesterday that I do in fact, keep an open mind about everyone. I was absolutely sure he was scum at the beginning of the day, but by the end of it I had changed my mind. Look at how walnut reacted to my accusations of him, and how you are now. You're reacting much differently.

[charter]

While Thesp's result (if he has one...) might return a guilty on someone, I'd still rather lynch LG.

[charter]

LG, I had suspicions that lead me up to the point where I'm assuming you're scum. It's not like I began the game and picked three people to hound. I'm saying that your play makes perfect sense as scum, and not much sense as town.

[charter]

Well, I haven't seen much you've done that looks townie to me.

[charter]

@Camn, I wouldn't say Fark is cleared. True that Walnut was also likely town after Mac was mafia, as long as Fark's alive, he's not cleared.

[charter]

I don't like Riot's post right there. I want to throw out my opinion, but will wait until after Fark's response.