Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[Tinsley]

/confirm

[Tinsley]

Vote: Hadhfang

Just because he did such a good job hiding his scumminess last time.

[Tinsley]

Some thoughts so far:

CF Riot - Seemed like an innocent statistical mistake at first. Then in post 48, you admitted you knew Had was just as likely to be scum in this game as anyone else. I know when you take both games into account he only has a 1/16 chance, but the fact that you posted it that way was misleading.

charter - I took his posts to mean that he assumed 3 scum in figuring the odds, just as CF Riot did. I don't find it scummy.

Lord Gurgi - I don't see how the town can gain from assuming there are 3 scum and 1SK. I'm a noob, but I would think making a statement like that would only invoke distrust or paranoia among everyone.

Battousai - Quickly votes farside after she votes Lord Gurgi, but says it was a random vote with a bit of information. Was it because you disagreed with her? Was she too quick to change her vote? Do you think she's scum, or was it a truly random vote?

FOS: CF Riot and Lord Gurgi

[Tinsley]

There's a 1/16 chance that Hadhfang would get mafia both games, assuming the number of mafia hasn't changed for this game.

That's 6.25% chance he's mafia.

Just sayin'.

I think that is certainly misleading. I could see how a mathematically challenged person could read that and believe that Had is less likely to be scum.

And I didn't say it

but that number I came up with goes for you too since you were mafia last game also.

That was the other key issue I had with that statement. You singled out Had, when your logic should have applied to charter as well.

[Tinsley]

Mac - Seeing as everyone had the same chance of drawing a scum role in this game, do you find CF Riot's statistic misleading?

[Tinsley]

I think Tinsley is mafia cuz he tried to post an analysis of everyone. And after what we saw last game.

I don't know what you're referring to here. Was it something Had, charter, or Acidmix did last game?


I don't like restarting this, but it's whatever.

I will stay in this game however only because I have a super-kick-ass role.

Great I'm sure this will really help put a stop to the setup speculation.

[Tinsley]

EBWOP: Oops...I forgot to take out the "I don't like restarting this, but it's whatever." part of BB's post.

[Tinsley]

Unvote: Hadhfang

I think it's a little early to be putting Had at L-2. While I have some concerns about him (flip-flopping on charter's triple post and CF Riot's misleading statistic on him). I think it's way too early in Day 1 to lynch him. We've barely heard anything from Blackberry or Battousai.

Speaking of Battousai, I had some questions for you in post 61 that you still haven't addressed.

[Tinsley]

Woah, that's 5 on me isn't it?...Also, I'm a cop with an unknown sanity. Of course its up to you as to what you think of that.

I'm pretty sure you were still at 4 votes with my unvote.

[Tinsley]

Now I don't know what information can be gathered, as this is the first time I've tried this, but I think Tinsley will look very scummy to me if Had turns up scum.

True, but I thought four (now five) pages is too soon to make a lynch. But with Had's claim, I agree that we certainly shouldn't lynch him today.

Is there anyone else you suspect right now?

[Tinsley]

That's interesting, because CF Riot's misleading stat should reflect badly on CF Riot and not had.

It would if CF Riot turned up scum. It would look like he was trying to convince everyone that Had isn't scum.

[Tinsley]

I think it's Tinsley + Had

Care to elaborate on this?

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.

[Tinsley]

Noob Question: When the cop is lynched/NK'd will his/her sanity status be revealed?

[Tinsley]

A few here have already mentioned our tendencies from our last game. That's the reason why I'm hesitant to lynch Netlava right now. Sure, he's been contradicting himself, but if I remember correctly he did that in the last game in addition to twisting other's words, and yet he still wasn't scum.

I'm not too sure about charter being scum either. He was much more defensive as scum in the last game when the wagon started to build on him. He may have learned his lesson, but I'm not getting scum vibes from him right now.

My motives have cooled on CF Riot, I doubt he would do all of that research and write that mammoth of a post (173) if he were scum.

Unfortunately, I think the person who deserves the most attention right now is the one that's getting replaced. Blackberry claims a "super-kick-ass" role without anything to really prompt it. He also claims to suspect myself and Had without much of an explanation. Then he leaves us saying confidently that Walnut is scum and possibly Macavenger as well.

[Tinsley]

It's a new strategy that I've seen done that relies on the fact that scum try to shift blame everywhere (typically picking an inactive townie) and making them seem scummy, and townies usually pick up on inactives nearer deadline when they realize that they don't have much to go on when rereading.

Could you provide links to the games you've seen it done? I think the problem with that theory is that I don't think people wait until a deadline to do a reread. I believe I had just finished a reread when I called you out for lurking.

Netlava: Has basically tunnel vision of CF Riot. Outed the doc (he thought it was the doc at the time). Goes after LG for somewhat defending Netlava (gave an excuse for Netlava's actions), and completely ignores the post by CF Riot, not even touching the discrepencies and contradictions in the post.

BB: Doesn't give this game much effort (reasonable as asked to be replaced), claims a great role out of the blue, and tells people who he feels is scummy, but doesn't give much of a reason why.

Tinsley: This is more gut than anything. He defends CF Riot, saying he is most likely town because he wrote a big post. Scum writes big posts too.

Those three are the main people who

IGMEOY

I'm surprised you didn't lump hadhfang in with me, seeing as a few here believe we could be scumbuddies based on my unvote when he reached L-2. In regards to the big posts, I was referring to the fact that to how much effort and thought went into that post.

Camn - Welcome to the game. Knowing what you do from inheriting BB's role, would you say his suspicion of Walnut and Macavenger were serious?

Mod - You don't have me listed anywhere in your vote count, but you have charter listed with a vote on camn and no vote. I think I'm supposed to be on the no vote list in charter's place.

I've got a busy weekend ahead of me so I may not post much before Monday.

[Tinsley]

Just to let everyone know, I've recovered from the long weekend and am working on a reread. I'm hoping to post some updated thoughts later today or tomorrow.

[Tinsley]

Sorry I've left everyone hanging I've been working on a reread but it's been going very slowly because the outside world has been getting in the way. But after 4 days and 4.5 pages of notes I'm up to the point of my last post of substance (post 201). My List of Suspicion from Greatest to Least at the moment (please keep in mind I've still got 3 more pages to go on my reread ):

Battousai - Admittedly lurked early in the game. When asked for his reason he learned the idea from another game - from scum Still don't know the point of his question to Netlava in post 150 (I think the reason he provided in post 192 was weak). While lurking may not make you scum, when you pair it with your weak reasoning and avoiding questions (as you did when I asked you for a list of suspects) makes you seem scummy to me.

Netlava - I agree his contradictions are certainly scummy. I also find it interesting that he and charter continue to defend each other. Charter defended him when Battousai questioned him in post 150.
Netlava switched his vote from charter to CFRiot when charter was up to 4 votes without providing a very good reason (something to keep in mind if we find out one or the other is scum.) I can't be certain on him though because of last game.

Hadhfang - Flip-flops on the charter's contradiction, then claims cop when he believes he was at L-2 (but actually at L-3). To be honest he was still at the top of my list when I unvoted him, but I felt it was far too early in the game. He's been quiet since. Obviously we shouldn't lynch him today.

charter - Has not been as defensive as he was in the previous game (as scum.) Regarding the accusation that he's setting up Had's lynch D2 - I honestly had the same thought, but I guess the key there is that he posted it.

Lord Gurgi - Only up this high because he brought up the SK point, has been asked at least twice about it, but still hasn't addressed why he brought it up. I've read everything else about him as town.

Walnut - Had suspicions of him earlier in the game because he seemed to focus on setup speculation and didn't provide much useful analysis, but I thought he made a great point in post 187 and appreciated him calling out Battousai for avoiding my question about his suspects.

Camn - Hard to get a read on her as she had just joined the game before I took off. But I like what I've seen from her so far. BB on the other hand came off very scummy. He was at the top of my list before he left.

CF Riot - Besides his misleading stat to start the game, he has seemed pro-town. The only other thing I could come up with on him was his analysis of Netlava came after Netlava voted him (OMGUS?) but he made valid points so I don't really put much stock in that. I don't really see the relationship between him and Battousai as Netlava suggests.

ShadowGirl - Hard to read her. As of Page 9 she hadn't posted much and what she did post was confusing or reiterated what others had said (post 194).

Farside22 - I disagree with her thoughts about charter being a hypocrite between posts 100 154. But that doesn't make her scum.

Macavenger - Living up to his sig. He's provided useful analysis and hasn't done anything that sticks out as suspicious.

Sorry for the absense. I've finally got some free time coming up so I'm going to work on getting completely caught up and post some more thoughts this weekend. Back to reading.

[Tinsley]

A few more thoughts after a quick skim over the last 3.5 pages:

As camn has already answered this, I feel relatively free to ask Tinsley- what were you thinking? How could Blackberry's role have told him anything of note about the mafia? To be purely hypothetical (so as not to compromise anyone's thinking about the current game), is there any role that on Day One, with no Night one and therefore no prior info, would have a better idea or not of which roles the other players would have? That is, other than a role that was intrinsically linked (e.g. siblings, lovers, lyncher/lynchee). Is that what you were implying?

I wanted to know if BB/camn's role might have provided any explanation to BB's peculiar behavior. But I think your comments here have flown under the radar. Once again you bring up role/setup speculation, as you have throughout this game causing distractions.

FoS: Walnut

Lets take a hard look at NetLava for a couple days.. simply because he is our vote-leader right now.
Let's not get distracted by other accusations for a little bit, until we are satisfied.

I know you later clarified this as too many conversations at once were confusing, but as others have stated if we just focus on Netlava, based on his playstyle, he'll get himself lynched.

I don't really see Netlava's case on LG. I honestly interpreted LG's post as "Let's give him a chance to defend himself before lynching him."

My opinion on Netlava hasn't really changed, more of Netlava being Netlava. I agree that his weak cases and flip-flopping on Riot are suspicious, but as I've stated before, it fits his playstyle whether he's town or scum. I don't think that makes him unlynchable however, I just think we should look for other scum and revisit him based on his actions a little later in the game.

I like Mac's suspicion of Batt, Walnut, and Riot, as both Batt and Walnut were already high on my list. All are currently suspicious of Netlava, two of which are currently voting him. I would think as scum Netlava would make a good first target because of his playstyle.

Concerning LG, the only reason I saw for him to bring up the SK was at the beginning when people were speculating on the amount of scum. He said, from memory, either 3 scum or 2 scum and a SK. Then people started questioning him and made him bring it up more. Shadowgirl is the 3rd most protown player on your list (3rd from bottom), do you feel lack of beneficial posts gives her more protown credability than someone who has posted a lot, but made a few posts that could be interpreted scummy?

I placed SG low because I don't have much to go on her either way. She should probably be looked at for lurking, however, I played in the recently finished Newbie 610 with her, and she probably could have been qualified as a lurker there as well (she turned up town.)

LG - I believe you said something to the effect of We should assume 3 mafia and 1 SK. I know you say you weren't trying to stir paranoia, but the way you said it made me think you were trying to do just that.

[Tinsley]

Maybe I should have been blunter, and just said that your question was at best meaningless and at worst scummy. Instead I tried to show why it was so, and you followed Macavenger's weak lead in saying that anything that provides context for the game is distraction.

I don't think the question to camn was meaningless. She has a little bit more insight to BB's actions than the rest of us, so she would know if BB's actions were role-related or not. Judging by her post 287, they may have been.

What? When I say it, it is cause for suspicion, but when you listen to what I say and paraphrase it, it is good reasoning?

I never said that your stance on Netlava was cause for suspicion, I and a few others have noticed that you have made several posts discussing possible setups and roles. How are these helping us find scum right now on D1?

Camn - Why are you considering claiming now instead of waiting until a possible lynch is imminent?

[Tinsley]

Post 183:

Maybe it’s me, but ShadowGirl, especially up to this point, was the town lurker, not Battousai.

In ShadowGirl's defense, I just finished Newbie 610 with her where she posted infrequently as well. She turned up town in that game. For right now I believe that it's just a matter of time constraints.

Tinsley

Post 61:

Seems unwilling to vote.

It was still early in the game, and I felt that neither of the people I FoS'd (you and Riot) were deserving of a vote at the time.

Post 179:

Seems to suggest that Netlava is unlynchable, this is bad, and nobody is unlynchable.

I said in post 285 that I don't think Netlava is unlynchable, but I don't think we should lynch him today. Even if Netlava is scum, he's got scumbuddies we can hunt. We can revisit Netlava later in the game based on what we find out about others and his posting history. If you have time LG, I think you should go back and skim the trainwrecked game. I really think it would make an easy D1 for scum to target Netlava because he has an aggressive playstyle, and tends to make arguments based on minute details that others overlook.

For right now, I would refrain from lynching the following people:
1)Camn - As others have pointed out, BB's semi-claim goes a long way proving her actual claim. Since I think most of us trust her at the moment, I'd like to see a list of suspicion from her.
2)Hadhfang - I don't think much explanation is needed here.
3)Netlava - I've explained this.

I don't think anyone is unlynchable though.

Walnut - What do you think of the proposed CF Riot/Battousai relationship? What do you think of Battousai's lurking strategy and the fact that he took it from a scum player?

[Tinsley]

Walnut - You didn't address my question about the Riot/Batt relationship.

[Tinsley]

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

Exactly. Walnut you continue to post useless content. I understand you defending yourself, but overall your posts have done little to help find scum. In regards to setup speculation, I don't believe you were directly asked questions, and instead of ignoring the questions, you answered them, distracting the town further.

Because Netlava is so close to a lynch:

Vote: Walnut

Netlava and Hadfanhg seem suspect to me, but I am getting the strong read off them that they just play Suspect. But I will watch them.

I think Batt is scummier....

camn - We still have over a week before the deadline, why do you feel the need to vote now? If you're not certain on Netlava, I don't think you should vote him yet. I agree that Battousai is scummier, and would be willing to vote him if we can get enough people to choose him over Netlava.

Tinsley pops up when his name is called

, and rarely otherwise.

Thesp - Welcome to the game. I'll admit that I don't post nearly as frequently as others do here, but I've also been busy, and as I believe farside said, the frequency of posts in this game is high and difficult to keep up with. Can you provide examples of me popping up when my name is called? Can you also give us reasons why you're voting Netlava?

[Tinsley]

ShadowGirl - What do you think of camn suspecting Batt most, but voting Netlava? Do you think Netlava's unwillingness to claim makes him more likely to be scum? What do you think about the case on Walnut, and charter's comparison of you and Walnut? We may be nearing the end of Day 1 soon, so it would be good to hear all your thoughts before then.

[Tinsley]

Because Netlava is so close to a lynch:

Vote: Walnut

That is a truly weird reason for voting.

Seeing as you and Netlava were the two leading candidates, and I felt you were scummier, I voted you in hopes of evening things up. Unfortunately it looks like my vote won't make a difference.

LG - Why the rush for the lynch? Mac already stated in post 444 he'd hammer tonight if no one else does. I don't like the fact you seem to be rushing it.

[Tinsley]

Batt - I'm not sure I understand your question regarding Mac/Walnut. Did Walnut = Lord Gurgi? If so, I have a problem with Lord Gurgi's post because he's urging others to change their vote, and he seems to have a problem with being in twilight. If Mac drops the hammer, it's by his choice, and he has made it known that he suspects Netlava.

[Tinsley]

Wow, I'm surprised to see Batt killed as he was one of my top suspects. However, I think there's a legitimate reason to suspect nearly anyone right now (I'm hoping to list those reasons later when I have more time to post.)

Does anyone have any ideas on why Batt was chosen last night?

[Tinsley]

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.

Voted Netlava - CFR, Walnut, LG, Batt, camn, Farkshinsoup, Netlava (Thesp did, but forgot to unvote, Macavenger was willing to)

CF Riot – Just on a quick skim, the tide on Netlava started to turn around page 7, and it looks to me like Riot started it. Riot was also linked to Batt. May have wanted to NK Batt to try to show he’s innocent.

LG – Still don’t like how he wanted someone to change their vote near the end of D1. Add that to the SK speculation, and the way he seemed very ready to jump on Netlava’s bandwagon just after CF Riot stated his case moves him up my list of suspicion.

camn – I believe someone speculated that Walnut could be the counter to her claimed role for scum. Could it be possible that her role is scum oriented? I’m hesitant to believe that though, because it seemed like BB was trying to draw scum attention with his soft claim. I still don’t like the fact that while she didn’t find Netlava the scummiest, she voted him anyways.

Walnut – I think everyone knows where I stand on him. Who do you suspect now that Netlava is gone?

Fark – Haven’t seen much scummy behavior from either him or farside. Right now I tend to trust him.

Those who ultimately did not vote Netlava – Thesp, Macavenger, ShadowGirl, charter, and myself:

Thesp – Voted Netlava, but did not unvote. Was that a mistake, or strategy? I’m interested to hear the result of his investigation. I’m also interested to hear who he suspects in Netlava’s place now.

Macavenger - The only thing that makes me wonder about him is the fact he’s still alive. I thought he would be the N1 target because he’s probably drawn the least suspicion. Not much of a case, but I’m starting to wonder about him. Now that Batt has turned up as townie, where do you stand on CF Riot? I also thought Netlava made a good point about the fact that he doesn’t seem as aggressive as he did in the trainwrecked game.

ShadowGirl – Still have a pro-town read on her for right now, but would like to see her participate more today. I’m interested to hear who she suspects now that the person at the top of her LoS turned up town.

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

Current LoS:

1) Walnut
2) charter
3) CF Riot

[Tinsley]

I am sorry that I was wrong about Netlava's alignment. I think I'm right about some other ones, though.

Also re: farkshinsoup, the way that farside22 did this felt markedly different than how others have done it - it felt deliberate.

Thesp, what is your opinion on Tinsley? How about on Charter?

I think Tinsley is scum. I think charter is pro-town and not thinking very well.

So you're confident that Fark and I are scum? Why did you investigate Batt instead of one of us?

[Tinsley]

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?

In the context of Day 2, are you still finding me suspicious?

When I first read your post 501, I really liked it, and wondered why you weren't making posts like this on D1. Then after thinking about it, Had/Thesp had been at the top of your suspect list all of D1, and you started D2 off by asking for his thoughts. After he provides a weak investigation story, you don't question him on it at all. Do you believe him? Same thing applies to charter. Bottom line is, yes I still suspect you, along with charter and Thesp.

On an aside, it looked like Tinsley (and/or others?) thought I had forgotten to unvote Netlava yesterday. I was out of town from Thursday afternoon on, but either way I would not have unvoted Netlava (making that moot).

I didn't mean you didn't unvote Netlava, I meant you forgot (or did you?) to unvote CF Riot before voting Netlava. But I can see how I worded that to be interpreted the way you did. You do realize you didn't end up voting Netlava in the end right?

I think Tinsley is scum.

Do you have any reasons to suspect me besides what you stated in post 389?

[Tinsley]

There are many posts on the past couple pages that are not in any way helping to lynch Walnut. This is very disappointing.

Nonvoters, get moving.

I don't understand the rush. Even if Walnut is scum, we still have his scumbuddies to find, and we can gain some insight into them before we make a lynch.

I'd really like to run up Farkshinsoup or Tinsley today. I do not mind the Walnut hate.

I'm still waiting to hear your case against me.

I'd also like to hear if anyone seriously wants to lynch me today.

I'm on the fence here. If you are in fact the cop and we lynched you, we'd probably seal our fate. But I can't get over the fact that you had the opportunity to investigate your suspicions, and instead you chose someone you had little info on (by the way, wouldn't ShadowGirl have been a better choice in that regard?) You think you're doomed to be killed eventually, so why not investigate the people you find most suspicious to be helpful toward the town?

[Tinsley]

ABWOP: I'm still waiting to hear Walnut's reaction to Thesp's investigation.

I'm still suspicious of him, but still less so than I am others.

Who are the others you are referring to?

[Tinsley]

Charter actually had two votes on him at the time.

Mod - I think you missed Walnut's vote on charter in the last vote count.

So I believe that means charter is at L-2 now right?

[Tinsley]

Stop stalling us and vote for someone.

Right, even though I'm still unsure between Walnut and charter, I should vote just because one of the players I find scummiest told me to.

I just reviewed Walnut's posts, and I'm not wild about his proposed lynch.

What made you change your mind on Walnut? I'm still waiting to hear:

1) Your case on me.
2) Whether the fact you forgot to unvote CF Riot before voting Netlava was intentional.
3) Your answer to charter's question on how you're so sure that SG is town.

As for Walnut vs. charter:

I went back and read Walnut's posts last game and found more of the same of what he's done this game (for example check out "Scumhunting for Dummies" post 118.) This made me lean towards charter, however, I don't like how quickly the bandwagon on him formed. I don't think Fark's case is that weak, but I do think LG deserves more scrutiny. It was a prime opportunity to jump on the charter bandwagon since the general (incorrect) concensus was that charter only had one vote at the time.

[Tinsley]

Stop stalling us and vote for someone.

Right, even though I'm still unsure between Walnut and charter, I should vote just because one of the players I find scummiest told me to.

I just reviewed Walnut's posts, and I'm not wild about his proposed lynch.

What made you change your mind on Walnut? I'm still waiting to hear:

1) Your case on me.
2) Whether the fact you forgot to unvote CF Riot before voting Netlava was intentional.
3) Your answer to charter's question on how you're so sure that SG is town.

As for Walnut vs. charter:

I went back and read Walnut's posts last game and found more of the same of what he's done this game (for example check out "Scumhunting for Dummies" post 118.) This made me lean towards charter, however, I don't like how quickly the bandwagon on him formed. I don't think Fark's case is that weak, but I do think LG deserves more scrutiny. It was a prime opportunity to jump on the charter bandwagon since the general (incorrect) concensus was that charter only had one vote at the time.

[Tinsley]

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

I did earlier in the game, and I noticed you haven't been as defensive as you were in the trainwrecked one (as scum.)

1) I love how eager you are to defend yourself. You need to die posthaste.

I'm just pointing out that since you've joined the game, you've been pointing fingers at myself and Fark without trying to build a case. If you're going to accuse Fark/farside for that reason, it's only right that we look at you for the same reason.

2) Nope, accidental. (Why in the world is this important?)

Because when I first realized you did that I thought maybe you were trying to see who would put Netlava at L-1 thinking that they dropped the hammer. But when D2 started, you still thought you had voted Netlava (post 500), did you not read the posts at the end of D1?

Regarding Fark/farside - Farside didn't post frequently, but as others have stated, she didn't appear to have time for the game. This makes sense seeing as she asked for replacement. Fark did make a case on charter and was only the second on his bandwagon. I don't think Fark's case was as bad as some make it out to be.

What do you think of Lord Gurgi? You never responded to to my question about Walnut.

[Tinsley]

Ok, so after doing a reread of the Walnut case I'm going to

Unvote

I agree with charter here, the timing of your unvote is suspicious. After the entire bandwagon on charter gets called out, you decide to jump off.

He votes Walnut, a vote that looks pretty useless at that point, put there more so that he can not be on the erroneous Netlava wagon. Also notice how sure he is that Net is town, and how he's willing to lynch Batt instead (there was no way that was going to happen either)

This is a fair argument to make against me since I made a similar argument against him in post 477, with the difference being that charter didn't supply much reason for believing Netlava. I'd stated my doubts about lynching him due to his playing style. This is speculation on your part.

I was hoping to draw up support for the Battousai wagon, I had my doubts on him, as did camn and ShadowGirl, I'm pretty sure there were others who suspected him as well.

I don't buy it. Your vote put Walnut at L-3 at a time that Netlava appeared to be at L-1. There was no way that things were going to get "evened out" and you knew it. I also don't believe that Walnut was the scummier of the 2 at that time to someone who was trying to choose between the 2.

This is all your opinion here. I voted for who I thought was scummier of the two. I didn't want to let my vote go to waste.

Comes right out of N1 with this big pile of WIFOM speculation. Also, here he does something that I've seen in other posts, namely putting questions out to everyone, which looks like it's supposed to spark discussion, but is mostly just useless. This question is particularly useless, as it concerns speculation on who would want to kill Batt last night.

Once again the WIFOM speculation was your opinion, but there were some that thought it could be useful. Can you give some examples of what questions I posted that were useless?

[Tinsley]

Take a look at how the voting shaped up before Fark changed his vote from charter to me:

Voting Walnut 2 (charter, Macavenger)

Both adamantly pushing Walnut's lynch.

Voting Farkshinsoup 1 (Thesp)

Doesn't see a case against charter, but is willing to lynch Fark or myself.

Not Voting:

ShadowGirl - V/LA until 8/8.
Myself - Starting to have doubts about either bandwagon.
CF Riot - Going to do a reread and then decide between charter and Walnut

charter 4 (Walnut, Farkshinsoup, camn, Lord Gurgi)

I think Fark decided he didn't quite have enough votes to lynch charter, so he decided to start a Tinsley bandwagon to appeal to Thesp. If he could get Thesp to vote with him, then he just needed two more non-scumbuddy votes.

Vote: Farkshinsoup

[Tinsley]

This is a thinly veiled OMGUS vote..

I understood it would look that way when I made the vote, but I feel confident, so I stand by it.

Yes, what a good play. I decided to get Thesp on my side, despite the fact that he's got me pegged as his top scum candidate...

But he's fine with lynching me too.

and so I took my vote off of the guy with 4 votes already and parked on the guy with no votes.

Here's the key to my argument. While charter had four votes on him, you thought you couldn't secure the final two votes necessary to lynch him, so you decided to make a case on someone who could. charter was tempted to vote me at the beginning of D2, so I think you thought it was possible to sway him.

You even conceded that I made some good points in your last post

Also, I craftily used compelling arguments.

I said you made one fair (not good) point, because you speculated that I knew Netlava was a townie, and I had made the same speculation about charter. I didn't think it was enough to vote him though.

[Tinsley]

Just so that we're clear here, aside from Thesp, who were my 2 scum buddies that would jump on your wagon? And who is the other townie (aside from charter) that I was counting on winning over?

Well I don't think Mac was about to jump on a wagon that you and Walnut were on, so I don't think he was going to vote me. But we all know Thesp would like to see me lynched. And if you are indeed scum, then I'm pretty sure LG is your scumbuddy. I'm starting to think that Walnut is your other buddy since you're so desperate to get someone other than him lynched.

Charter said at the start of D2 that he was tempted to vote me, so I think you were hoping to persuade him to vote me. With ShadowGirl MIA (you seem very more agitated than anyone else by her absence) that would have left just CF Riot or camn to drop the hammer (unless I was dumb enough to drop the hammer on myself ), and at the time you didn't know where CF Riot stood on Walnut, so you may have thought you could persuade him as well.

The key point is I think you believed you could get five fairly easy votes on me (Yourself, your scumbuddies, Thesp, and charter) when a charter lynch was looking like it wouldn't happen.

[Tinsley]

But your vote did go to waste. That's the whole point of my argument. Clearly you knew that it wasn't going to get Walnut lynched, so the only reason to put it there was to be able to point at it on Day 2.

You're right, I'm sorry, I should have voted for someone I didn't find scummy.

The fact that you made a point of calling out everyone who voted Netlava in post 477 only bolsters my argument

Uh...I called out nearly everyone in that post. I was trying to keep an open mind, and generate some discussion.

[Tinsley]

The timing of his vote. As I said, he had just been called out as scum by Thesp, and he believed (as did we all, I think) that Net was about to get the hammer.

What did I have to gain from voting Walnut rather than just not voting at all?

Further to my point about Thesp, since I was one of the people that he pegged as scum, I can tell you that I thought to myself, "This is trouble. This guy has Paragon of Mafia Hunters under his name." If I had been scum, I would really have been worried.

Actually I shrugged it off because didn't provide much to back it up.

Have you noticed how he keeps asking Thesp why he thinks he's scummy? Not aggressive, but insistent. I think Thesp has him worried.

I explained this in post 565.

[Tinsley]

Tinsley, I am not on your wagon, nor have I ever even voted for you. Are you so convinced that I am scum that you associate all possible evil behaviours with me? Don't believe the hype- I don't eat babies either

That statement was made under the assumption that you're one of Fark's scumbuddies. While you have stated you believe I'm pro-town, if you're scum, I could definitely see you jumping on my bandwagon to save your ass.

Fark - in post 624 you say that Mac makes a good point in post 622. Does that mean you're leaning more toward believing Walnut is scum, or that you're leaning more toward believing I'm town? Or both?

[Tinsley]

Walnut - You just used your own quotes to prove Riot and myself right. Look at your quotes in 463, 501, 522, and 544. You never questioned Thesp on his investigation while some of us found it scummy. You never provided your thoughts on it until later when I asked. If Thesp was your number one suspect, why did you wait so long to provide your thoughts on his investigation?

[Tinsley]

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.

[Tinsley]

I think charter summed up LG's play perfectly - opportunistic.

I'd be ok with either a Fark or LG lynch.

Camn - What players, if any, have you cleared and why?

[Tinsley]

charter - I have been suspicious of LG since the quick bandwagon formed on you on page 22. I even mentioned in post 597 that I thought Fark and LG could be scumbuddies. However, I'm starting to think it's one or the other, not both.

[Tinsley]

I don't have enough time to address everything that's been asked of me right now, but I will address the most pressing question:

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?

They've both done things that have piqued my scumdar, but because of their little fight on page 26, I'm starting to have doubts they are both scum. Because I continue to believe Fark wants the easiest lynch possible (notice he switched his vote back to me when my bandwagon started gaining steam) I think he's the best lynch, and that's where my vote is going to stay.

[Tinsley]

I'm just pointing out that since you've joined the game, you've been pointing fingers at myself and Fark without trying to build a case. If you're going to accuse Fark/farside for that reason, it's only right that we look at you for the same reason.

farside22 didn't scumhunt. Sorry, Farkshinsoup, that you inherited an already-caught scum role.

That’s the only reason you’ve given for suspecting Fark, so if there’s another reason, what is it? While we're on the subject, what scumhunting have you done?

What was your question about Walnut?

You said you weren’t wild about Walnut’s proposed lynch while earlier in the game you said you didn’t mind the Walnut hate. What made you change your mind?

Tinsley, what do you think of Lord Gurgi?

I don’t like the fact that he seems to just jump on whatever bandwagon is most popular. I also didn’t like how he jumped off the charter bandwagon after it got called out (as did Fark). But I would feel more comfortable lynching Fark.

Fark – In post 632 you said you were going to keep looking at me. Did you find something that made you want to change your vote back to me? You think that both I and LG OMGUS’d you, what made you decide I was more lynch worthy?

charter – You stated in post 608 that you think Fark is just a townie that is wrong in his assessment of the game, but your most recent post suggests that you think he could be scum, are you starting to change your mind on him?

[Tinsley]

So you’re voting me because I decided not to vote for someone I didn’t find scummy, and MY argument is crappy?

By the way my crappy argument/prediction is looking like it’s coming true. You’ve got your loyal followers (camn and Walnut) on my bandwagon now. With charter doing a reread, ShadowGirl set to return any day now, and Thesp more than willing to drop the hammer, it looks like you might get someone other than Walnut lynched. Nice work scum!

Walnut – What made you change your mind on me?

[Tinsley]

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

Post 573 was my initial reaction to Fark, at the time, I really didn't suspect him as post 565 says.

It wasn't until after post 573 that I started thinking about what had happened with Walnut/Fark's wagon on you, the fact that SG was going to be gone for several days, Thesp's assessment of me, and the fact that you had earlier said that you were tempted to vote me. It seemed convenient that Fark's reread resulted in (weak) evidence against the next easiest lynch.

[Tinsley]

You think I am Fark's follower? Please explain why.

That was in reference to you following his suspicion on both charter and myself. I don't think you're his scumbuddy, but I'm almost certain Walnut is. You seem suspicious of his bandwagon on me, so what do you think of Fark?

I don't want to lynch walnut today. There's reasonable doubt in my head that he's scum....Walnut stands a good chance of being scum.

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?

The reason I ask is that I don't think a deadline is necessary. There are six of us with votes on either Fark or Walnut. I think they're scumbuddies, and you seem to as well. I think it's just a matter of those of us suspicious one or the other getting on the same page. I'd prefer a Fark lynch and it sounds like you and Thesp would as well. Riot and Mac - What do you think of Fark?

LG - What do you think of Walnut?

[Tinsley]

That’s the only reason you’ve given for suspecting Fark, so if there’s another reason, what is it?

Perhaps you should answer these questions for yourself, and get back to me?

CF Riot already mentioned it, but yes this question was in regards to you saying you had other reasons for suspecting Fark. So what are they? I can't read your mind.

While we're on the subject, what scumhunting have you done?

Isn't that a question for you to answer?

I'll address it if we're both still alive D3. I think it would be a distraction now. We've limited the D2 lynches to Fark, myself, LG, and Walnut, I think we should focus on the four of us.

I'm still waiting to hear from LG on what he thinks of Walnut. It looks like Fark also missed Riot's question about what he thinks of Walnut.

Right now I'd rather see a Fark or Walnut lynch. I still have some doubts about LG.

[Tinsley]

Unvote: Fark

Vote: Walnut

Between Walnut and LG, I find Walnut scummier. I had my doubts about LG being scum because of his fight with Fark, but I need to reevaluate him since Fark's claim seems believable.

[Tinsley]

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? I've been thinking about this since Fark's claim, here's where I stand:

I now trust:
Fark
Thesp

I'm pretty confident in:
camn

That leaves:
LG
SG
Walnut
Mac
CF Riot
charter

I've stated it several times, but I'll say it again, I just don't think SG is scum. That leaves five people I'm unsure of, and I just don't see Walnut having two partners out of that group. It seems obvious if Walnut were scum, that LG would be his partner, but who would be the third?

I mentioned earlier that I thought that it was the scum strategy to target Netlava on D1 because of his aggressive play style. I've been rereading Mac since LG voted for him, and while Riot really got the bandwagon started with post 173, Mac put some heat on him even before that (posts 141, 146, 160, and 170). He places a vote on Netlava after Riot and LG have. In post 278 he unvotes Netlava because Riot and Batt, who he now suspects, are both on the Netlava wagon and Walnut is considering joining it. To be fair though, he did continue to mention his suspicion of Netlava, and offered to drop the hammer.

Netlava also pointed out that Mac's playing style changed from the trainwrecked game to this one in that he was less aggressive. Mac argued that he typically doesn't play aggressive, but he was just that confident he had found scum last game. After it was brought up however, Mac has been more aggressive.

A couple other things I found that I didn't like:
- I think he's been doing some buddying up in this game. He defended LG when LG was arguing with Netlava. LG even called him out on this. He's also been buddying up to me - see posts 603 and 726 - he gives his reasoning as "I haven't seen him do anything massively scummy, and I don't see him as tied to likely scum Walnut and LG" even though several here have found at least some reason to suspect me.
- Claimed to suspect Riot during Day 1 (even jumping off Netlava's bandwagon partially because of the fact Riot was on it.) Riot disappears from his list of suspicion on Day 2. He's replaced on Mac's LoS by ShadowGirl for her lurking even though in post 323 he defended her lurking as a case of not having time.

Unvote: Walnut

Vote: Macavenger

[Tinsley]

Fark - I think it's best not to discuss it so the scum have no clue what you plan to do.

Sorry, if you lynch me you won't be taking out a mafia roleblocker. Am I at L-2 now?

I probably won't be able to claim for about 16 hours. Should I go ahead and do it now?

[Tinsley]

Claim: Innocent Bystander (a.k.a. Townie)

If I get lynched, please put some pressure on Mac on D3.

[Tinsley]

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. It's wasn't enough to build a case on, and there were others I found more suspicious. When I was reading through his posts, it just seemed like he was trying to lynch the people with the scummiest play styles - Netlava (Very aggressive, uses small details like the word tempted as scumtells), Walnut (Doesn't scum hunt just like he didn't really do it last game), ShadowGirl (tends to lurk) - because they would be the easiest targets.

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.

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.

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?

There are a good amount of if's here. Why are you suddenly so certain that both Walnut is town, and that I'm scum pushing a wagon on him, rather than town doing so? Pushing the wagon of the person you find scummiest is not a scumtell.

There was only one if there, and that was in regards to charter's statement. My suspicion of Walnut mostly came from his history with Fark (both being on the bandwagons for Netlava, charter, and myself/Fark trying to get any lynch besides Walnut). While I don't think Fark's claim clears Walnut, it's made me reevaluate everything. 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?

The logic that takes Walnut out of the picture is good, but the detail that is left out is Tinsley himself should still be on that list of suspects.

Right. Obviously I know where I stand and no one else does. But I was expecting to be lynched (and still do), then I'll be out of the equation, and I hope everyone will keep this in mind then.

Tinsley, following your own train of thought, if Mac is scum what two buddies could you pull from that list?

It would have to be two out of: Riot, charter, and LG. Right now I'm leaning toward charter and LG.

Did Macavenger just become the vote leader? I do not like how quickly this thing is moving.

I don't really think the bandwagon got moving that quickly. It's three votes, and two of them were on Fark who just claimed doc.

I think we should mass claim.

I think that's a bad idea. I think we'd just get caught up in analyzing each claim trying to decide if it's a lie or not. How would you prove it? I think it would just be a WIFOM situation.

[Tinsley]

This is the manipulative post I was referring to (there could be others, I haven't gone back over Tinsley too thoroughly).

So you haven't gone back over me to thoroughly, but you're ready to lynch me?

[Tinsley]

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

vote Tinsley

Thus why I said it wasn't enough to build a case on. You asked why I was all of a sudden suspicious of Mac. That's only where it started. It's not what I based my whole case around.

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'm the manipulative one? You're totally twisting my words here and in the quote above.

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?).

Then as a townie isn't it your responsibility to put these ideas out there for consideration? Even if you had nothing else against Mac, shouldn't you have said something, or were you afraid you would get lynched?

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.

That's your opinion that NK speculation would have been WIFOM. I wasn't the only one who thought that it could help find scum.

[Tinsley]

Since I still have a little time before I get lynched, I'm going to put together some cases on the others I'd like to see targeted tomorrow. They may be coming in pieces as I have time. I'm starting with charter, then either LG or Riot.

[Tinsley]

Charter analysis - First 10 pages. I'll work on the rest as I have time. I'm hoping to finish my charter analysis later this afternoon.

Posts 20-22: I think we all know about this series. Assumes 3 scum, then calls CF Riot out for making the same assumption in his stat about Had.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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

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.

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

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?

Rich

Don't worry, you're safe today. I'm not so sure about D3 though.

[Tinsley]

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.

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.

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?

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?

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

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.

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?

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

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 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.

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.

[Tinsley]

Sorry I'm nowhere near finishing my charter reread (I've had a busy afternoon). I'll try to get more tonight but can't promise anything. If I can convince more people to lynch charter, I'll switch my vote to him.

[Tinsley]

Riot - I hate to sound like Netlava here, but the way you brought it up sounded like you didn't find it suspicious. Charter said he was going to do a reread and remove any bias on Netlava, then returned with nothing on Netlava, which seems pretty suspicious to me. But thanks for reading all that. I've put a lot of work into this and it kind of sucks I'm not getting any response at all.

Anyways I could only get through page 20 tonight I'll try again tomorrow.

@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.

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?

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.

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?

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.

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

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?

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.

[Tinsley]

Sorry Walnut, all I can say is that I overlooked it before. I know it's a poor excuse, but it's all I've got. Honestly, having played in the trainwrecked game with Mac and Riot, I think I had a bit a bias towards them because I like the way they play the game. So I believed their arguments towards you being scum, and charter being townie.

If it will help convince people to vote charter now instead of D3, I'll go ahead and do it.

Unvote: Macavenger

Vote: charter

[Tinsley]

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.

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

Post 510 - Again singling out SG.

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.

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.

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 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.

Walnut is scum because he misdirects the town

rather than scumhunting.

Post 555 – Oh the irony!

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

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

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.

Post 569 – Charter again defending me.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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?

[Tinsley]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

@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.

@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?

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.

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

Post 716 – You have VOTED four people. Four!

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.

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.

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.

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'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.)

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.

[Tinsley]

Charter - I presented several cases where, in my opinion, you contradicted yourself, misrepresented the comments of others, and cast suspicion on everyone but Mac and Riot. If you choose to defend yourself by saying that none of what I posted was scummy, that's fine. I'll leave it up to everyone else to decide that.

It's looking pretty clear that I'm going to be the lynch for today, so I'm putting all of my thoughts out there before I can't post anymore. I don't have time to get into a petty argument over whether or not any of that is scummy.

I'm going to start working on a CF Riot reread tomorrow.

[Tinsley]

Tinsley what made you decide Charter was more likely scum than Mac?

I changed my vote to charter because the Mac wagon wasn't going anywhere. I doubt it will change anything, but I will vote any of charter, Mac, or Riot if we can get enough for a lynch on any of them. I will only vote Walnut, LG, or SG if it will keep me from being lynched at deadline.

Sorry, no reread on Riot yet. I've been too busy today.

[Tinsley]

So it turns out that I normally kind of skim past vote counts, as I have a good memory and generally keep a pretty good handle on who's voting for whom without needing a reminder. As such, at the time of my last post, I was actually unaware that a deadline had been implemented.

You weren't the only one to miss the deadline.

Tinsley what do you mean the Mac wagon wasn't going anywhere? He got 4 votes pretty quick. And also, why would you vote me before Walnut?

I have had suspicions of Mac, and could vote for him, but if I do that now Tinsley would hop on and I suspect someone like Camn (based on her last post) would hammer.

Riot - Yes the Mac wagon picked up steam quickly...then stalled while I was sitting there at L-1. I didn't see it happening, so I decided to try charter instead. I'd be willing to lynch you over Walnut, because as I was rereading through Mac and charter's cases, I started to suspect you could be working with them.

Walnut - If you're concerned about me jumping onto the Mac wagon after you vote him, of course I would. I'm not going to let myself be lynched. I appreciate you taking your vote off of me so I could post my thoughts. I'll switch my vote to Mac, and leave it up to you and camn (since it appears the two of you are my only hope).

Unvote: charter

Vote: Macavenger

Still planning on getting to a Riot reread later today.

[Tinsley]

I was planning on trying to post all of my Riot analysis at once, but since I'm back at L-1, I'm going to post it as I go along. Here's the first 10 pages analysis:

Riot started with the day with the probability of Had getting a scum role two days in a row. Many of his early posts are spent discussing it. It doesn’t need to be discussed further. I think someone mentioned it’s a null tell either way, and probably is.

Post 52 – Generates more discussion of roles by asking about other 3rd party roles besides SK.

Post 64 – More role speculation.

Post 71:

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

Fake breadcrumb or not? I'll get back to this later.

Post 78 – More discussion on his stat.

Post 80:

Wow thanks. I didn't think of protown roles accidentally appearing 3rd party. That makes sense. *standing corrected*

Ok Walnut so far no real vote input from you. Any suspects whatsoever?

More 3rd party role discussion. This is the first time that anyone has called Walnut out for no real input, and yet at this point Riot has called Batt shifty and that’s about it.

Post 99 – Finally he provides an opinion on Had’s vote on charter, 48 hours after it occurred (he made three posts before giving an opinion – after hadhfang reached 5 votes and claimed cop). He claims he interpreted as Had voting charter for bringing up SK speculation and [Riot] is confused because LG clearly brought up SK speculation first. Riot – Why didn’t you ask him to clarify the statement then?

Post 111 – Defends charter in regards to his triple post about the statistic. Also questions why we would lynch BB after charter votes him for his semi-claim.

Post 139 – He’s much more vocal here about not lynching BB after Walnut mentions that he might vote BB if he doesn’t get a replacement.

Post 149 - FOS’s Walnut for his suspicion of BB.

Post 157 – Continues his suspicion of Walnut. Also suspicious of Netlava for suggesting lynching a claimed cop.

Post 173 – After Netlava votes Riot in post 169, Riot does an investigation on Netlava resulting in a vote for him (OMGUS?):

Still questioning me, now about other players actions instead of my own. Makes a short comment on Charter voting for BB, but does not question him. (Remember, since post 46 Netlava had been voting Charter, not me. This is the first post since then that he even addresses Charter directly.)

Riot also made a short comment on charter voting BB, but doesn’t question him either. I know you didn’t have a vote on charter at the time, but you chose not to question charter on voting BB for his claim, but did question Walnut for considering voting BB.

Regarding the “apple comment”:

If there is no scenario or reason for a REAL doc to ever breadcrumb, why then would that be a tactic a scum would try? It seems like breadcrumbing as a doc must be a legitimate play in order for faking it as scum to also be legit.

We’ve now seen a case where a doc did breadcrumb. I don’t know whether your apple comment was just joke, or if it was a possible fake breadcrumb, but Netlava’s case here doesn’t seem so farfetched anymore.

Post 243 - Disappears for a week (to be fair that was 7/1 – 7/8 so I somewhat see why he wasn’t around, but why no V/LA warning?). Calls out Netlava for waiting so long to respond to Riot’s post (already been mentioned by LG and Batt). States that he’s still suspicious of Walnut.

In regards to why Netlava couldn’t be a tunnel-visioned townie:

The just the fact that he has, but the way he has singled me out along with his other actions make me think it's far more likely he is scum.

That’s a little vague. How was the manner in which he singled you out scummy? Also defends Mac in this post.

[Tinsley]

Ok, we're deadlocked at 5 votes apiece here, so let me throw this out there. Is there anyone voting me that would even consider changing their vote to Mac (I'm looking at you camn). If not I'll save everyone a couple days and self hammer, unless anyone has any objections. I'm not sure I'll have the time to finish an analysis on Riot, and frankly, I'm having a hard time staying focused reading through all of those long posts.

I'd post a summary of why I think Mac, charter, and Riot are scum before I drop the hammer. Let me know what you guys think, and we can probably have this excruciatingly drawn out day done within 12 hours.

[Tinsley]

What would I have to gain by bluffing? As it stands right now I'll be lynched unless something changes in the next couple days. I can save everyone some time.

[Tinsley]

Charter - I claimed in post 827.

I'm still working on that Riot reread, but I just found something in post 514 that has completely thrown me off.

This is the post where Had claimed. Notice that he said "unknown sanity". If this was a fake claim, it's a good move because 1) if there was a sane cop in the game, they would not counter claim, and 2) the unknown sanity part keeps him from being lynched. If he had said that he thought he was paranoid, he'd have probably been strung up.

So then why would Thesp further clarify the claim to say that it's most likely paranoid? If he was scum, what would he have to gain by that, especially considering he suspiciously investigated Batt? Thesp, could you elaborate at all about how you came to the conclusion that you are paranoid and not simply of unknown sanity?

For now,

FoS Thesp

.

So you FOS'd someone you knew was town?

[Tinsley]

I'll

unvote

as well to make sure Mac doesn't get lynched before we hear from Fark on this.

[Tinsley]

Why would a weak doc suspect a claimed cop he knew for a fact wasn't scum?

[Tinsley]

You never addressed this, Tinsley, because I ended up switching my votes about a jillion times and stopped asking, but could you please now explain how it was you came to make this horrible argument coupled with your blatant OMGUS vote?

I addressed it in post 597.

So the guy was voting me, and was claiming that he was a cop of undetermined sanity who just happened to investigate the dead guy. If I had not had knowledge that he was actually telling the truth, this would have definitely warranted an FoS from me. So that's what I did. If I had just given him a pass, it seems to me like I might as well have hung a sign around my neck saying "Hey scum, power role over here!."

That's a craptastic justification. Just because he voted you doesn't mean you have to indicate suspicion of him. As for his investigation, while Riot and I found it questionable, there were others that trusted it, so you weren't exactly going along with the crowd. If you knew Thesp was telling the truth, then wasn't it your responsibility to not bring suspicion onto him?

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).

I unvoted Mac for two reasons:

A) I didn't want someone to jump on his bandwagon after you unvoted me, ending D2 before we could discuss this.
B) I'm no longer leaning toward Mac being scum.

Which leads me to:

Tinsley if you are going to continue your case of me that's fine but I'd like you to respond to my defense if that's the case. I had 2 questions to you in my last post, aside from the general "this is why you're wrong" type statements.

I'm dropping the case on Riot. My whole case on Mac, charter, and Riot was that they seemed to be targeting the players with the scummiest playstyles - Netlava (charter didn't target him) and Walnut, and the fact that they rarely indicated suspicion of each other. The whole case was based on the fact that I thought Fark was town, but I don't see it that way anymore.

I'd like to ask everyone where they stand on Fark (scum or town)?
Charter, Thesp, Camn - If you think Fark is scum, why would you join a bandwagon he's leading?

[Tinsley]

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.

I still have some doubt on LG. Since we're letting Fark live, I'd prefer a Walnut lynch since he seems like the most likely partner for Fark.

[Tinsley]

Vote: CF Riot

I could go back and finish my PBPA on him, but I don't think anyone's interested. Bottom Line: I thought Riot's play mirrored Mac's through D1 and most of D2. On D1 Mac voted Walnut while helping to push the Netlava bandwagon. Meanwhile Riot voted Netlava while helping to push the Walnut wagon. Both came in on D2 pushing hard for a Walnut lynch. Both refused to vote me while the rest of the town was suspicious of me.

I think the fact that they started pointing fingers at each other toward the end of D2 was just distancing.

Fark - Who did you protect last night?

[Tinsley]

Tinsley if you were right (you're not) who would be my buddy? Still Charter? The only thing I can say for my play being mirrored by Mac is just that. Look at the sequence of events. My actions were never following his, always the reverse. I'm assuming he put his support behind the strongest arguments given because they had the most potential to gain support.

Still leaning toward charter, but the timing of his vote on Mac has me a little perplexed. It did not seem to me that Thesp, Fark, or Camn were going to change their vote from me to Mac. If charter is in fact Mac's scumbuddy, I would think he would keep his vote on me in that situation, and let me be lynched at deadline. I haven't ruled LG out as a scum candidate, I just think charter's play has been scummier.

In regards to "your actions never following his", I disagree. While your vote on Netlava (Post 173) on D1 was the first on the bandwagon that got him lynched, Mac had been casting suspicion on Netlava since at least Post 141.

[Tinsley]

I understand the bussing theory, but I just don't see why scum would unvote a townie who's likely to be lynched, just so they can lynch their buddy.

As far as the unvote on Mac, I started having doubts about him after I found Fark's FOS on Thesp to start D2. I didn't want Fark to vote Mac while he was sitting at L-1, and shut down all conversation on that evidence until D3.

[Tinsley]

While I agree that if the person Thesp investigated is about to be lynched, then he should stop us. But I think Thesp's reason for keeping his investigation quiet is so that person lives through the night. If that's the case, then I agree with his reasoning.

[Tinsley]

I'm going to be out of town over labor day weekend. I'll have internet access, but my posting probably won't be frequent. I'll be back 9/1.

[Tinsley]

Good game Riot and SG. I was getting pretty frustrated with the lack of Riot lynching, but I wouldn't have been any help, I would have gone after charter next.

SG - Were you allowed to tell Riot you were the Usurper while Mac was still alive?