Mini 679 - BSG: The Basestar (Game Over!)

[andersonw]

Vote: iamausername

How dare you call me a toaster!

[andersonw]

I don't think I'm being impatient; in the 'model game' for not random voting, Newbie 465, people ask questions in their first post, even if it's as basic as "are you scum?" - and I can't see any reason to delay doing that. Definitely, if I were not-random-voting, I'd have asked a question or two by now, so I'm curious.

Are you scum?

[andersonw]

[offtopic]Does anyone else get the feeling that this is a large theme whenever they look at this thread? Or is it just me? (it's probably because of the fancy OPs)[/offtopic]

It usualyl happens when someone puts forth a solid vote with a solid reason for that person, which gets people talking about whether or not it is good or bad

Why did you answer a question directed at Awesome Pants?

In fact, I think he had a very good question there, and I'd like to hear some answers.

I would say that I am still voting for you because it still seems that we are in random voting. Also, I generally don't unvote unless if I think someone else is scummy enough for them to deserve a vote (or if s/he is close to being lynched and I want more discussion).
Also, were you deliberately exaggerating in the first part of this post? It seems like a bit of an overrepresentation or what's going on with KE now, although I agree with the general idea of it.

King Enigma - admitted activer lurker with his refusal to random vote?

I don't see how taking a "zen approach" correlates to being an "active lurker".

[andersonw]

ug...still have like 3 projects due Monday, I'll post few comments now.

First, I can understand Timeater's suspicions of Farkshinsoup, but it feels that some of his arguments against him are exaggerated, like his replies to the "Timeater vs. Tar" comment and the "jury's still out" comment.

I guess we don't really need a set of rules or anything that we can use to make emotionless lynches, but rather a rough plan of sorts to weed out people that are excessively lurking, or at least encourage them to post more. I hardly ever see lurkers get lynched, though I haven't really played in many games. Thoughts?

I think that's what mod prods are for, and if a lurker barely posts any content, he/she can always be replaced. There is also a prod limit for this game, so that already ensures consistent inactive people will be replaced.

BTW, this is my first theme game. Is it reasonable to ask how much knowledge a player has of the theme?

I don't see any rule saying that it's not reasonable to ask people any game-related questions. Although, I don't see how asking someone about their knowledge of the theme is a "serious game-related question". Also, what was the point of your post 112?
Another question: Do you think OMGUS=scummy?

What is your obsession with "fairness" and things being "even". This game is, at its core, full of unfairness. It's unfair when innocent townies get lynched. It's unfair when townies are set up by scum.

Ummm... First reading this, it seemed pretty clear that this isn't the definition of fairness Timeater was talking about.

[andersonw]

Another question: Do you think OMGUS=scummy?

Sometimes, but certainly not always. "OMGUS=scummy" seems like a cheap trick that scum can use to throw undeserved suspicion on someone. Case by case basis I'd say.

Saying someone OMGUS'd you when they didn't actually OMGUS you is scummy. It's using a codeword to link someone to scumminess when they don't particularly deserve it. (May or may not apply in this case, as my re-read left me a bit undecided. I may have over-reacted when I saw that Tim hadn't actually had a vote anywhere when he pulled the OMGUS card.)

In this post, it's very strongly implied that you think OMGUS automatically is scummy, since you said that OMGUS was a "codeword to link someone to scumminess". Explain?

[andersonw]

What I meant by "codeword" is that, again from what I can tell, many or at least some players think that OMGUS=scummy, or at the very least OMGUS=scummier. Thus by calling someone's vote OMGUS when it isn't is an example of said craplogic. Please note in my second quote "when they didn't actually OMGUS you". That is a qualified statement and clearly doesn't apply all the time.

Thanks for the explanation.

Come on people this is an interesting game, talk!

Given what you currently know, do you think andersonw is scum? Please answer yes or no, and give reasoning.

Given what you currently know, do you think Timeater is not scum? Please answer yes or no, and give reasoning.

[andersonw]

Helo forbiddanlight, welcome to the game!

Timeater, could you just post (in reply to Tar's huge post) the few points you think are strongest in Tar's post and your response to them?
Also, you haven't responded to my post 162 yet.

[andersonw]

Grimmy: Could you answer the question I had in post 67?

Given what I've seen in other games I've read, I think it makes good sense to officially request a claim from any self-voter. How do people feel about this?

Why do you think this? Could you give an example of a game where it was helpful? Personally, I'm not sure if this is correct all of the time. Obviously, if the person was Natirasha or someone like that, it wouldn't make sense to request a claim, but in other cases, I don't see exactly why it would be a good idea (and if the person was close to being lynched, we would be asking for a claim whether he/she was voting for him/herself or not).

@Forbiddanlight: What's Fong's gambit (I can probably infer what it is, but more specifically, where did it come from?)?

[andersonw]

I would say that I am still voting for you because it still seems that we are in random voting. Also, I generally don't unvote unless if I think someone else is scummy enough for them to deserve a vote (or if s/he is close to being lynched and I want more discussion).

anderson, last time I asked, this was your explanation for your vote. What parts of this reasoning, if any, would you say still apply?

Well, I definitely don't think that it's in random voting stage anymore, since the game has (sort of) picked up, cases being made etc.
I don't feel you are that scummy either, but to me, no one else has been acting super-scummy yet, although that's probably because, I must admit, I haven't really gotten into the feel of this game yet. I will probably do an "active" reread during the weekend, or whenever I get my projects done.
And of course, you aren't close to being lynched, so that point still applies.

[andersonw]

First of all, sorry for not posting, I had a cold recently and could barely read, let alone make a decent post.
Just finished reading the posts I missed, still trying to sort out my thoughts on FoP, Elmo, Tar, etc.

Rishi:
I don't really like this part of your post 317:

That whole Elmo/forbiddanlight argument was a whole lot of nothing. If Elmo was scum, he'd be making newbie-level scum mistakes. And I don't think he'd do that.

You're assuming that Elmo isn't scum since he wouldn't be acting bored if he was. To me, it's just WIFOM.

@IAAUS: What is your definition of playing "by the book", regarding post 318?
Same question for FoP, I'm curious to know what both of you think by standard scum play.

More coming later

[andersonw]

To the best of my knowledge, I am not a cylon.

I can't really think about what to post on, could some people ask me some questions that I can respond to?

[andersonw]

Not to bring us back to page 2, but are you scum?

No

Real question: What do you think of either claim?

To tell you the truth, I'm not that sure of either one. I am leaning slightly towards believing Tar's claim, since he provided the breadcrumbs before it was even looking like that he would have to claim. I'll try to expand on this tomorrow, really exhausted/tired right now.

Any more questions?

[andersonw]

andersonw - Your vote is still on username, back from the random stage. Please explain this.

Also, I generally don't unvote unless if I think someone else is scummy enough for them to deserve a vote (or if s/he is close to being lynched and I want more discussion).

And IAAUS is not close to being lynched (I might unvote when it gets closer to deadline though).

On the claims: I am also slightly inclined to believe FL's claim, since we have already established that there are some cylons in this game. I also agree with FoP that we shouldn't completely base our suspicions on whether someone is a cylon or not.

Vote: Anderson. He seems to be posting just enough to stay off the radar, haven't seen much scum hunting. He seems to get out of the way when there's a skirmish. Need to do a proper re-read on the guy.

Interesting. I understand why you would think I haven't been posting that much, but I disagree with the "get out of the way" comment. I don't think I've been involved in any skirmishes this game, and if I'm not even involved in a skirmish, how would I get away from it? Could you provide an example?

@Elmo: Sorry, didn't see that. I'll have to think about those questions.

[andersonw]

Hmmm... I could have sworn that I made a post here yesterday.

unvote

Fark: Could you respond to the bottom of my post 465?

Still considering Elmo's questions.

[andersonw]

First, sorry for not posting that much, I should be better now because ultimate frisbee practice is over until spring. Also, I'm posting this at midnight, and my mother is yelling at me to go to sleep, so my brain is kind of fried.

Next, Elmo's questions (although it's kind of late).

andersonw: What do you think of Iam's play? Flask's stance on Macavity? Tar's jump onto me?

Currently not that sure. I liked his play at the beginning of the game, he was trying to scumhunt, and asked a bunch of questions that mostly seemed like trying to figure out something. I can provide examples if you want, later.

Okay, my mom's in my room, and she really wants me to go to sleep now, I'll finish tomorrow if I get home before the deadline.

[andersonw]

Also..

FoS andersonw

for not voting yesterday.

May I ask why this is scummy?

Finally, I'd like to hear from andersonw. It was obvious that either ML or KoC was scum towards the end of the day, but no vote at all?

I still wasn't sure who to vote, and I figured that ML would have been lynched anyways, so it wouldn't have mattered.

Also:

Since Fark's roleblock of me didn't have any effect,

Does this mean that you believe Fark's claim?

[andersonw]

Sorry.
(posting this to avoid getting replaced)
I'll answer everything tomorrow.

[andersonw]

You know, there were other people on the KoC wagon (including KoC himself - the only reason that I ever feel a self-vote is useful is if someone is scum wanting to end the day early to limit the spread of information), so I'm not sure why I'm getting so much attention.

Bleh, I don't like this, trying to get attention off yourself by saying that other people were also on the KoC wagon.

Because it's an obvious move to avoid suspicion. If you jumped on the ML bandwagon, it might have been seen as bussing. If you jumped on the KoC bandwagon, then it would have seemed that you were trying to save ML. You took the "safe" approach instead, which is why it seems scummy.

I'm sorry, but this doesn't make much sense to me at all. I could use your same logic to say that everyone that voted or didn't vote is scummy. It "might" have been seen as bussing, but clearly, it wouldn't have been. If I was scum, and it was clear ML would have been lynched anyway, what's the point in not voting for him?
And how safe is the "safe" approach if it causes people to be suspicious of me? (WIFOM, I know...)

And FoS andersonw. Anderson, who is your top scum candidate right now? Doesn't have to be 100%, but I want to hear you express a firm opinion on someone.

Rishi is the only person that has stood out to me so far, so he would be my #1 right now.

Also... @Andersonw do YOU believe Fark's claim?

I'm leaning towards yes, mainly because ML did post a case against and voted for Fark sometime day 1, and it seemed very genuine to me (i.e. not distancing).


(sorry if this post is confusing, I'm kind of in a "stream of consciousness" mode right now)

[andersonw]

Rishi, could you respond to KoC's post 712?

[andersonw]

What is there in 712 to even respond to?
Why would you stand on such a thin, thin, point?
Do you also want a "counter claim" to Fark? (as if this is an open setup!)

1. Rishi made a point against KoC and asked him a question, and in his post 712, KoC responded. In Rishi's next post, two days later, he didn't respond to it, which could mean that he either didn't read KoC's post or wasn't pushing the case any further (which was very unlikely). (and questions aren't the only thing to respond to).
2. Huh?
3. No, because it still wouldn't confirm Rishi as scum or town either way, and it would out a possible power role.

[andersonw]

OK, then.

anderson, Could you respond to Rishi's 746?

Could you explain your second question?

Also, by "respond", do you mean "give my opinions"? (since as KoC already said, it was directed at him).

[andersonw]

anderson asked Rishi a question in 737, which Rishi responded to in 746.. in anderson's next post, many days later, he didn't address it, which means he either didn't READ Rishi's post, or just wasn't persuing the case any further.

Either way, andersonw is At BEST very lazy, and at worst very scummy. Oh, and questions aren't the only thing to respond to!

...
I asked Rishi to respond to KoC's post...
So he did...
How do I address the fact that he responded to KoC? Do I say "thanks" or something?

Now, addressing the content of Rishi's post is a different matter, so do you want me to respond to what Rishi actually said to KoC? In that case, if you accuse me of being lazy for not responding, then everyone else (besides KoC), including you, would be lazy for not responding.
(also, could you answer my two questions from my previous post?)

[offtopic]And thanks for the sarcasm. It obviously gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside. [/sarcasm]

[andersonw]

...
I asked Rishi to respond to KoC's post...
So he did...
How do I address the fact that he responded to KoC? Do I say "thanks" or something?

My point is this.....
You mimic Rishi in this case.
Rishi called out KoC.. and CORRECTLY, I might add.
KoC responded.
then you, out of basically nowhere.. ask Rishi to respond to KoC's response. Did YOU want HIM to say "thanks" or something?
KoC later ADMITTED that it was bad play to ask for the claim.. so the question, (#2) stands... what were YOU thinking calling Rishi out like that? You never responded when he addressed it.
I read it is classic scum distancing.
You see a case on your buddy popping up, so you try and "get in" on the hunt by latching on to KoC's case. the problem is this: is was a poor point. Rishi was CORRECT in calling out KoC for fishing. you picked the wrong point to latch on to.

How is asking someone to respond to someone's point considered as attacking them?
It doesn't matter whether it was a bad point or not. The point (no pun intended) is that KoC responded to Rishi, and Rishi made a post two days later without responding to his post, so I wanted to know what he thought about it.
Also, "classic scum distancing"? What does that mean? That this has happened before and the person who did it turned out to be scum?
I'll get to the rest, and give my thoughts on his post, tomorrow (I do see a rhetorical question in your post, thanks for that).
It would also be good if Rishi could give his opinions on this. Were you planning on making more posts against KoC?

[andersonw]

How is asking someone to respond to someone's point considered as attacking them?

Did I say it was? More importantly.. WERE YOU? Were you or weren't you attacking Rishi? Do you or don't you think he is scum?

Yes, you implied it by saying I was trying to "get in on the hunt" and I was "calling Rishi out"
No, I was not (that is also implied by the fact that I asked the question). I have already explained why I asked the question in post 754.
Yes, I think he is scum (I have already said that before, though, but apparently, you didn't see it)

It doesn't matter whether it was a bad point or not. The point (no pun intended) is that KoC responded to Rishi, and Rishi made a post two days later without responding to his post, so I wanted to know what he thought about it.

And I want to know what YOU think about it. But you don't have an opinion, I guess.

Well, if you want to answer for me, go ahead...
Please clarify what you mean (my opinion hasn't changed than in my last few posts).

Also, "classic scum distancing"? What does that mean? That this has happened before and the person who did it turned out to be scum?

We are playing mafia, right? (now THAT is sarcasm! ) Answer: YES. Scum have bussed their partners before. Scum have seen that other scum were going down, and tried to 'distance' themselves from the person...

I already said that I was not attacking Rishi by asking him to respond to KoC's post. You are saying that my post was "distancing", how exactly?

I'll get to the rest, and give my thoughts on his post, tomorrow (I do see a rhetorical question in your post, thanks for that).

You are welcome. Though.. I asked three questions, none of which you answered. Here is a fourth.. which question are you ignoring as "rhetorical" and which are you just ignoring?

I said "I'll get to the rest"
The rhetorical question was "are you scum, or are you scum?" (the last question of your post). I thought that the, "did you want him to say thanks?" was also rhetorical, because I didn't understand how it would make a difference.

It would also be good if Rishi could give his opinions on this. Were you planning on making more posts against KoC?

I, too, want Rishi to step up his game here.
And if KoC acts scummy, I will certainly make more posts against him. You and Rishi are acting MUCH more scummy than him right now, though, so I think I will leave him alone for now.

I was directing that question towards Rishi, about whether he was planning on making a post against KoC after his post 746 (notice the past tense).

You, however, I will not leave alone.
I ask questions for a reason. Sometimes they have easy answers.... like "yes" or "no". I ask them so that later, if you are scum, you will be forced to keep your positions straight. This is a common technique. When you avoid answering them, it looks scummy to me. Like you UNDERSTAND that what you write now may be used against you later.. and you want to avoid that.

Townies generally don't have this problem. They can answer simple questions easily.. . not worrying about how it might look later on.

I'll respond to this in another post, coming later.

So, for clarity, let me sum up my unanswered questions to andersonw:

1) Did YOU want HIM to say "thanks" or something? (re:737)
2) what WERE you thinking calling Rishi out like that? (re:737)
3) Which is it? Distancing or Faux-hunting? (these first 3 all go to the same question..... why did you post 737? What were you thinking? what did you hope to see? )
4) Do you have an opinion on Rishi's response? (you had enough of an opinion to ASK for the response...)
5) IS RISHI SCUM?
6) Why do you find it difficult to answer these questions?

1. No, I don't know why you would think that (what is the point of this question?)
2. already explained
3. This question is equivalent to "are you scum, or are you scum?". The answer is no (or neither).
(and I already explained why I posted 737).
4. I'll also get to this in another post (not now, though, my parents are yelling at me, and answering this question probably deserves another post anyways)
5. YES I SAID THIS IN POST 715 ALREADY
6. Loaded question (what is the point of this question, too?)

<whew>

[andersonw]

Oh, and

Vote: Rishi

L-1 now (are you going to call me on distancing if Rishi turns up scum, and wagoning+other scummy stuff if he turns up town?)

(btw, that was rhetorical)

[andersonw]

Actually, that's probably a bad idea, don't want anyone to hammer before Kison gets an investigation in, etc.

unvote

I also apologize for the pointless question in the last post, I'm kind of mad right now, as you can probably tell.
(and I apologize for the triple post).

[andersonw]

I think having more information about your #1 suspect is a good thing, including his opinions on other's posts (hey, this applies to you, too! )
Also, this may be semantics, but saying "I think Rishi is scum" is definitely giving an opinion on him (yeah, this is a pointless sentence).

NOW, you vote (then unvote) Rishi. With basically no reasons.

Basically no reasons? Can you read? (this question is rhetorical)
Do you think this is scummy?

I try not to IMPLY. I state things. Some times I DON'T state them. Your error is in interpretation.

My bad. I should have used a stronger word than "imply". You SAID that I was attacking Rishi by saying I was trying to "get in on the hunt" and I was "calling Rishi out".

http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... Distancing

And how is it distancing, when I wasn't attacking Rishi, just asking him for his opinion?

You used it as an answer to the same question. The point was to see if it made any sense as an answer. You seem to think it doesn't... yet you used it. Filed for later.

Sorry, but can't you tell when a question is rhetorical or not? (this is not a rhetorical question) I thought that it was pretty obvious that my question was rhetorical, especially with the rolleyes smily, but apparently, I should have explained it better (this is not meant to sound condescending, sorry if it sounds that way).

So what if it is loaded? It is very relevant. And unanswered still. The point, as I explained before, is to see what you will say. Not answering is an answer, too.

I do not find it difficult to answer your yes/no questions. I find it difficult to answer questions such as "what do you think of Rishi's posts" because they require thought, which takes time. I also find it difficult to answer loaded questions, simply because they are loaded.
Also, I asked you a question that you didn't answer. What is the point of this question? How is it relevant?

Okay, to sum it up:
You are basically attacking me for "avoiding questions", and making post 737. Is that right?





And, tada, here is my response to Rishi's post, which you will probably find very unlightening:

Okay, I'll respond to this. First of all, I will concede that you did not ask all power roles to claim, but all protective roles. There is a difference. But, even though you say that the purpose of claims was to verify Fark's claim, that's not what you said. You specifically asked for all protective roles to claim, not for a counterclaim.

I felt that KoC had already implied that he wanted a counterclaim when he said that in that context. I do agree that it wasn't a smart idea to ask for a claim in the first place, though. (Come to think of it, I would like Rishi to respond to KoC's post 751, too, especially the first and last points)

After people agreed it was a bad play, you IGNORED the issue. I don't see the difference between saying that you stopped asking for a claim and ignoring the issue. Maybe you could illuminate me as to what the difference is. People pointed out scummy behavior that you made and you never answer the questions. You either ignore them or act all incredulous. This means you're either hiding something or you're too thin-skinned to be playing this game.

KoC has already explained this, but my reaction to it was the same as his. Just because he stopped talking about it doesn't mean that he's ignoring the issue. Also, ad hominem attack at the end there.

And how am I saving my own skin? My lynch is nearly inevitable at this point. All I am doing is pointing out some of your scummy behavior so that when I turn up town that people might focus their attention back on you.

I don't like how Rishi just seems to be giving up here, although he's right that it does seem like he will be the lynch for today. This could come from both town or scum, though.

And, remember, this isn't the first time you asked for a claim. Maybe you think people have forgotten about this little gem here:

And for this, I agree KoC was pretty scummy for saying that, and I was pretty surprised when he posted that line, but I can see why he would do that if he was telling the truth (and obviously, if he was lying).

Overall, Rishi's post hasn't done much to convince me that she shouldn't be lynched today.

Happy, camn?


(apologies in advance for any typoes in this post)

[andersonw]

I figured that the mafia wouldn't kill. That being said, if we lynch scum today, we'll pretty much have a perfect game, which is pretty cool.
I would still like camn to respond to my post from yesterday.
I don't care if we massclaim or not, but I do agree with the beginning of FoP's post 803.
@FoP: Why exactly do you want to lynch me? Just because of the roleblock?

Also, anyone else find it interesting that Rishi and Grimmy are the same people? (except Grimmy is married).

And I'm just going to say this now: I slightly breadcrumbed my role in a post on day 1, but it was more of a bread molecule, so it is probably going to be pretty hard to find.

[andersonw]

Hmmm... can someone photoshop a Christmas hat onto my avatar? I'm too lazy to use GIMP right now, but I'll probably do it tonight if I have time

I'm not so willing to lynch Anderson on Frak's RB tonight, but it's certainly something to think about - Anderson has kind of slipped under my radar to some extent - does anyone know if this fits scum or town meta for him?

Honestly, I don't think I have a reliable meta yet. The only game I played in recently that ended was Dwarf Fortress, and you were in it. I don't think anyone else here has been in a game with me (except for this one, of course). Other games are on my wiki.

[andersonw]

Okay, sure.
Was my voting, then unvoting of Rishi scummy?
Do you still think I was distancing from Rishi, mainly because I asked him to respond to KoCs post?

Some new questions:
Do you still want to lynch me? Why?
Also, what do you think of the no kill last night?

Currently thinking of Patrick's plan, it seems good to me so far. It would also help confirm Kison as cop, because if he was mafia, he would have to keep giving innocent results or be screwed over, in the very likely case of 3 mafia.

[andersonw]

I did my really slight breadcrumb in post 186, if that helps (actually I'll give it away: it's in the first word of post 186. does that help anyone?).

why would scum NOKILL to frame anderson?
Why not just kill anderson? Like, at night?

If we mislynch me, then the scum could still get a NK in, but if they just NK me with a no lynch, then the parity remains the same.

I also am open to the idea that Kison is scum, working off a BRILLIANT fake-claim of Tarlahindur's. Or maybe it is a real-claim, only he is a scum-aligned investigator.

Just wondering, what is the point of a scum-cop?

I think you are a good lynch for today, even regardless of your scummy play yesterday. If you are innocent, it goes to the existence of another roleblocker or protective role, WITHOUT actually exposing that role.

And you probably know this already, but there's still the possibility that scum intentionally didn't NK. (which is still a lot of WIFOM)

[andersonw]

Okay, we are

not

confirmed masons.
The reason I didn't explicitly state this was that I thought Kison's investigation was enough to clear Grimmy, and I know myself to be town, so it would be better just to assume that we are both town. I'm not so sure about this anymore, though, obviously.

That being said,

vote: grimmy

, for posting on december 12 and yet not answering my questions that I asked him on december 10.

[andersonw]

You're not confirmed masons, anderson? Then in that case, why didn't you say that instead of riding along with Grimmy?

See my last post: I thought the evidence was pointing towards Grimmy being innocent (especially with the cop investigation) so it would be better for the town if they knew both of us were innocent.
It's also possible that Grimmy doesn't have a gun, but can kill in some other way (like with a spoon), I'm not sure of the flavor on that though.

Fullclaim? Everything that I know has been said already: I am Karl Agathon, and I am associated with the Fleet. At night, I can talk with Grimmy, who is a number 8 and claims to be Sharon Agathon. To the best of my knowledge, we're not lovers either.

And I'd also like Grimmy to explain this part of my last post:

for posting on december 12 and yet not answering my questions that I asked him on december 10.

[andersonw]

If Kison was roleblocked, wouldn't he have received a "no result" rather than a "non dangerous"? I'd like him to comment on this.

[andersonw]

@Grimmy: could you still explain why you didn't post in the QT, when you had like 3 days to do so? Also, could you explain why you thought that you would have been targeted tonight or tomorrow, and why you implied you would have died?

His belief that Farkshinsoup was guilty matches up with what he said in the quicktopic. However, he did not imply that he was forced to do a vig kill, he said that he received a vig kill.

And this

Would I really FAKE-claim that I BLOCKED out investigator.... who happens to have an innocent on me?

is some pretty crazy WIFOM.
I sorta believe your claim, though, it does provide a good reason for why there were no kills. Although, your reason for claiming human over cylon isn't very good, because as Elmo said, a nameclaim would have specifically have been avoided.

[andersonw]

I'll be V/LA until the 31st for vacationing in Florida. Don't know whether we will have internet or not.

[andersonw]

Well, this hotel has free wireless, but the cruise obviously won't, so I might not be posting for about a week.

Mod - can the scum withhold kills?

You should read the rules.

Currently, I'm still not sure on camn's claim, it does offer an explanation for why there were no night kills, but there's still the problem of having two jailkeepers and that she lied about it in the first. I think I'm leaning towards believing, though, but:

camn, you're basically saying "things went well, therefore I did nothing wrong" while ignoring the fact things would be going even better if you didn't lie.

QFT

Just had a thought. Maybe macavitylock was lying about being a jailkeeper.

forbiddanlight, I'd like to hear your reasons on why camn was harming the town by lying (not "preventing something better from happening", but "harming").

[andersonw]

Back.

[andersonw]

I'll get to this tomorrow when I'm home after the airplane ride, this hotel's wireless is very bad.

unvote

[andersonw]

Humph, the flight was delayed.

So, some opinions:
I believe that camn is town, for various reasons. Our argument at the end of day 2 was one main thing that made me feel camn was scumhunting. Kison's investigation is also fairly strong evidence. The only thing I don't like, as has been pointed out already, is the lying.
I have a question: If iamausername didn't call you out, would you still have told the truth if/when you claimed?

I'm not sure whether forbiddanlight is scum or not, though, and I still don't get why forbiddanlight is refusing to post a PBPA, since the majority are agreeing on it, I think. If both forbiddanlight and camn aren't scum, I can't think of who else it could be.
@IAAUS: Why do you think forbiddanlight is town? Is it just because you think camn is scum?


I also wouldn't mind no lynching today and having kison investigate forbiddanlight.

Happy new years everyone!

[andersonw]

Yay! Good job everyone!
I was probably was least useful town for my inactiveness, though. Blargh, after my newbie game is over, I'm probably going to take a break from mafia until summer.
I have to echo what fark and incognito said, it was really fun playing with such good players, who kept it interesting and, um, fun.

Oh, and I love you too Grimmy. <3 (is it okay with you to post the QT?)

P.S. Watch there be a day 7...