Mini #717 - Alpha Centauri Smalltown (Game Over!)

[farside22]

Is that directed at me farside? I don't think I understand you.

You stated that most found MM scummy compared to Grem. I looked at the vote count which at one point was a tie. The strongest person looking at Grem was you. Emp really didnt' say much nor did Cephrir who changed his vote. I'm noting that although the vote count is close I realize you are correct about people's push on MM versus Grem.
I think the votes between the two are weird. As the people voting for Grem really arent' making an effort on pushing him. I'm trying to figure which is the scum based on this idea.

[charter]

A large part of my suspicion of Grem was his repeated popping in but talking about stuff no one was interested in. I also think Gremwell more likely to be scum because I'm pretty sure everyone has said MM is scummy, but there are a few people who haven't commented on Grem hardly at all which is extremely odd.

Actually MM has some prime candidates for bussing scumpartners imo, namely Oman and empking. I don't think ignoring your partner is necassarily the most common scum move.

True, but bussing day one here doesn't seem like the greatest idea to me. Town is chock full of powerroles. From being scum in smalltown before, you can't afford to bus. I think the classic just not interacting with your buddy is much more likely.

@farside, that's the latest votecount you quoted. I still don't really follow what you're getting at though.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not scum, I'm town, so this whole train of thought is pointless.

[farside22]

@farside, that's the latest votecount you quoted. I still don't really follow what you're getting at though.

Grumble.
You stated that no one had a case on Grem. To me seeing 5 votes on a person is weird if no one on that BW is not making a case.
I'm commenting on the difference between 2 lynch canidates both at the time with the same number of votes one case stronger then the other.

[charter]

I said no one had a case on Grem???? Where on earth is that?

[farside22]

I said no one had a case on Grem???? Where on earth is that?

Hardly at all was the exact words. But again 5 people voting a tie vote how is it there is hardly anyone talking about Grem. I think the lurkers (less talkative one except you) are on the Grem lynch.

[charter]

Oh, I think there was a misunderstanding. I was saying that practically everyone has commented on the MM wagon. I don't think the same is true for Gremwell. But as for your point, I'd agree that emp and DP are less talkitive, and are voting Grem. I think both have givin their opinions on MM though.

[farside22]

I just think the Grem case is weak in comparision to MM.
Oh and yes MM we see you still dodging the points again and RR rocks for making those points the best.

[Oman]

If I wasn't sick of this day and almost sure that MM was scum, I'd be jumping on Cephrir. Tomorrow. lacking a better target through night choices, I'm jumping on him.

[ortolan]

As has already been pointed out, posts 329:

All right then...

Unvote: Occum
Vote: Gremwall

and 338:

All right then...

Unvote: Occum
Vote: Gremwall

Why are you in a rush to finish off this bandwagon?

I'm not in a rush, but there's no point in my vote going to waste and voting after he's lynched. I can't use my politician power until day 2, since I steal votes during the night, so you don't have to worry about that yet.

by MM re: changing his vote to me are scummy and opportunistic.

charter gets a good criticism of him in in Post 340:

I didn't say he was being incosistant. I know he's said he's suspicious of Gremwell. I just think it's interesting that he changes votes after the Gremwagon gains steam and without Gremwell posting. The only thing that's changed is that Gremwell has more votes.

I also note how his vote isn't necessary for a lynch yet. I took his statement to mean 'If Gremwell went to L-1 and no one else was suspicious, I'd vote Gremwell'. I can also point out his statements where he doesn't change his vote around unless the new person is scummier, it's just very hypocritical.

Doesn't really seem to want to further Gremwell's wagon, his vote is just on there because others' are.

More reasons MM is scummy:

289 by charter - Well, Gremwell isn't scumhunting and made up a retarted plan "to get reactions". That can still be paseed out as simply questionable play. MM also isn't scumhunting, tried to string up Occam and Ceph in a similar way, than attacked Gremwell for suggesting a variant of his own plan regarding Occam and Farside, then went overboard at the slightest sign of suspicion because of the apparant failure of his town act, which he keeps trying to reaffirm by stating how everything he did is obviously pro town and such. Also intentionally misinterperted and now ignores Oman's question. Since Gremwell also has a better role, I don't see why you'd rather lynch her actually.

charter has changed his lynch preference from MM to me in Post 353:

A lot of people are just saying 'Gremwell has a better town power, vote MM' or 'Gremwell did one scummy action, MM has done two, vote MM'.
I personally feel that first point is meaningless, and the second is just wrong. For some reason people are buying into both of these, when they are just not true. Also, most of the people voting MM voted him and just left it at that. That seems counterintuitive since MM posts frequently, but everyone voting him is already convinced he's scum and needs to die. I draw this conclusion since the people voting him aren't interacting with him hardly at all any more.

There are a lot of scummy things Grem has done. Never commenting on anything important (instead doing lots of setup speculation), the terrible idea and withholding opinion, his backtracking of this idea, his utter lack of scumhunting, and I feel Occam points out a good point in his post 320 where Grem contradicts himself (post 178 and 184).

Actually, I disagree. I indeed found that Posts 234 and 261 were the only notably scummy posts Gremwell made. They also related to the same gambit. The other apparent inconsistency was put forward by Occam in Post 320:

[80] Grem labels my L-1 vote as an "attempted self-hammer, which is just a distortion of the facts.

[178] Nearly 100 posts later, Grem says:

The self vote is a big red flag to me, if you're town and a wagon like that ran up on you in the first 3 pages and actually went to lynch whoever had the stones to hammer you would be soundly trounced D-2.

as for the BP being more dangerous as scum it's nonsense, aside from the vig and sk who wouldn't likely target him, its worthless for scum aside from the argument that it is such an asset for the town.

Paragraph one - yes, they would, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all.

Paragraph two - is first and foremost flawed, but... earlier, Grem, you said:

I would think that in this setup that scum would have a very easy time working around a BP and killing off more important roles like tracker, jailer, any that could potentially out them

So, what's the point? He is just saying if the BP is town then scum can work around him and kill the more dangerous roles to them. He is not contradicting the idea that the role is not particularly useful for scum. I don't like how charter has deferred to this post as an extra reason for Gremwell being scummy without actually analysing/referring to the argument contained therein, which seems very weak to me.

charter's further points in that post are all extremely general:

There are a lot of scummy things Grem has done. Never commenting on anything important (instead doing lots of setup speculation), the terrible idea and withholding opinion, his backtracking of this idea, his utter lack of scumhunting, and I feel Occam points out a good point in his post 320 where Grem contradicts himself (post 178 and 184).

I can't respond to them because I don't even know what most of them refer to. Again there's the "witholding opinion" accusation- I still don't know what this means.

2. Agree. I don't think MM even had a case on Grem till someone else brought it up, plus is vote looks more to save his own but then scum hunting

Yes, he spent all his time wagoning Occam before this.

3. Something in my gut say MM scum and Grem isn't but I really want him to reply to that post about scum doing more killing comment.

What's this?

I like MacavityLock's point here:

So anyone who doesn't want to bandwagon Gremwell is automatically scum? My policy is not to change my vote unless I think the new person I'm voting for is more scummy than the person I'm currently voting. My reasons for my vote are sound, weather you agree or not.

is directly contradicted not 20 posts later with:

I'm willing to go with the majority on Gremwell if we need my vote for a lynch, but I don't want to give the impression that I'm letting Occum off the hook.

279 is also clearly contradicted by the actual change of vote.

and here, re: self voting:

Self voting is scummy because the only logical basis for it is to gain town sympathy.

Town sympathy is not the only logical reason for a self-vote, though I don't particularly like them.

If you know you are town you should not be voting for yourself. If you are scum you should not be voting for yourself. In short, any self vote is scummy.

Hee hee.

Good spot, as the fact one has no motivation for self-voting as either scum or town does not therefore make it scummy.

Scumhunting is finding flaws and asking about them, trying to dig deeper into the game.

Well, I suppose some would try to find flaws in every single player, and some would try to concentrate on those they find most guilty. My playing style is the latter.

That's a nice euphemism for tunneling.

Grem: I want to know what made you say that scum has more killing ability in post 184

I don't see him say this in Post 184...

RR's Post 383 is awesome, I suggest you all re-read.

1. The main reason Gremwell is suspected is for trying to line up kills on farside and occam, creating a false dillema stating one of them has to be guilty. In 166, you did the very same thing, only a bit more subtly, with Ceph instead of Farside and a suggested sencond lynching instead of overnight vigging. Since the core of the idea is the same, what exactly in Gremwell's play do you find scummy?

He said he would not give his opinion until others did. Even though I have waited to change my vote to see if other players would be aggreeable to my attack on Occum, I have always been upfront about my opinions. Withholding information, even, maybe even especially your opinions, is definatley a scumtell.

Now I see where the "withholding opinions thing comes from (Post 242 by Gremwell/me). This is a *terrible* criticism, because it is 100% consistent with the idea that Post 234 was indeed a gambit- people always wait to gauge reactions (which is the whole point) when pursuing them. If anything it gives extra credibility to Gremwell's Post 234 being a planned gambit. It certainly can't be treated as an independent criticism from the gambit however, and as such it is scummy that MM and charter have tried to portray it as such.

2.And yet you moved your vote to Gremwell, despite explicitly saying you don't find him scummier than Occam, and even in fact that you'll be "glad to vote him if necassary for a lynch,

but certainly not as a threat

". How is this not a contradiction?

My opinion on Gremwell changed(for the worse), and I decided attacking Occum was no longer productive. I'm entitled to change my opinion, and weigh others opinions when appropriate.

And people are entitled to find you scummy for it.

If you are town, you do not vote for town(yourself). Occum voted for himself, meaning either he is scum or he has some alterior motive, and is just acting scummy. Either way, a scumtell

This contradicts what I quoted above from MacavityLock's Post 374, in which you also acknowledge that scum also have no reason to vote themselves. You've deliberately twisted around your own argument to make it sound more plausible here.

But it's really telling that niether Occum or Gremwell have voted for me, because they both know that if they hammer me and I turn up town, they will(rightfully) be looked on as scummy.

This makes no sense, why would Gremwell-scum not vote you and take the lynch for himself, rather than vote you as town, with the possibility he would look scummy (which he apparently does anyway) tomorrow. The additional explanation of his failure to vote you at this point is that he wasn't even around.

Now, either you think Gremwell is scum, or you think I'm scum.

Methinks the Monkey doth protest too much. When Monkey flips scum, I think there's a good chance that Grem is a buddy.

Even though in that case MM's pretty much spent his whole day bussing me after his case on Occam fell apart?

I would appreciate an answer from Grem if anyone is thinking of hammering I ask that you wait. In fact till I get an answer

unvote

grem please explain you scum nk's comment post 184

I'll need some help in seeing what you're referring to here.

Surprisingly I actually agree with a lost of MM's analysis in Post 424. I think as RR points out in Post 432 he may be classifying the actual towniest players as his "towniest", so that when he flips scum they will be implicated.

By post 441 charter now thinks I've been

way

scummier than MM. Interesting transformation of opinions.

I do think it's worth considering having the cop or mason target the bp tonight, though. If he's scum we lynch him, and if he's town he becomes useful to us.

I think the masonier targeting the BP is an extremely good idea actually, and would be happy to doc-protect the masonier tonight if scum try to NK him to foil the plan. Assuming I don't get lynched today I can at least be of some use before charter vigs me. Obviously it wouldn't clear the masonier, but it would clear the BP.

I point out that with Occum and Gremwell, two people I have pointed out as scummy, having not voted for me yet, and me being at L-2, that they would have enough votes by themselves to hammer me. Then Occum(predictably) votes for me, saying he wants to "see what happens", clearly implying that he wants to see if Gremwell will vote for me or not not. To me, Occum is trying to cover his losses, since he can always say voting at L-2 for a townie is not as scummy as voting for L-1 for a townie. In actuality, however, this seems to be a variation on appeal to probability, and nearly just as scummy as Gremwell's potential hammer(which can't be done now with Farside's unvote). In actuality, it might be MORE scummy, because it relies on two scummy actions, the vote itself, and the appeal to probability.

This is barely coherent.

Scale of 1-10, 1=scum, 10=town
MacavityLock - Foreman Domai, Roleblocker
(7) - Solid scum hunter

I am Monkey's 2nd towniest read. What does it say about Monkey when he says that I'm a "Solid scum hunter" when the only bandwagon I've been on with any conviction is his?

Once Yos2 makes his posts and Grem returns, can we just end this?

MacavityLock points out in Post 445 what RR earlier and now me have observed- MM is genuinely finding the most "townie" players, and one of the best criteria for this seems to be those who've attacked him the most. If he is town how could he find those that have attacked him so much townie also? Again, looks like an attempt to implicate them when he gets lynched and flips scum.

No more discussing vigs….we should be discussing how we are going to claim tomorrow…I think Dicecorn (Popcorn Dice) It is the most random so scum can not manipulate.

Claim? What is there to claim?

I do think it's worth considering having the cop or mason target the bp tonight, though. If he's scum we lynch him, and if he's town he becomes useful to us.

please lets not talk about night actions ANYMORE. The idea is out there. If someone wants to do it they will. But NO PLANS should be formulated today.

Actually in the masonier case there is benefit to discussing it beforehand, especially if the masonier winds up dead. Please now point out flaws in, assuming I don't get lynched, masonier targetting BP and me targetting masonier. The only flaw I can see is if I am scum then I could deliberately not protect and kill the masonier to implicate the BP. But I doubt I will survive the night anyway, and then you will see my alignment and know this is not the case. Either way, the only flaw is if the masonier winds up dead (which is a possibility no matter who he targets), and then you can openly speculate about whether the BP or me is more likely to be scum.

Really don't like charter's obstinence in Post 452. MM has acted so amazingly scummy all game, and Gremwell's scumminess is reducible to one sole point (and if you actually believe it was a gambit, which is especially plausible in light of the "withholding information" post, then he's really done nothing scummy at all).

MacavityLock in Post 469 gives more credence to the idea that I'm scum with MM, even though I believe he's now spent the majority of the day attacking me.

Oman explains in Post 479 that the popcorn-claiming refers to targets. Good.

Still think Posts like Yos' 487 are tunneling on *one* thing Gremwell did, which is entirely explainable if you buy it was a pre-meditated gambit. I have not seen any evidence there is more to the case against Gremwell than this one point, which covers all his "suspect" posts.

Why does charter change his opinion of farside between posts 485 and 490 even though she doesn't even post between these?

Empking's Post 497 uncritically jumps on the Gremwell/me wagon. I really don't like how so many people are happy to vote Gremwell based on what is reducible to one thing, without applying any critical analysis.

Raging rabbit: Can you explain why you think MM is scum, as opposed to just making newbie mistakes? I mean, reading back at your attacks on him; one point you raised against him was a "anti-town is not the same as scummy" theory debate, and another one was "You said had a policy and then you changed it" thing, and both of those seems more like newbie behavior then scummy behavior to me. Can you explain specifically what he did that makes you think he's scum?

Can you explain why Gremwell/me is more deserving of your vote, for one thing?

Ok I'm up to the present and I will reply to the responses to my first post now. Also, please discuss my doctor/masonier/BP plan. I'm starting to think it's not so good and I should just protect who I want to, but if town thinks it's a good plan I'm happy to go with it.

[ortolan]

See the parallel between this and me?

No, I see two different scenerios and you trying to say they are the same.

The point is that they are not the same. Originally you expressed reluctance to lynch someone so early and without good reason. Now you are happy to lynch me before I even post, which is especially worrisome when I dissected the case against Gremwell and saw how insubstantial it was, and how it mainly relies on reducing the aspects of his gambit into different points, when they are all the same.

This seems an odd thing to say “you are scum" and not even follow it up with more substantive argument for me/Gremwell being scum.

I overstate all the time.

Well, it wasn't useful anyway, because you didn't give any argument for why me/Gremwell were scum, even if your inclination towards us being scum wasn't as strong as you initially implied.

Why have I been boosted to number 1 since then?

Without checking reasons I already posted, some are that people favor MM's wagon over yours for what I think are invalid reasons, and Gremwell's 'gambit' and refusing to take a stance himself, even after it was pointed out he needed to.

You need to be more specific in the criticism of the MM wagon. I personally am very, very surprised anyone would find Gremwell more scummy than MM, especially considering how consistently scummy MM has been and how lurky overall Gremwell has been (again leaving aside the point that the case against him is ultimately very insubstantial). And the "refusing to take a stance himself" point has already been answered, and if anything is a point in his favour.

Why is the doctor particularly good at helping scum?

Kind of explained this already but, town doctor doesn't know who to protect, scum doctor does. The scum doctor will significantly reduce crosskills.

And as I already said, this is risky for the scum doctor because killing roles will know who the doctor protected if their kill does not go through on the player. Thus if I pursue this strategy and get lynched and flip scum I will implicate my buddies.

I question why all your points against me were never brought up before by anyone ort, why do you think this is?

Argument from majority? Because no-one else finds you suspicious, I shouldn't? And wouldn't it be very suspicious if instead of bringing new arguments to the table, I just parroted what everyone else had said anyway? I'm sure you would have readily leveled that argument at me had I done so, also.

I also will wait to point out why other points of yours are wrong until whoever you were asking answers. And since today is probably going to end soon, my top two suspects are ort then farside. MM is being moved way down, because once again, he receives a vote over Grem for a BS reason. Ceph essentially just lynched MM because unless ort is going to try and get me lynched, (I assume at least) he's going to vote MM.

Your persistent defence of MM (who you inexplicably changed your mind on since earlier) is a big reach, and doesn't assist in making me think you're less scummy.

A large part of my suspicion of Grem was his repeated popping in but talking about stuff no one was interested in. I also think Gremwell more likely to be scum because I'm pretty sure everyone has said MM is scummy, but there are a few people who haven't commented on Grem hardly at all which is extremely odd.

Maybe the case against Gremwell was much, much less substantial than you portrayed it as.

As the people voting for Grem really arent' making an effort on pushing him.

Because he hasn't acted sufficiently scummy, and then he disappeared.

I'm not scum, I'm town, so this whole train of thought is pointless.

Thanks for that.

I want opinions on my masonier/BP/doctor plan before I put Gremwell on L-1.

[ortolan]

EBWOP: Gremwell = MM

[Oman]

Makes a lot more sense with that last EBWOP.

[ortolan]

Well I'm hardly going to vote for myself, am I

[Raging Rabbit]

I heard that was an anti town thing to do.

[Oman]

So much lulz.

[charter]

I can't respond to them because I don't even know what most of them refer to. Again there's the "witholding opinion" accusation- I still don't know what this means.

Gremwell proposed the idea to get other people's opinions on it. He never gave his own. I think I asked him what it was and he still didn't give it.

Now I see where the "withholding opinions thing comes from (Post 242 by Gremwell/me). This is a *terrible* criticism, because it is 100% consistent with the idea that Post 234 was indeed a gambit- people always wait to gauge reactions (which is the whole point) when pursuing them. If anything it gives extra credibility to Gremwell's Post 234 being a planned gambit. It certainly can't be treated as an independent criticism from the gambit however, and as such it is scummy that MM and charter have tried to portray it as such.

I disagree. He could have still done the 'gambit' just the same and gave his opinion in the original post. Withholding his opinion (especially after being told to give it) was scummy because he was just waiting for everyone to weigh in so he could give his opinion after he knew what everyone else thought.
I think this point is further strengthened by him getting Fos'ed by everyone, then saying he didn't advocate it.

I think the masonier targeting the BP is an extremely good idea actually, and would be happy to doc-protect the masonier tonight if scum try to NK him to foil the plan. Assuming I don't get lynched today I can at least be of some use before charter vigs me. Obviously it wouldn't clear the masonier, but it would clear the BP.

Once again, I disagree with planning night actions. What if the BP and masonier are scum? Yay, two confirmed 'townies'. Making scum answer for their night actions will cause them to slip up. It WILL happen.

Why does charter change his opinion of farside between posts 485 and 490 even though she doesn't even post between these?

I thought farside revoted out of the blue, when her reason for unvoting before was to wait to hear from grem. I didn't see that Oman questioned her about her lack of vote, so it wasn't out of the blue like I thought in 485. (and I corrected myself in 490)

And as I already said, this is risky for the scum doctor because killing roles will know who the doctor protected if their kill does not go through on the player. Thus if I pursue this strategy and get lynched and flip scum I will implicate my buddies.

Lots of things will mess with kills. There will be epic WIFOM debates tomorrow.

Argument from majority? Because no-one else finds you suspicious, I shouldn't? And wouldn't it be very suspicious if instead of bringing new arguments to the table, I just parroted what everyone else had said anyway? I'm sure you would have readily leveled that argument at me had I done so, also.

That's just asking me a bunch of questions, it doesn't really answer my question.

[ortolan]

I can't respond to them because I don't even know what most of them refer to. Again there's the "witholding opinion" accusation- I still don't know what this means.

Gremwell proposed the idea to get other people's opinions on it. He never gave his own. I think I asked him what it was and he still didn't give it.

You need to refer to specific posts here, without doing so it makes it far too easy to get away with the weak case against Gremwell.

Firstly, I assume as I said in my summary post that the "withholding opinions" post is number 242. In which case, this is perfectly consistent with what he said in Post 261, about Post 234 being a gambit. But, unless I am wrong about what the "withholding opinions" point is supposed to refer to, stop attacking this as an independent point, as it is clearly part of the gambit. If you don't believe it was a genuine gambit, that's fine, but then be clear about it, instead of harking on about "withholding opinions".

Now I see where the "withholding opinions thing comes from (Post 242 by Gremwell/me). This is a *terrible* criticism, because it is 100% consistent with the idea that Post 234 was indeed a gambit- people always wait to gauge reactions (which is the whole point) when pursuing them. If anything it gives extra credibility to Gremwell's Post 234 being a planned gambit. It certainly can't be treated as an independent criticism from the gambit however, and as such it is scummy that MM and charter have tried to portray it as such.

I disagree. He could have still done the 'gambit' just the same and gave his opinion in the original post. Withholding his opinion (especially after being told to give it) was scummy because he was just waiting for everyone to weigh in so he could give his opinion after he knew what everyone else thought.
I think this point is further strengthened by him getting Fos'ed by everyone, then saying he didn't advocate it.

As far as I'm aware, he did give his opinions on what you're referring to, in Post 261. These were that both farside and Occam are probably town. Is this what you wanted? If not please be more specific about what he was "withholding opinions" on, and the relevant posts.

Why does charter change his opinion of farside between posts 485 and 490 even though she doesn't even post between these?

I thought farside revoted out of the blue, when her reason for unvoting before was to wait to hear from grem. I didn't see that Oman questioned her about her lack of vote, so it wasn't out of the blue like I thought in 485. (and I corrected myself in 490)

Why does being "baited" into a vote make her no longer accountable for it, in your mind?

And as I already said, this is risky for the scum doctor because killing roles will know who the doctor protected if their kill does not go through on the player. Thus if I pursue this strategy and get lynched and flip scum I will implicate my buddies.

Lots of things will mess with kills. There will be epic WIFOM debates tomorrow.

Fair point, but it equally applies to why a scum doctor might not be particularly additionally useful for scum- because there is a chance their attempts to protect their scumbuddies get redirected also.

Argument from majority? Because no-one else finds you suspicious, I shouldn't? And wouldn't it be very suspicious if instead of bringing new arguments to the table, I just parroted what everyone else had said anyway? I'm sure you would have readily leveled that argument at me had I done so, also.

That's just asking me a bunch of questions, it doesn't really answer my question.

But your question was pointless, all it accomplished was implying I was scummy via argument from the majority. By saying:

I question why all your points against me were never brought up before by anyone ort, why do you think this is?

You are implying that as no-one previously brought up my points, they are weak. Are you seriously suggesting this was a legitimate question? There are multiple explanations for why no-one else may have brought them up: I may be a more observant player than others in this game so far, or I may be clutching at straws with bad arguments to take the heat off me, or any number of other explanations may be accurate. However, whether anyone else made my points is entirely irrelevant, you should instead be assessing whether they are of merit. The fact you smugly suggest "hehe well no-one else thinks I'm scummy" isn't going to help the scummy reading I have of you.

I think the masonier targeting the BP is an extremely good idea actually, and would be happy to doc-protect the masonier tonight if scum try to NK him to foil the plan. Assuming I don't get lynched today I can at least be of some use before charter vigs me. Obviously it wouldn't clear the masonier, but it would clear the BP.

Once again, I disagree with planning night actions. What if the BP and masonier are scum? Yay, two confirmed 'townies'. Making scum answer for their night actions will cause them to slip up. It WILL happen.

Good objection, I shan't go through with the plan. As the alternative lynch is me, and as I may very well not survive the night (;)), I'll put my money where my mouth is and

Vote: MonkeyMan576

I hope my lengthy analysis proves useful should I not be with you tomorrow.

[iamausername]

"It is not uncommon to see patients undergo permanent psychological trauma in the presence of the Sphere, before the nerve stapler has even been strapped into position. Its effect on the general consciousness of the culture is profound: husbands have seen wives go inside, and mothers their children. Dr. Xynan left the surface of the sphere semitranslucent for a reason. You can hear them in there; you can see them. It is a thing of terrible beauty."

-- Baron Klim, "The Music of the Spheres"

-=Vote Count #16: The End of Day One Vote Count=-

MonkeyMan576 (7) - Oman, MacavityLock, Raging Rabbit, Occam, farside22, Cephrir, ortolan

ortolan (4) - charter, Drunken Piper, MonkeyMan576, Empking

Not Voting (1) - Yosarian2

7 to lynch.

The atmosphere is tense as the twelve faction leaders gather. With the rumours of a secret alliance going around, accusations fly far and wide to begin with, but after some time, most of the suspicion ends up pointed at two; Lady Deirdre Skye and C.E.O. Nwabudike Morgan.

While Skye goes very quiet in response, Morgan protests his innocence loudly and repeatedly to anyone who will listen. Then Lady Skye pipes back up again, seeming almost to be reborn, and the Council reaches an accord. Morgan is lead away to the Punishment Sphere, still protesting that this is preposterous, and that nobody has a shred of evidence to implicate him, but it falls on deaf ears.

The Sphere leaves him a gibbering wreck, mind shattered, and through the torturous process, the Sphere operators are able to determine that Morgan's protests had been perfectly true. He bore no ill intentions towards the others.

Their mistake hanging over them, the remaining eleven head back to their central bases to recuperate, fearing what the coming years may bring.

MonkeyMan576 - C.E.O. Nwabudike Morgan, Politician (Isolationist) - Sent to the Punishment Sphere Day 1

-=It is now Night One. Please send all night actions in as swiftly as possible.=-

[iamausername]

"Let the Gaians preach their silly religion, but one way or the other I shall see this compound burned, seared, and sterilized until every hiding place is found and until every last Mind Worm egg, every last slimy one, has been cooked to a smoking husk. That species shall be exterminated, I tell you! Exterminated!"

-- Academician Prokhor Zakharov, Lab Three aftermath

---

In the years following the first Planetary Council meeting, the human race's apparently unlimited capacity for self destruction showed no signs of abating, which has led to the second meeting having rather diminished numbers.

First, Comissioner Lal's dedication to upholding the original U.N. Charter set out at the launch of the starship

Unity

, despite her crew's split, came to a grisly end when he was found dead in the corridors of U.N. Headquarters.

Secondly, in spite of his reputation, Chairman Yang proved to be as mortal as any other man when an assassin got the drop on him in his own sleeping quarters.

Finally, and most brutally of all, was Academician Zakharov. The 'mind worms' native to Planet had always seemed to act randomly and unpredictably before, sometimes with deadly consequences for the human settlers, so the assault on Lab Three, though tragic, was no huge shock. But that turned out to be just the beginning. It seemed the mind worms were hellbent on the destruction of the University of Planet, as if directed by some higher force, and it could only end in Zakharov's truly agonising demise.

Top advisors to each dead leader were taken in by the Council for interrogation, and while Lal and Zakharov proved to be everything they claimed, the truth about Yang was revealed; he was a member of the infamous S.C.U.M. alliance. However, before the names of Yang's partners in crime could be extracted from his aide, Ota Kyi, she was shot in the head by another assassin who had infiltrated the proceedings, who then turned the gun on himself.

While the increasing death toll leaves the remaining Council members deeply troubled, they are able to at least take some hope from the fact the shady S.C.U.M. Alliance seem as vulnerable as the rest of them.

Yosarian2 - Comissioner Pravin Lal, Jailkeeper (Isolationist) - Assassinated Night 1

Oman - Chairman Sheng-ji Yang, Redirector (S.C.U.M. Alliance) - Assassinated Night 1

farside22 - Academician Prokhor Zakharov, Inventor (Isolationist) - Mutilated by mind worms Night 1

-=It is now Day 2. Deadline set for Monday, 26th January. With 8 alive, it will take 5 votes to lynch.=-

[Occam]

I think everyone should post their night actions.

I didn't commute last night.

Also lol at mind worms.

[Drunken Piper]

A new year,
Brought in with a beer.

(guzzle)

Now for claiming…it should be done randomly…so scum can not change their claim to adjust to others. I don’t think ANY conversation should be had about the claims UNTIL everyone has claimed.

We should do it with dice…I am including myself because I can still claim if I received an invention or mason visit…and even though Occam has partially claimed..I am including him for the same reasons I am including myself…I think everyone should also mention (at least) if they were targeted by the mason.

1-Cephrir - One-Shot Masonier
2-charter - Vigilante
3- Raging Rabbit - Tracker
4 - Drunken Piper - Bulletproof
5 - Empking - Supersaint
6 - ortolan - Doctor
7 - MacavityLock - Roleblocker
8 - Occam – Commuter

Original Roll String: 1d8

1 8-Sided Dice: (4) = 4

[Drunken Piper]

Orto, you are up.

[Drunken Piper]

if it wasnt clear
explaining again, dear.

(sip)

claims should who you targetted and if know YOU were targetted...I dont want anyone to come back later after someone claims and say.."oh yeah..I know X targetted me, but I forgot to mention it".

[Occam]

Highlights of Oman-scum's game (w/ commentary):

Vote: Cephrir

You don't say you're jumping on the largest bandwagon for no reason. You're doing it for a reason.

Early vote on Cephrir for bandwagoning. Distancing?

I refuse to believe occum's self vote as anything more that what it usually is: a null tell. Its interesting, but not able to be analysed right now.

you see there are too many variables to deal with here. I can give you one scum-occum for every town-occum scenario you give me. And one town-occum for every scum given to me.

We'll look back on it later, especially if occum is scum.

Weird strategy here. Defends me (oddly, Oman-SCUM was one of the few players who recognized what I was trying to say (or at least pretended to)), even though I'm under fire. I'd tend to buddy up with someone who looks protown but whatever works.

As a town we're letting people like Gremwell and monkeyman get through the net. Not to mention charter is a dangerous bastard right now. I don't think a lot of you grasp the gravity of all of this.

This stood out for whatever reason. He calls attention to MM and Grem (and we now know that MM was town). He groups Grem and MM. I was sure MM was scum - but MM's not being scum makes me rethink my opinion that Grem is scum based on Oman's comment there. I didn't and still don't "grasp the gravity" of charter - how was he dangerous?

I'd be hapy with a Monkeyman or Gremwell lynch. Monkeyman is rather transparent though, so Gremwell is more dangerous.

Again groups Grem and MM.

Plus its a risk reward thing, i'd rather kill a town politician than a town doctor.

In the light of Oman being scum this is a handy comment. MM WAS a town politician. Does this mean ort (doc) is at the very least not S.C.U.M.?

At some point Oman makes a weird post about me and MM being scumpartners. He made some mistake chronology but Oman bounces back and forth quite often on his opinion of me, one moment buddying up and saying he think's i'm town, then calling me scum pretty much out of the blue. I should have noticed that inconsistency yesterday.

So for me it seems important that Oman kept grouping Grem and MM together. I would have thrown my vote on Grem right away if not for that brief reread. Instead I'm going to wait till this claiming business gets resolved. I agree with DP on the method and that we should hold off on discussing claims till they're all done.