Mini 775 - Hammersmouth Is Under Attack! (Game over)

[kabenon007]

His was the first name on the player list I didn't recognise. I've played with Artem and Percy before, and I've read some random game with Pablo Molinero in it at some point. And obviously, I recognise yours from the fact that you are posting in this thread right now.

Have we met before?

Vote: Artem

Go wagon go

[kabenon007]

Unvote, vote: Percy

Diescumdie.

[kabenon007]

Wagons are used to lynch. Getting on them serves the town. I jumped on as vote four. If you're going to get pissed at someone for a wagon, go after the ones who put him at -2 and -1. I jumped on because I believed at that moment that Percy was the scummiest, therefore my vote would rest with him. I witheld my reasons for reactions, which I got.

@Pablo

You criticize me for wagon hopping. How is it any different from any of the other random voting stage antics that go on Day 1? You yourself say that my hopping was blatant (sarcastic?) So, you've got your answers right there... why vote me for it?

[kabenon007]

Phail kirroha. That was my second post. Please read the first page. I jumped on a wagon then as well. Now why would that be, kids? That's how I play the first day. I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death,

with no information coming out of it.

In this game, information is all we've got to go on, so we need as much of it as possible. Look at all the information that's come out of my short little post. There are people accusing me, there are people who are avoiding talking about my actions (perhaps to keep attention away from themselves?)

I believe that my vote should have rested with Percy because, as I said, he was the scummiest at the time I voted. This was because a) there is never much information to go on in Day 1 and b) because he was the one exhibiting the scummiest behavior.

Point One
He says his FoS's are his signs of suspicion when his votes are not. First off, that's just weird. I never saw an explanation as to why he works like this, and would like one. It does not make sense that the vote that could kill someone is not a symbol of your suspicion, because it should. An FoS won't kill scum. A vote will.

Point Two
He wanted to keep things in the random voting stage. Keeping things in the random voting stage only traps the town in getting random information. Random voting stage yields random information until we find a way to get ourselves out of it, which is another reason for my wagon/ witholding of my reasons. It helped create responses and therefore information.

That is why I voted for Percy.

And now, until I discover who exactly I want to vote for this information, I will

unvote

FoS

on Psycho for his appeal to emotion apology.

Also, can we please realize that I put Percy at -3? Everyone keeps saying I put him at -2, when it's at -3 I put him. Please do research before pulling that accusation on me.

[kabenon007]

"That's just how I play" is an insufficient excuse for scummy actions, although you freely admit it (first step to admitting you have a problem). You say that you hate Day 1, due to lack of information we get from it, to rationalize your actions to get it over with as soon as possible. And yet in the same post you pride yourself on getting info and talking points going with your vote. I'm seeing two distinct themes that clash.

This is hilarious. Where did I say I'm trying to get Day 1 over with as soon as possible? You drew that conclusion on your own my friend. Also, you misinterpreted what I said, drawing your entire accusation from it.

Here's what I wrote:

I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death,

with no information coming out of it.

which Pablo interpreted as:

You say that you hate Day 1, due to lack of information we get from it,

I hate it due to the quick lynches that I've seen happen that give no information, not the fact that there is no information.

Yes there are these people. Now what does it all mean? Who are they? Point us in the right direction; info without analysis is useless.

I am not omnipotent. Gathering information is gathering information is gathering information. I had no particular goal in who I wanted to get information from, I have no particular person I was trying to trap or whatever. I was just getting information, mostly for use come Day 2. Once we have a couple corpses on our hands, we can then look back and see who defended who, who accused who, and who avoided speaking about anyone. Besides, I don't want to point anyone in the right direction, as that would be leading the town. People can take what they want from the information gathered. They don't need me to "point them in the right direction." Frankly, as of right now, I can't point them in the right direction, because I don't know where it is. But I didn't gather the information to try to lead the town somewhere, I gathered it just to get some information out there.

However, I agree with getting out of the RVS as soon as possible and your points on the muddled info you get from it.

You say it's muddled, but don't say how. How can I defend myself if I don't have anything but "muddled" to defend against?

[kabenon007]

He then went on to say that he "hates it do to the quick lynches... that give no information". However, he seems to have no problem with jumping on a bandwagon on the very first page.

Le sigh... there exists a difference between jumping on a wagon at -3 and a quick lynch. I joined at -3... if that became a quick lynch, w'd simply have a case of dumb scum.

But I didn't gather the information to try to lead the town somewhere, I gathered it just to get some information out there.

To which _over9000 responded:

You just directly confessed that what you were doing wasnt helping the town in any way. If you aren't with the town, you're against it. No in-between.

Double sigh... why on Earth would I want to lead the town? Leading town=bad, over9000. Leading town=bad. We've discussed this before in this game, I believe.

Second post then, but still, you jumped on a wagon in your first post. How is that not called wagon hopping? You posted little or no proof on why you suspect someone. You just try to go with the flow and explain it with "I hate the first day with a passion". Then if that's the case, you mean you don't mind if somebody bandwagons you either?

Random vote onto a bandwagon produces more information than a plain random vote. No one posts proof of why they suspect someone in the random voting stage, which is where we were at the time of my first vote. Then, the second vote was going from a random wagon to one I supported. So this was not random.

I've only voted for two people.

That is not what I call wagon hopping, that is going from random to what I viewed as scum. Not hopping. And no, I don't mind if people bandwagon me. I defend myself, provide information, and if it so happens, die.

In the first day it is extremely crucial to gather information. You saying that you can't get any information from the first day does not sound very appealing to me. Is that a defensive statement to state that we are not supposed to gather any information from the posts that you made?

Seriously, do I have a disclaimer or something on my avatar that says misinterpret my posts? Where do I say that you can't get information from the first day? I said I hate it when that happens, not that it happens everytime. Why do you think I'm causing such a ruckus if not to get information? My post 71 was almost entirely based on the fact that I was trying to get information out of Day 1. Why would I be trying to get information out of Day 1 if I believed it to be impossible?



@Wulfy

...

Until you come up with something that is your own material and not you just agreeing with someone else so you can "play lassie," all you receive from me is ...

[kabenon007]

Only if you lead in the wrong direction. If you're leading the town to scum lynches, that sounds like a good thing to me.

While this may sound good, I prefer not to quote unquote lead the town anywhere, because if I am leading them in a direction I believe to be a scum lynch, one can never be one hundred percent sure, so I prefer to put out reasons why my direction is appealing, why I am heading in that direction, and then let the town decide for itself whether it wants to follow me, rather than lead. Does that clear things up a bit for you, username?

1. What is "random information", and why is it bad?

Mm, perhaps I should have used a different word other than random. I was merely drawing a parallel between random votes and the information that would come of them, and so called it random. Random information in this case would be information garnered in a fashion that was not planned, and therefore the information received was not of a linear nature.

Say Person A randomly votes Person B. There are many different ways Person B could respond, so let's say Person B says "Lulz, well, you're ridiculous." Because the cause was random, it did not force Person B to give any kind of information, therefore it is not as trustworthy as if Person A made an accusation, forcing Person B to respond and make some comment on the exact information Person A is desiring. It makes sense in my head at the moment, if it needs a bit more clarity, ask and I'll try again when I'm less tired.

Gathering information is gathering information is gathering information.

Gathering information is gathering information is gathering information.

I am saying that scum gathering information or town gathering information doesn't matter, information is still being gathered. The means by which it is gathered, while important, do not discount the fact that information was obtained.

What kind of a reaction were you expecting?
What information have you gathered?

I was expecting the exact reaction I got. Shows me what kind of mentality the people I'm playing with have.

I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

[kabenon007]

Stupid actions make me angry. Nobody likes me when I'm angry. When an accusation leveled against me is not dumb, inane, and nonsensical, I like to respond in a way that is non-threatening and trying to be helpful just by giving what they are asking for. Sometimes people just piss me off though.

[kabenon007]

Miller had to think of something to fill his one line of post. Give him a break, semioldguy.

So, kirroha, seeing as how you still think I'm scum, why haven't you replied to my defense or pushed your interrogation? If you think I'm scum, you should be going after me. After all, it's what a townie would do.

[kabenon007]

But, kabenon, which direction are you heading in right now?

That is a question I'm actually still trying to answer myself. At the moment I'm leaning towards voting for kirroha, because she is not answering questions posed to her, rather than coming up with a case against me, she quotes basically my entire post and asks questions about random lines that have nothing to do with my scumminess.

"After all, it's what a Townie would do"... Is that supposed to be in a mocking tone? I'm not sure, but since the main reason why semioldguy and Artem have been suspecting me is "because I'm trying to appear Too Townie", and then you say "After all, it's what a townie would do."

Ding ding ding, we have a winner. Sarcasm, so point refuted.

Nobody likes me when I'm angry.

Hmm, why, I wonder? What exactly happens when you're angry?

Once again, any relevance to the case against me? The only possible connection I can see you making is "when you're angry, people die, cuz ur the scumz."

I like to respond in a way that is non-threatening and trying to be helpful just by giving what they are asking for.

That seems to also fall in place with what semioldguy and Artem have been accusing me for - for being "Too Townie". I'm sorry, but I don't find the posts you make "non threatening" and "trying to be helpful". In fact, in most of your posts, you come off as frustrated and rather angry to me.

It's not Too Townie because I'm not saying "I'm saying things in a non-threatening way because that's how townies should say things." I've seen townies be complete and utter a#@holes, but they were townies. I'm saying that when someone questions me with relevant information, I reply in a civil manner. And most of my posts have not been frustrated or angry, more like attacking and questioning. There is a difference. Sarcasm does not equal anger.

And all the rest of your quotes are replies to others. As I don't understand what exactly you are talking about with the previous persons, I would rather you reply to my messages instead.

Why don't you understand what exactly I'm talking about? You would if you are reading the thread. I quote the person before I respond, how can you not know what I'm talking about unless you aren't reading the thread to its fullest extent and instead are tunnel visioning yourself on one person: me.

You know, username, I've made up my mind as to my direction, at least for Day 1.

Vote:kirroha

That last bit is what sold me on it. Scum don't read the thread fully. They can afford to just skim it because they don't need to search the thread carefully for clues as to who the scum are because they aren't searching for scum.[/quote]

[kabenon007]

I would argue that scum have to read the thread just as carefully to avoid inadvertent scum-slips.

It is my view that townies

have

to read the thread to play the game well, while scum only

should

read the thread. They can get by with only skimming, but it's not a wise choice, as it can lead to my very accusation on kirroha.

[kabenon007]

You claimed you withheld your reasoning "for reactions". You say this as if it's supposed to be good for the town. Like by gaining reactions you do nothing but assist us in finding scum. But to me, this is a huge, blatant scumtell. By not giving your reasoning from the start, what would everyone else have to argue against? Nothing. You left the town nothing to pick apart aside from one specific error.

I gave my reasons afterward, so the fact I witheld the information is irrelevant. I wasn't trying to present something for people to argue against, I was trying to see what would happen. Who would come to Percy's defense, who would jump on him after me, etc. All of these will be useful later on. Could I have said my reasons? Yes, but I chose not too in hopes of generating more talking.

Maybe I'm interpreting this wrong. But not only is this wordy and hard to follow, you seem to be saying that whether scum gather information or the town gathers information, its still good. To the town, scum gathering extra information is BAD. It gives them room to create fake defenses to convince the town they are innocent. The only way that you could possibly consider scum gathering information good is if you were indeed scum.

Yeah, I had a tough time coming up with a way to word that as well, one that wouldn't be confusing. Let's try again.

If a townie asks a question, and the question is answered, information was generated.
If a scum asks a question, and the question is answered, information was still generated. I'm trying to say that scum, while trying to act like townies, are still able to produce information that can be used by townies. Does that make a bit more sense?

[kabenon007]

Now, as my suspect has changed to CJMiller due to kabenon's ability to show some good defense points, I will go and review his posts (or lack thereof) again.

Wait a sec... something doesn't seem right here to me...

I am attacking you right this instand, kabenon,

This was in her previous post... in which she is attacking me. I didn't say anything in between that post and the post in which she says I show good defense points. Nowhere did I get the impression that she thought any of my points were good, in fact it seemed like she was attacking me all the harder. Does anyone else find this suspicious, cuz I sure do.

[kabenon007]

Honestly, nothing can really defend the type of "diescumdie" post he made, and it makes me want him to be lynched very badly. So, I'd be inclined to defense kirr in her view of "You're scum. Prove otherwise."

Isn't a "You're scum. Prove otherwise" post equivalent to a "Diescumdie" post? Both say about the same thing. Why do you believe her and not me?

Second, if nothing can defend against that post, then all that does is show me that your tunnelvisioned on me, not willing to listen to what I've got to say. If nothing can defend it, then you're being too closed-minded.

[kabenon007]

Kabenon, if you want to know why I unvoted you and went for CJ - It's because CJ seems more suspicious than you. Not because you are any less suspicious. In all honesty, I think that you two might be scumbuddies. Still, I won't jump to conclusions (I've learnt my lesson with the Percy incident) and just fully concentrate on CJ right now, in all his scummy glory.

And this only confirms my suspicions of you, kirroha. First you attack me. Then, after attacking me again, you say I made some "good defense points." Not that you were more suspicious of CJ. That I made some good defense points. That to me says, "Good job, you defended yourself well, my suspicion of you has gone down." Which was odd to say the least because it certainly didn't look like you thought I'd made good defense points. In fact, it looked like you were just trying to get off me and go for an easier target in CJ.

You seem awfully confident on CJ's scumminess. Everyone else so far who has voted for him has expressed concern that while he might be scum, he might also be crappy town. But you are quite sure of his scumminess... if someone asked me to call the game right now, I'd nail you two as scum buddies. You guys' exchange of "You're an idiot" and then voting each other seems more like feuding scumbuddies than anything else.

[kabenon007]

I agree with Artem. Even if the townie is a crappy townie, they exist as an obstacle to be eliminated by the scum and therefore have a use. Lynching him, if confirmed 100% town is the worst choice, followed closely by a Vig NK, I believe. But town help just by being town, playing the numbers game.


And plus he's voting for kirroha, who I'm convinced is scum, which is also helping.

[kabenon007]

The case against kabenon007

Wagons are used to lynch. Getting on them serves the town.

See, this is bullshit. Getting on wagons only serves the town if the person who is going to get lynched is actually scum. Not thinking and jumping on a wagon headed for a town lynch is just about the stupidest thing I can think of.

You're only thinking of wagons as being useful only in lynching. What about pressure wagons? They generate information quickly. By your logic, couldn't it also be said that voting only serves the town if the person who is going to get lynched is scum? I was not intending to have you lynched, I would have jumped on whoever the wagon was.

I find kabenon007's rationale rather contradictory. I feel that he's basically resigned himself to a bad day, bemoaning how no information will ever get generated, and attacking those who attack him.

How have I resigned myself to a bad day? I've been working damned hard if I do say so myself to generate information, I haven't lurked like some, I have not avoided anything on purpose. I have addressed everything brought to me, I have questioned those I feel deserve questioning. How is that resigning myself in any form of the word "resigning?"

That's how I play the first day. I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death, with no information coming out of it.

In this game, information is all we've got to go on, so we need as much of it as possible. Look at all the information that's come out of my short little post.

"That's just how I play" is an insufficient excuse for scummy actions, although you freely admit it (first step to admitting you have a problem). You say that you hate Day 1, due to lack of information we get from it, to rationalize your actions to get it over with as soon as possible. And yet in the same post you pride yourself on getting info and talking points going with your vote. I'm seeing two distinct themes that clash.

I found this post interesting. His response:

I hate it due to the quick lynches that I've seen happen that give no information, not the fact that there is no information.

This just makes

no

sense to me. Why is jumping on a wagon (without analysis) a good idea? And even if it is a good idea, why bemoan the fact that the lynches aren't good?
Players who spend all their time saying that the information isn't good enough, without trying to scumhunt and generate information themselves, are trying to sow confusion and muddle the waters. This is how I see kabenon007's posting playing out.

You confuse me with this post. The post wasn't about jumping on a wagon, nor about bemoaning the fact that lynches aren't good. It was me refuting kirroha's statement. Where did you get the idea, from the post quoted here, that I was saying anything about jumping on wagons? If your read the post, you would see I was talking about the difference between not liking Day 1 because you can't get information (which is how kirroha interpreted) and how I don't like Day 1 because people just go "Haha, I'm a chargin my lynch lazer!!" and speed lynch the hell out of someone, not giving them time to defend themselves and creating a useless day (which is what I said in that post.)

I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?

Miller had to think of something to fill his one line of post. Give him a break, semioldguy.

So, kirroha, seeing as how you still think I'm scum, why haven't you replied to my defense or pushed your interrogation? If you think I'm scum, you should be going after me. After all, it's what a townie would do.

Again, this post screams scum. Miller is lurking like hell, and even though the defense was still a joking one, that doesn't change the fact that he's saying "Don't worry about Miller". Now kirroha had attacked him, he defended, and now he's saying that she should respond to his defense. This is true, and she does eventually. But the fact remains that he hasn't scumhunted anywhere else, or done anything other than defend himself. It seems so opportunistic I could cry.

Sigh, you don't speak sarcasm, do you? How is that first line not sarcastic enough to say that I'm making fun of Miller, condemning his actions through use of sarcasm? But I guess sarcastic "defense but not really defense" screams scum?

I haven't scumhunted anywhere else? Eh? I've got three people who I am watching, all of which are people who attacked me. Can I help that? Why would I start interrogating people if I don't see a reason to interrogate? I saw inconsistencies and scumtells in kirroha and Miller, and I'm watching Wulfy. Also, I don't think your scum, even though you're attacking me. If what you're saying is true, that I only find scum on those who attack me, then wouldn't I be suspicious of you as well? And _over9000 as well? Granted, I don't think his post was as attacking as yours, but still.

If a townie asks a question, and the question is answered, information was generated.
If a scum asks a question, and the question is answered, information was still generated. I'm trying to say that scum, while trying to act like townies, are still able to produce information that can be used by townies. Does that make a bit more sense?

If that's the case, then talkative scum are better than quiet scum. I happen to agree. If that's the case, then why are you voting and targetting kirroha, who is far more talkative than most other players in this thread?

So here in this post you are saying that it is better to leave someone you think is scum alive... because they are more talkative? I call shenanigans on that shit. If you've found scum, you lynch them. You don't say, "Oh, well, you're scum, but you're providing information to the town, so I'll leave you alive and instead lynch a townie." You kill the scum. That's how the game is played, and that's why I'm voting for kirroha. I'm not going to leave her and go after the silent scum. It's easier to find the talkative scum, because the more they talk, the easier it becomes for them to slip up.

I'm voting you because you haven't done anything to show how town you are. (ie, scum hunting) ...

...

if you were to dig through the game and show significant, REAL scum hunting effort, your towniness will be picked up on, and I will naturally remove my vote. Suspicion of you, like it has on Kirr, will be with me until your dead, the game is over, or you are proven town enough (of 50% town, let's say) that I can give you the same cursory glance as everyone else.

QFT.

Truth is, there is no such effort. kabenon007 wants to get by with the cranky, "I hate Day 1 let's lynch someone and get it over with!", defensive posting style, and it's seriously scummy in my book.

Once again accusing me of not scumhunting. I addressed this above, I don't feel like addressing it again. It seems like I continue to defend myself against the same attacks, over, and over again. Most of this post was a complaint that I am not scumhunting, one I do not agree with. I have sought information, I have given information, I have accused (multiple people), and I have attacked. How does that not amount to scumhunting?

[kabenon007]

My bad, iamausername... I confused Percy's wagon with Artem's wagon at the beginning. I forgot I had that wagon first. To clarify, I would have jumped on anyone's wagon, it so happened to be Artem. Percy's was because he was scummiest and too of course get some sort of reaction. The first part of that quote is still true though. I didn't want to lynch either of them at that point.

[kabenon007]

How is jumping on two different wagons, one randomly and the other for scumminess, equal to a speed lynch? I said I didn't want you lynched. So I was not rushing to lynch someone.

I'm saying that it's odd that you identify just how bad lurking scum are (worse than talking scum, that is), but make no attempt to root them out.

I would prefer to go after the talking scum, because I can form arguments against them better because they have given me more material to work with. I'm more confident in my ability to go after the talkers than the non-talkers, just as I'm sure others prefer to go after lurkers.

No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?

I was making fun of you, Percy, cuz you used the exact same words in post 102:

There's your explanation. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

See the sarcastic similarity?

I do not plan on quoting all my posts containing information, and neither did you. If you need me too, it is only because you are too lazy to go back and find them. If you have specific questions, that's fine, I'll go find them, but quoting all my posts would be ridiculous, as most are quite long.

[kabenon007]

Once again Wulfy's vote is on me. And once again, I don't really care. If I'm not scumhunting with all the questions I pose, the analytical replies I make, and the cases I bring against people, then what am I doing with those, Wulfy?

[kabenon007]

Actually, telling you would just make me look stupid. And I'm not going to wait till day 2. In fact, I probably won't mention it as it gets dumber and dumber as the player posts. It isn't anti town to hold back useless information, and mostly irrelevant since its turned out to be complete garbage anyway.

So, in the five posts between the time when you said you weren't going to explain who was #2, and this post, the reasons for you suspecting that person lessened. I'd be willing to believe that if one person had posted twice or something like that, giving reason for the decrease in suspicion. But perhaps I'm looking to much into that part.

[quote="Wulfy]You have done things that are town, but the vast majority of your play seems scummy to me. As for your "analytical posts," well...they arn't that good. So, I'm irrelevant. [/quote]

Whether or not you think they are "good" the fact is that I made them, they count as scumhunting, but you are just trying to discredit them by calling them irrelevant rather than accept a small defeat, which is what I assume you meant in that last sentence but instead came up with the hilarious typo "I'm irrelevant."

Regardless of whether they are good or not, you said I did not scumhunting. I bring to the table elements of my scumhunting, and you say "They don't count because they aren't good." Which is bologna. Scumhunting is scumhunting, especially in this case because you were saying I wasn't doing any period.

[kabenon007]

Ok, I didn't get that that was what you wanted. I thought you were going along the more Wulfy line of, "I don't see your valuable information, please quote all of it for me." I can do what you ask, although there isn't much, because as I am pretty sure I said, most of the information gathered Day 1 becomes useful Day 2 once one or more corpses have been identified and roles disclosed.

When I jumped on your wagon, the biggest thing I was looking for: people who would jump on my wagon after someone else got the ball rolling on me.

That reason is the reason I suspected Pablo, _over9000, and kirroha. Wulfy got the wagon going, and though I hated his playstyle, it wasn't the kind of reaction I was looking for and therefore didn't pursue. Pablo then voted for me, followed by kirroha, followed by _over9000. I bantered back and forth with Pablo and over9000 and liked what I got out our discussions, found them to be more town than kirroha, especially because she first jumped on Percy first, after I made my "Diescumdie" post, before jumping to me. If she were so suspicious of that, as she claims in her attacks on me when she votes, why did she vote Percy first, and then only once it became "acceptable" to jump on my wagon did she make her attack against me?

And the whole "Diescumdie" thing? I just like saying it, it makes the post seem heavier, and therefore it would (hopefully) garner more reactions. "Go wagon go" is also a favorite of mine. I knew it was a risky plan going into it, but it does do so much for the town. Look at all the discussion that's come out of it.

[kabenon007]

While I don't think CJ is innocent because of kirroha's alignment, I would say it helped him out considerably. However, I would caution everyone not to simply write him off as town. His scumminess did not change just because kirroha flipped scum. I originally suspected CJMiller a lot because it seemed like kirroha and he were bussing significantly, but going back I can't seem to find enough evidence to support my thoughts on that. Will have to read through and search a bit more for that, but not right now, cuz it's really late.

@Wulfy real quick because I just saw it... you say Artem is not definite scum but is much higher, but you've only got him at your third level of suspicion, which puts only two people below him, IAAUN and over9000. That's not "much higher." Care to comment?

[kabenon007]

Giving no reason, just laying down the hammer... certainly scummy behavior... definitely against the town... but does it mean he is scum? I know it really gets into WIFOM, but why would he be that stupid? I think that that may have just fallen into his typical style of play.

However, seeing as how the vig did not get him last night, and there is a decent chance he is scum, I am willing to up it farther with a

Vote:CJMiller

. Explain yourself, sir.

[kabenon007]

FTY

(For the Yay)

[kabenon007]

Sorry to disappoint, folks, but I'm just a plain ol townie. Sotty, you're up. Claimitty claim claim.

[kabenon007]

Now hold up, Xtoxm, I don't think that confirms them. It links them, but I don't think it confirms them. If there were two remaining scum, those two roles are the ones I would pick to claim. Work it out between themselves to claim those two, as they compliment each other nicely and, as you say, confirm them. What better way to claim?

[kabenon007]

The entire time of thinking up a plan has happened in the course of a day and a half, roughly. I'd hardly consider that to be lurking. Besides, studying for finals>checking mafia games everyday. I like the plan as set by Percy, because it makes sense to me and involves me not dying.

Vote: Sotty7

[kabenon007]

Unvote, vote: Kabe

I approve of this message.