Mini 742 Monopoly Mafia - Game Over!

[ac1983fan]

Your case on me is total BS, and CTD was just trying to point that out. I love how every time somebody points out that somebody's case on someone else is crap, they are supposedly "defending them".
Defending someone is saying "No, I disagree, I think they are town for reasons X, Y, and Z." CTD basically said "No, I disagree, your case is bad for reasons X, Y, and Z." Learn the freaking difference people.

And ac1983fan returns the favor and defends CTD.

*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*

I'm just pointing out that you have incorrectly defined what CTD did as defending. It has nothing to do with my opinion of CTD. Zilla, WTF are you doing?

*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*

[CrashTextDummie]

Nightfall has been attacked by both CTD and ac1983 at key times that make it not look like bussing.

Please point out where ac1983fan attacked Nightfall at a key time. I just scanned his posts for comments on Nightfall, and he was exclusively pro-Nightfall before today. And even today, I see nothing that could be construed as an attack.

Most telling is how CTD defends ac1983fan in 742.

It displeases me that ac1983fan already answered to this, but he got it right. I have no desire whatsoever to defend him, as I haven't had the chance to reread him yet and so haven't made up my mind yet on whether he's actually worthy of defense.

This is a shut case only if you want the town to lose. You are suffering from a severe case of tunnel vision as evidenced by the fact that you gleefully ignore the numerous things that are wrong with the role claims.

You are also either extremely lazy or using logic of the crappiest kind. You haven't put out a single legitimate reason for why you think I am scum. And no, attacking DGB doesn't cut it. For some unknown reason, you have arrived at the conclusion that I am scum with ac1983fan, and you base every last one of your arguments around this unfounded premiss, ignoring all the evidence that suggests that you are wrong.

Do you even realize how asinine that is? You accuse ac1983fan of a scummy action he didn't even commit, and yet when I point out that Nightfall is, in fact, guilty of committing that act, you brush it off entirely simply because the one who pointed it out was me.

CTD, you should have been around long enough to know that 'I suspect my scumbuddy, but only by association with this townie, and i want this townie killed first' is a very common scum distancing manouevre.

It's also a very inelegant maneuvre, one I would be ashamed to use as scum. This is also entirely ignoring the fact that my suspicion of you two as a scum pair was natural for a pro-town player to have. I was right about Grimmy being scum and I was right about your behavior towards him being inconsistent, the only thing I was wrong about was your motive for the inconsistency. I am so sorry for being unable to devine the fact that you planned to vig him.

If I didn't have this suspicion on D3, I would have definitely gotten it once Grimmy came up scum. The link I saw between you two was an excellent piece of pro-town scumhunting, because it was

there

. That I didn't realize the true nature of that link is nothing I should have to explain myself for.

Your 'suspicion' of him was ENTIRELY driven by the fact that in my recap post where i pointed out the most suspicious behaviour of the game, I pointed out a lot of things that Grimmy did that were scummy, but didn't vote him.

This is evidently not true, and you even quoted it a bit further down your post. I was individually suspicious of Grimmy for reasons completely unrelated to you, that had been mostly outlined by ac1983fan at the time, as I clearly stated. That I never got around to present my own case against Grimmy was my bad, and I regret that fact. I felt more strongly about you and hence concentrated my efforts on you.

You completely ignored the fact that Jebus was even scummier, made arguments that made no logical sense, and was a significant wagon candidate at deadline, whilst no-one else appeared to show any interest in wagoning Grimmy.

And it doesn't occur to you that maybe this was because I correctly read Grimmy as scum and Jebus as town? Well that may be a stretch, as I didn't feel strongly about Jebus either way, but the fact of the matter is that I didn't find him "even scummier". That you are trying to turn my attacking scum while not attacking a town player into an argument against me quite frankly boggles my mind.

Liar. Your stated reason for voting me was that you thought my first post made it look like I was scum with Grimmy- with a cheap shot at Pacman and his connection problems thrown in for good measure.

My stated reason for voting you was that I strongly felt on Day 2 that pacman was scum. It's right there in the post you quoted. I followed my vote up with more arguments for why I thought you were scum. That I felt you two were scum together was merely the icing on the cake.

Try your desperate attempts to use craplogic to show that Jebus 'cleared' you.

I scanned his posts for breadcrumbs and the first one I found was the one I quoted. I still stand by the fact that it can hardly be interpreted any other way than I did. Excuse me for not immediately scanning his posts for breadcrumbs that contraticted this first one, but that's just not behavior I expect from a cop. Craplogic how? Desperate how?

Just for the record, who do you think Jebus investigated? Provide reasoning, I'm curious how your logic compares to mine.

PPE:
Hai, Zilla.

[The Fonz]

Before I forget: DGB's clutching at straws fits with her as scum. Even with loaded scum, six town power roles is definitely too many.

Note also that one-shot bulletproof is an incredibly easy scum claim when the town doesn't have any killing power.

[Zilla]

You are also either extremely lazy or using logic of the crappiest kind.

I'm not lazy in scumhunting, I'm just lazy in trying to communicate all the nuances that are giving you away. You're looking hard for logical ways to try to disprove the cases on you, and your approach to those arguments is scum trying to justify their "towniness" by skewing in-thread evidence. This goes for both you and ac1983fan.

[Zilla]

That's six pretty good power roles. I especially want Zilla's opinion on this.

You know what this is? This is you trying to make it sound like if I don't consider it from your point of view, you think I'm scummy for it. You're using the "that's overpowered town" thing as some kind of defense.

Personally, I don't think it's overpowered, but I play mafia where vanilla is pretty much unheard of. However, of all the claimed roles, a lot of them are pretty weak, IMO. Cop and JoaT are the heavy hitters, roleblocker next, one-shot doc and one-time bulletproof are next, and then tracker. Town trackers are relatively useless, IMO.

Fonz, can you kill whenever, or just once?

[The Fonz]

Each of the three abilities is one-shot.

(Note for any newbies reading this in future trying to meta me: DO NOT VIG WHEN MISVIGGING WILL LOSE THE GAME. You have to be VERY sure. Or angry).

[Zilla]

Then I'd say Nitefell is clean. It makes no sense to have one-off bulletproof scum, and that's a far-fetched idea for a scumclaim IMO.

[ac1983fan]

Town trackers are relatively useless, IMO.

A town tracker can be almost as powerful as a cop, maybe moreso.

You are also either extremely lazy or using logic of the crappiest kind.

I'm not lazy in scumhunting, I'm just lazy in trying to communicate all the nuances that are giving you away. You're looking hard for logical ways to try to disprove the cases on you, and your approach to those arguments is scum trying to justify their "towniness" by skewing in-thread evidence. This goes for both you and ac1983fan.

To quoth Rick Sanchez/Jon Stewart, "What the hell does that mean?"

[Zilla]

Like I said, lazy in communication.

It's really hard to explain but both of your defenses aren't town defenses.

[The Fonz]

It's also a very inelegant maneuvre, one I would be ashamed to use as scum. This is also entirely ignoring the fact that my suspicion of you two as a scum pair was natural for a pro-town player to have.

No, no it wasn't.

I was right about Grimmy being scum and I was right about your behavior towards him being inconsistent, the only thing I was wrong about was your motive for the inconsistency. I am so sorry for being unable to devine the fact that you planned to vig him.

No. You can't claim to have been 'right' on him at the same time as claiming you only suspected him because of me.

If I didn't have this suspicion on D3, I would have definitely gotten it once Grimmy came up scum. The link I saw between you two was an excellent piece of pro-town scumhunting, because it was

there

. That I didn't realize the true nature of that link is nothing I should have to explain myself for.

NO IT WASN'T. IT WAS A FUCKING MORONIC IDIOT DICKSHIT FAILURE TO REALISE THAT IT'S PERFECTLY POSSIBLE TO SUSPECT SOMEONE, BUT SUSPECT SOMEONE ELSE

MORE

. Because the second player was scummier. And have that second player, who you also suspected, be a viable wagon whilst the other wasn't. Your attack on me was, and remains, ludicrous, and if i hadn't had the role i did, it would probably have cost the town the game due to your idiocy.

And it doesn't occur to you that maybe this was because I correctly read Grimmy as scum and Jebus as town? Well that may be a stretch, as I didn't feel strongly about Jebus either way, but the fact of the matter is that I didn't find him "even scummier". That you are trying to turn my attacking scum while not attacking a town player into an argument against me quite frankly boggles my mind.

He was scummy as fuck. That you didn't notice the obvious inconsistency in his posts isn't my problem.

Just for the record, who do you think Jebus investigated? Provide reasoning, I'm curious how your logic compares to mine.

PPE:
Hai, Zilla.

Zilla, clearly. The other's a crapshoot. Not Alabaska, clearly.

[CrashTextDummie]

I'm not lazy in scumhunting, I'm just lazy in trying to communicate all the nuances that are giving you away. You're looking hard for logical ways to try to disprove the cases on you, and your approach to those arguments is scum trying to justify their "towniness" by skewing in-thread evidence. This goes for both you and ac1983fan.

Let me repeat myself: You

never

made a case against me. You never provided a single thing that "is giving me away", let alone nuances. It's ludicrous that you accuse me of trying to defend myself as if it was a bad thing.

You know what this is? This is you trying to make it sound like if I don't consider it from your point of view, you think I'm scummy for it. You're using the "that's overpowered town" thing as some kind of defense.

Let me use a quote from you:

Why so defensive?

Never did I mention thinking you're scummy for not considering my point of view. Never has it been my intention to paint you as scummy. I am working under the assumption that you are an incredibly boneheaded townie making a godawful play that could potentially lose us the game.

If I thought you were scum, I wouldn't try so damn hard to convince you of how fucking wrong you are. If I thought you were scum, I wouldn't even bother with your stupid non-arguments because no sane townie would ever go along with them.

It's perfectly obvious to me why you're so defensive, and no, it's not because I think you're scum. It's because your position on me is entirely unjustifiable.

It's really hard to explain but both of your defenses aren't town defenses.

Is it the fact that you can't refute my defense that makes it not a town defense? Or do you ignore perfectly valid arguments for sports?

o. You can't claim to have been 'right' on him at the same time as claiming you only suspected him because of me.

Stop putting words into my mouth. That's the exact opposite of what I claimed.

NO IT WASN'T. IT WAS A FUCKING MORONIC IDIOT DICKSHIT FAILURE TO REALISE THAT IT'S PERFECTLY POSSIBLE TO SUSPECT SOMEONE, BUT SUSPECT SOMEONE ELSE MORE. Because the second player was scummier. And have that second player, who you also suspected, be a viable wagon whilst the other wasn't. Your attack on me was, and remains, ludicrous, and if i hadn't had the role i did, it would probably have cost the town the game due to your idiocy.

It seems to me like you are really butthurt that I would dare suspect you. You clearly and unambiguously stated that you backed off Grimmy, in part, because you intended to vig him. So you took the easy way out. That's okay. And I'm sure you don't see it that way. It should be clear by now that I don't agree with your stance of "only attack the one person you want to lynch".

He was scummy as fuck. That you didn't notice the obvious inconsistency in his posts isn't my problem.

Except he wasn't scum. That you didn't realize this and pushed him regardless while I didn't is

your

problem. I wouldn't give a shit if it wasn't for the fact that you're attacking me for

not attacking a pro-town player

.

[ac1983fan]

CTD, you do realize that it is impossible for The Fonz to be scum with Grimmy? since he is either a JOAT or an SK, since no one else has claimed a role that could've killed grimmy, and more to the point, no one has claimed responsibility for grimmy's death?

So, because of this, IMO, the fonz is definitely not todays lynch target, since either way, he will probably die tonight. Zilla is clear in my mind, yet really isn't making the best cases. Obviously, regardless of my alignment (even though I am town), I am clear from my point of view.

Therefore, from my point of view, the three scum are amoungst DGB, CTD, and Nightfall. I am much more sure about DGB than the other two. DGB has been much more consistantly scummy. I'm really iffy about CTD and Nightfall.

I'm really uncertain as to why my defense of my self is not a townie defense. I mean, how else am I to defend myself other than counterpoint your reasons for finding me scummy?

[Zilla]

It's not that you're counterpointing, it's the method you're using.

CTD's doing it wrong. I said it already, AtE doesn't cut it. "Just because you can't refute my defense." What defense? Your entire last thing was an appeal to emotion and WIFOM.

Throw in misrepresentation here for calling me defensive. I'm pointing it out where I see it, I didn't say he called me scummy, I was pointing out how he was trying to psychologically manipulate my thinking regarding power roles.

He claimed vanilla. If he's scum, he's obviously going to be pushing that scum claimed the power roles and that town shouldn't have that many power roles. He's trying to get DGB lynched. When he saw the question about whether it was possible for town to have that many power roles, he apparently wanted me to question that as well with his "I'm especially interested in hearing Zilla's take on it." There's no reason he would be interested in my view. The only reason he could have for putting that on there is to influence my view of it.

CTD's last post is way too much of an appeal to emotion. He's trying to make my case seem as insignificant as possible because he doesn't have any other way to defend against it (partially because it's based on psychoanalysis instead of logic).

[Nightfall]

Nightfall: When I said that I find your lack of voiced suspicion scummy, that wasn't just a throwaway comment for you to ignore. I want to know who you're suspicious of.

I'm sorry but what post did you say that in? (Pre submit edit) Post 721?
I missed that again at first even on a reread. I think I saw the little line and thought your sig was below.

My thoughts on people are as follows:
DGB: As I explained before I am not certain but I do believe DGB to be more likely town than scum as I think the claim makes sense and the night results would make sense if Ala was the target of our bus driver, which after looking things over I believe is a rather strong possibility.

Fonz: Even though I find (a few of) his posts today to be kind of scummy I'm believing his township claim because of Grimmy's death. If I could think of some other explanation for Grimmy's death then I may have to reconsider, but right now he looks like a lock for a protown role.

Zilla: Since coming into this game Zilla has appeared to be one of the most protown players in this game. While I don't find all of her accusations towards CTD and AC to be greatly supported I am starting to think she may have something with the way CTD and AC are starting to react.

AC: Since AC has replaced in I had got more of a positive read from him than a negative one. I was up in the air regarding his previous incarnations though. There was always someone that I found scummier at the time. In the near future I'll go back and check out some of their posts to see if I can find anything more one way or the other. Posts 729 and 730 seem a bit off to me. (Why did you think my claim was a little fishy?)

CTD: My main suspicions right now fall on CTD. I found Gamma scummy earlier on and Gamma ended up blowing up in anger when pushed. Oddly CTD seems to be doing the same thing now. I'm not fond of his post 705 which looks a little like he went into it with a target for his suspicions predetermined. He has criticized Zilla for seemingly having tunnel vision while at the same time seems to be pretty set on DGB being scum. Also is that a Hitler reference at the end of post 751 on the subject of Zilla? I think that's pretty uncalled for...

Note also that one-shot bulletproof is an incredibly easy scum claim when the town doesn't have any killing power.

Each of the three abilities is one-shot.

So I would make a false claim of a one shot night immune (which I think would be incredibly easy to pretend I have) the day AFTER my scum buddy ended up being vig'ed and BEFORE you revealed that your own actions, including your vig powers are a one time ability? That doesn't make sense.

That seems a poor choice considering I was breadcrumbed as investigated by a cop.

Again, with a scum bus driver, we can't take anything for granted.

DGB, you appear to be unaware of how the combo of target switching and investigations work. If your target is switched, you told who your result is on.

I can't remember ever being in a game where the above has been true. If I was to MOD a game I wouldn't tell the person they're target was interfered with. That's what makes the role a powerful role.

Also Fonz, sorry if you said it before and I missed it, but what did you mean before when you said that Pacman's vig attempt "timed out"?

[Zilla]

Wow, Gamma was a noob. Through all of it, I think he's more noob-scum than noob-town, what with blatant bandwagoning, no reasoning to his votes, and hammering charter.

[CrashTextDummie]

CTD, you do realize that it is impossible for The Fonz to be scum with Grimmy? since he is either a JOAT or an SK, since no one else has claimed a role that could've killed grimmy, and more to the point, no one has claimed responsibility for grimmy's death?

I don't think Fonz is scum with Grimmy anymore, naturally.

CTD's doing it wrong. I said it already, AtE doesn't cut it. "Just because you can't refute my defense." What defense? Your entire last thing was an appeal to emotion and WIFOM.

You're damn right I'm appealing to emotion, because appeals to logic or common sense utterly fail on you. You are giving me absolutely nothing to defend against or outright ignore my legitimate defenses, so yes, I am resorting to appeals to emotion. The alternative is rolling over and losing the game for the town, since you give me absolutely no middle ground.

He claimed vanilla. If he's scum, he's obviously going to be pushing that scum claimed the power roles and that town shouldn't have that many power roles. He's trying to get DGB lynched.

And if I'm town, I'm also obviously going to be pushing that scum claimed at least one power role, because I know it to be true. You are suffering from confirmation bias.

When he saw the question about whether it was possible for town to have that many power roles, he apparently wanted me to question that as well with his "I'm especially interested in hearing Zilla's take on it." There's no reason he would be interested in my view. The only reason he could have for putting that on there is to influence my view of it.

I am interested in your view because I want to know what the fuck is going on in your head. And yes, I want to influence your view on it, because your view on it is dead wrong.

CTD's last post is way too much of an appeal to emotion. He's trying to make my case seem as insignificant as possible because he doesn't have any other way to defend against it (partially because it's based on psychoanalysis instead of logic).

Your "case" on me is based on psychoanalysis? And here I thought it was based on circular reasoning and confirmation bias, with a bit of crap logic mixed in. Everything I say to you makes sense for a pro-town player to say, and you simply ignore that fact because you wont take off your fucking blinders.

I'm sorry but what post did you say that in? (Pre submit edit) Post 721?
I missed that again at first even on a reread. I think I saw the little line and thought your sig was below.

Fonz quoted it and agreed with it. I suppose you missed that as well.

I'm not fond of his post 705 which looks a little like he went into it with a target for his suspicions predetermined.

Indeed, my target for suspicion was predetermined. Here is where I determined it. This is scummy how?

He has criticized Zilla for seemingly having tunnel vision while at the same time seems to be pretty set on DGB being scum.

I don't believe DGB's claim. Naturally, I'm pretty set on her being scum. This is tunnel vision how?

Also is that a Hitler reference at the end of post 751 on the subject of Zilla? I think that's pretty uncalled for...

Just for the record, there is a difference between saying hi to a person and a Hitler salute. Thank you for reading my posts closely.

[The Fonz]

NO IT WASN'T. IT WAS A FUCKING MORONIC IDIOT DICKSHIT FAILURE TO REALISE THAT IT'S PERFECTLY POSSIBLE TO SUSPECT SOMEONE, BUT SUSPECT SOMEONE ELSE MORE. Because the second player was scummier. And have that second player, who you also suspected, be a viable wagon whilst the other wasn't. Your attack on me was, and remains, ludicrous, and if i hadn't had the role i did, it would probably have cost the town the game due to your idiocy.

It seems to me like you are really butthurt that I would dare suspect you.

Funny, I was going to say the same thing. Your 'no case on me' argument looks to me like a townie, who can't possibly conceive of how anyone might find him scummy, despite the fact that there are obvious reasons.

You clearly and unambiguously stated that you backed off Grimmy, in part, because you intended to vig him. So you took the easy way out.

No. As I've said repeatedly, I tried to get Jebus lynched because he was as scummy or scummier than Grimmy, and a deadline was looming with no-one else suspecting Grimmy. It was Jebus or Alabaska, and of those two Alabaska was clearly the scummiest.

He was scummy as fuck. That you didn't notice the obvious inconsistency in his posts isn't my problem.

Except he wasn't scum. That you didn't realize this and pushed him regardless while I didn't is

your

problem. I wouldn't give a shit if it wasn't for the fact that you're attacking me for

not attacking a pro-town player

.

[/quote]

But you DID attack a protown player. And I pushed Jebus because he was the only possible alternative to Alabaska. Who was a genuine, and claimed, protown roleblocker.

[CrashTextDummie]

I'm rereading.

The charter lynch:

Megatheory (ac1983fan) looks the cleanest to me. He was the instigator of the wagon and provided reasoning that makes sense to me from a pro-town perspecive at that early stage of the game. He disappeared before the wagon really got afoot, so it's hard to judge him any further. Braeden (DGB) seems like opportunistic scum. He was very critical of the charter wagon and expressed displeasure with his soft-claim on the grounds that a full claim could "prove his innocence further" (as opposed to thinking it was a scum move). He then made a complete U-turn and changed his mind on charter for very little reason. Look at this post and you will have the definition of opportunism.

Nightfall doesn't look too bad. I could see his "while I find charter scummy, I would rather look at other people" thing as supporting a band-wagon without being on it, but it also strikes me as something a pro-town player would do in that situation. Yawetag was on the wagon simply because charter suggested name-claiming (Post 107, Post 111), which is a weak reason, to say the least. On D2, he claimed that his reason for suspecting charter was actually "his attitude after being denied the nameclaim idea" (Post 205), which strikes me as inconsistent.

Day 2

:

It should once again be pointed out that Jebus started D2 not only with a vote on yawetag, but also an extensive case on him and the statement that he is "very scummy [and] should be a prime candidate of today". It's virtually impossible that he investigated yawetag the night before.

I'm not impressed with ac1983fan's entry into the game, but I do like his first vote.

I don't see much of interest in spoilum's attack against Nightfall, because it's such a non-issue to be arguing about. While it's true that Nightfall was somewhat inconsistent when it came to his "jokewagons can turn into lynches" argument, I don't see what he had to gain as scum. What I do find interesting though was Grimmy's reaction to it, in which she FoSed Nightfall for no discernable reason at all. It faintly smells of distancing.

Grimmy/ac1983fan interaction gives me wildly mixed signals. Grimmy's Post 286 strikes me as something scum wouldn't say about their buddy, but then ac§983fan unvotes him while complimenting him on a post that really wasn't all that special in the very next post. May be distancing after all. This is further impacted by a follow-up post, in which ac1983fan clearly states that "Grimmy seemed incredibly anti-town", which seems to be a rather strong suspicion to be washed away by such a throw-away post.

I am once again reminded of why I found pacman so incredibly scummy. It's all water under the bridge now, though.

Zilla's entry into the game strikes me as curious. She ponders whether to examine the charter wagon or the people who are calling to examine the wagon, and concludes that the wagon was mostly town-led. She betrays this thought on the very same page by voting Alabaska J, who was part of the wagon.

I really dislike ac1983fan's jump on the Alabaska wagon. I also agree with Zilla at the time that ac1983fan's defense of Nightfall made very little sense, particularly considering his criteria for suspecting Alabaska J and Grimmy.

Day 3

:

ac1983fan backpeddals on his Grimmy vote. Scummy. Also dislike his insistance on suspecting "non-contributors".

Nightfall's list of top-suspects is terrible. On the flip-side, I like how Zilla is critical of Grimmy even though her reason for being so is backwards. It's internally consistent.

I'm pointing out this post of Jebus again, because there is no earthly way he investigated Alabaska J on N2.

DGB's entry into the game is really off. She claims to find Alabaska J totally town based on a read in isolation, but quickly changes her tune once she's caught up with the gamestate. Note also that all of Grimmy, ac1983fan and Nightfall are in her TOWN collumn. That's one confirmed scum and both potential scum-buddies. Considering how staunchly anti-bussing DGB is, the list is doubly terrible (on top of being wrong pretty much from top to bottom).

I dislike Nightfall's reaction to my argument with Fonz. He's hedging his bets and playing both sides.

DGB changes her tune again in regards to Alabaska J once it becomes aparent that he's going to get lynched. This is particularly telling because I don't think there's a lot of difference between the kind of frustration Alabaska displayed at that time and the one he displayed previously.

Day 3

:

I'll try not to repeat myself too much here.

ac1983fan's first post of the day is slightly puzzling to me. Particularly that he suspects the Fonz and not me, when the last he said about us two was this.

While I don't agree with Nightfall's analysis of DGB's claim, it has an air of sincere confusion which I've seen from Nightfall in previous games.

I will point out again that DGB has done

nothing

today except claim.

Conclusions:

Braeden did nothing all game except opportunisticly lynch a town player. DGB has been inconsistent when it comes to Alabaska J. Her claim is wildly implausible. She is now hedging her bets instead of trying to solve this game. DGB is scum.

I am leaning towards ac1983fan being the second scum, for weird interaction with Grimmy, inconsistent behavior and driving the Alabaska wagon. The main point in his favor right now is voting DGB, but I can see it as bussing seeing as he's on the spot as well.

Nightfall is a very mixed bag. His suspicions have been horrible all game long and I felt like he spent an inordinate amount of time debating technicalities instead of trying to lynch scum. He was never very forceful about his suspicions and has an air of wishy-washyness. My main reason for suspecting ac1983fan over him is that I am notoriously bad at reading Nightfall, and have falsly suspected him for similar reasons in more than one previous game. I will weigh these two against each other again tomorrow if it comes to that.

I think Zilla has been playing terribly, but I do think she was investigated innocent, so she's off the table.

[CrashTextDummie]

Vote: DrippingGoofball

A question for Nightfall:
Do you have any flavor supporting your role-claim?

[The Fonz]

I like that analysis, actually. I think the scum are 2/3 of DGB, Nightfall, and acfan. I'm pretty sure IF a claimed vanilla is scum, it's acfan.

I do find Zilla's 'case' on this page bizarre mind, and i think i would react as acfan has done. The plot thickens...

[The Fonz]

Also Fonz, sorry if you said it before and I missed it, but what did you mean before when you said that Pacman's vig attempt "timed out"?

He submitted it before the thread was opened, but was told the deadline for night actions had passed. I'd have thought that obvious.

[Nightfall]

CTD

"Fonz quoted it and agreed with it. I suppose you missed that as well. "
- Yes, Which post is that in?

"Indeed, my target for suspicion was predetermined. Here is where I determined it. This is scummy how?"
"I don't believe DGB's claim. Naturally, I'm pretty set on her being scum. This is tunnel vision how?"
- You have reached a conclusion but in my eyes you don't seem to be really considering the posibility that she could be town and still get the results she claims. In my post on DGB I said why I think she could be telling the truth and I don't think that possiblity has been given enough thought. instead you seem to have moved on to trying to paint me as her partner in crime.

"Just for the record, there is a difference between saying hi to a person and a Hitler salute. Thank you for reading my posts closely."
- That is the reason that I asked if it was a Hitler salute. I apologize if I am wrong but that is what it looked like to me and that's why I commented on it.

"I dislike Nightfall's reaction to my argument with Fonz. He's hedging his bets and playing both sides."
- I wasn't playing both sides. I was feeling that the arguements you were making against each other didn't seem to have much support to them but then when the two of you would react to each others comments you did less to make me think that the otherone had nothing and more to make me think that you were hiding something or wrong in some way.

"Nightfall is a very mixed bag. His suspicions have been horrible all game long and I felt like he spent an inordinate amount of time debating technicalities instead of trying to lynch scum. He was never very forceful about his suspicions and has an air of wishy-washyness."
- I don't think that my suspicions have been horrible at all. The people that I have spoken out against appeared to have been scum because of how they were acting. It's not my fault if someone acts scummy and I find them suspect for that. As for debating technicalities vs finding scum, I thought I was doing both. Also a lot of my talk regarding technicalities have been the result of being called on to defend my suspicions.

"Do you have any flavor supporting your role-claim?"
- Yes I do

FONZ

"He submitted it before the thread was opened, but was told the deadline for night actions had passed. I'd have thought that obvious."
- Zilla had asked about it too so aparantly not. I just wanted to make sure we knew the details.

DGB

If you are around could you post your thoughts. I do agree with CTD that we haven't heard much from you today.

[Zilla]

Oh my god.

unvote: CTD
Vote: DrippingGoofball

She posted her scumlist. Check her entry opinions with triple asterisks. She claims that was something she "was doing before the totally town" thing, and that she took some of them off.

Bull.

Grimmy is triple-starred, and turned up scum. If AC and CTD aren't scum together, I knew for certain Nightfall and DBG were scum together. I can't exactly back this up becuase it's all psycho-theory stuff based on where the pressure was being applied, especially by nightfall and CTD.

There are a TON of problems I have with CTD's post, but reading back through some of those links, it's pretty clear that DGB slipped in regard to Alabaska and her "totally town" lists, and I suspect HEAVILY that those asterisks were a MAJOR slip revealing her scumbuddies.

[ac1983fan]

That is L-1 I believe.
And who will be the hammerer?

[Zilla]

Okay, I can back it up slightly because Nightfall has been defending DBG's claim.

I will admit I have been playing these last few pages totally irrationally, but it did help generate information that couldn't be obtained by logical arguing, and I needed some insight.

I, too, think AC's reaction wasn't bad. CTD's is horrible though, and if I hadn't looked over DGB's posts again, I'd still consider him my lynch candidate. I'll outline some of the problems I have with his post:

Calling Braeden's vote on Charter a "sudden U-turn" and opportunistic seems inaccurate. I can see the problem in his post in that, from a scum standpoint, he thinks he can lynch a power-role Charter, but also I felt the same way about Charter after his fake-death "you just lynched a power role" thing. Refusing to claim it made it extremely suspect.

"Liking AC's first vote," he votes confirmed-scum Grimmy, BUT he does so at a time when Grimmy wasn't in danger, and scum will often vote their partners when it is safe to do so. I dislike that CTD ignores this possibility.

Zilla [...] concludes that the wagon was mostly town-led. She betrays this thought on the very same page by voting Alabaska J, who was part of the wagon.

This is a horrible misrepresentation, as my vote on Alabaska had nothing to do with his position regarding Charter. Also note that "mostly town led" does not mean "there were no scum on the case." I don't see how one can draw a connection between my reasons for voting Alabaska and my views on the charter wagon.

I'm pointing out this post of Jebus again, because there is no earthly way he investigated Alabaska J on N2.

Jebus played irrationally for a cop. Nevertheless, I think it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the mafia has a framer or there was bussing involved. If the mafia switched Alabaska for one of their own, the investigation would show guilty as the target switches to the mafia, and the cop would VERY likely not be informed of this.


So I have problems with his analysis on some points.