Post #30: This Leech vote from CA really sticks out. It's just weird, there's no reason for it, and as I explained at the time, it runs completely counter to his stated goal of starting a bandwagon, any bandwagon. I could definitely see it as a clumsy distancing attempt.
Sotty/Leech +
Post #47: Even more ridiculously, he outright states that he disagrees with the reasons that Prana is being voted, but still joins the wagon for the sake of wagoning. Which is dumb as hell, but probably not something you'd do to your scum partner.
Sotty/Prana -
Post #59: Prana makes a concerted effort to ensure that CA is the first serious wagon of the game.
Sotty/Prana -
Post #62: At some point between #47 and this post, CA generates a scum read on Prana. So the "I don't think he's scummy, but I'll join the wagon anyway" wasn't just so he'd have an excuse to get off the wagon later.
Sotty/Prana -
Post #64: Leech totally ignores the spat that's going on between Prana and CA. I don't think this is revelatory about possible scum partners for him, I can see a scum player doing this whether or not his partner was involved in the spat. But in general, it's a little scummy.
Post #75: Leech does comment on it in passing now, and seems to be taking CA's side, though with a word of warning that he might be pushing it. Possible coaching here.
Leech/Sotty +, Leech/Prana -
Post #102: CA totally misrepresents fitz's case on dalt as "attacking someone for being new".
Sotty/fitz -
Post #108: Prana doesn't like the fact that Xite is encouraging Nexus to look for suspects outside the names that are already under suspicion. If Prana is scum, this seems like a strong indication that his partner falls outside that group.
Prana/Sotty --, Prana/Llama -, Prana/fitz -, Prana/Leech ++, Prana/Nightwolf ++
Post #155: Leech pointing out the fact that I didn't pursue fitz when he demonstrated a lack of setup knowledge, as well as being a general town tell for reasons I pointed out earlier, is specifically evidence against a partnership between him and fitz.
Leech/fitz -
Post #181: CA blasts Korashk quite a lot here, does not seem likely to be distancing to me.
Sotty/Llama -
Post #182: And fitz backs him up. The fact that he's not actually voting Korashk means I'm not counting this as a negative for Llama/fitz, but it's definitely a
Sotty/fitz +
Post #190: Prana spreading the suspicion around liberally here. The stuff about fitz could be distancing, since I don't think he ever follows up on it. Korashk getting the vote, on the other hand, makes this a
Prana/Llama -
Post #205: Leech takes up the case against fitz's case against dalt stronger than anyone else, I think.
Leech/fitz -
Post #207: CA goes after Korashk for requesting replacement. If he was distancing, the replacement would be a very convenient time to drop it with no consequences, so
Sotty/Llama --
Post #236: The last sentence here doesn't follow at all from what comes before it in any way that I can see, and is definitely a
Prana/fitz -
Post #240: CA continues to pursue Korashk even after he has been replaced. Definitely, definitely
Llama/Sotty --
Post #241: And Prana jumps back to CA for the above.
Prana/Sotty -
Post #246: Possible slip here; Prana says that fitz is "convinced he is right", which kind of sounds like he is assuming that fitz is town, while arguing that fitz is scummy. A bit more
Prana/fitz -
Post #250: CA attributes a Prana post to me.
Sotty/Prana -
Post #255: Llama replace-in ultimately concludes CA and fitz as the most suspect.
Llama/Sotty -, Llama/fitz -
Post #262: fitz says that town Llama would = scum CA, then votes Llama.
fitz/Llama -
, fitz/Sotty -
Post #267: Prana is directly asked to comment on Leech, and his response comes across a little like he is reluctant to do so.
Prana/Leech +
Post #276: Good case on CA from Llama, and it came when attention was starting to disappear on CA.
Llama/Sotty --
Post #285: Petty little snipe here, not likely to come between scum partners. If they're going to attack each other, scum do it big.
Prana/fitz -
Post #379: I FEEL THE NEED TO FEEL THE NEED TO POINT OUT THAT YOU FEEL THE NEED. FEEL IT. FEEL THE NEED IN ME.
Leech/fitz -
Post #441: Trying to decide if the Prana line here is more likely to be scum-on-scum or scum-on-town... I suppose it depends on the followup. Nightwolf being right in the middle of the town reads =
Llama/Nightwolf +
Post #472: Several people responded to my "why don't you want to lynch CA?" questioning to say that actually, they wouldn't mind lynching CA. Nightwolf specifically says that he'd lynch CA
over wendy
, which makes it less of an empty gesture, so Nightwolf/Sotty -
Post #474: fitz doesn't just disagree with lynching CA, he actively discourages me from even thinking about it.
fitz/Sotty +
Post #495: Leech is not willing to let go of a really poor point against fitz, that's a
Leech/fitz -
"I never said I was opposed to a CA lynch." -
Leech/Sotty +
Post #603: I just realised that this post is wrong, I meant "signal to noise ratio
decreased
". No wonder Nexus was confused.Post #626: "wendy has done a ton of stuff that's so scummy that I've seen less scummy scum." kind of sounds like another case of Prana assuming wendy is town while calling him scum. I know I said I was focusing on looking at scum partnerships, but there's been like five pages where it's all just people talking about Xite and wendy.
Post #631: fitz throws in a nice little dig at Llama to round out the day.
fitz/Llama -
Post #645: Leech agrees with my idea that the wendy kill implicates someone who had been getting off easy. That's a fairly short list at that point, especially if you remove Leech himself from the equation.
Leech/Nightwolf -
Post #652: So here's the followup to that Llama comment I mentioned earlier. Llama seems delighted to have something solid to bolster his gut read from earlier,
Llama/Prana -
OTOH,
Llama/fitz +
Post #666: That'll be a
Llama/Prana -, Llama/fitz -, Llama/Nightwolf +, Llama/Leech +
Post #677: Prana's endless argument with Lat contained a good deal of insistance that wendy being town doesn't mean there is anything worthwhile in his posts, which, in addition to being generally scummy, is a
Prana/fitz +
Post #699: Llama makes a solid contribution to the mounting pressure on Prana.
Llama/Prana -
Post #702: Prana responds with a rather less solid contribution to the pressure on Llama.
Prana/Llama -
Post #704: Meanwhile, Leech continues to insist that an obvious null tell from Llama is a scum tell.
Leech/Llama -
Post #731: Nightwolf not just accepting Llama's answer here is very definitely a
Nightwolf/Llama --
Post #735: fitz writes off the possibility of CA/Sotty as scum for a completely ridiculous reason, which I believe he is still pushing even now.
fitz/Sotty +
Post #749: Totally unwarranted hostility from fitz to Nightwolf here.
fitz/Nightwolf -
Post #779: Sotty comes in with another solid case on Prana.
Sotty/Prana -
Post #783: fitz answers Lat's "who are your top two scum" question with a bonus third place answer of Llama. I can't see scumfitz being so desperate to get some distancing in that he'd have to break the parameters of the question, so
fitz/Llama -
Post #788: Llama limits possible partners for fitz. On the one hand, if fitz was his partner, this would make it harder for him to link other players to him if he was lynched. On the other hand, it makes it less likely that fitz would be lynched in general. And since Llama was more on the chopping black than fitz at this stage, I'm going to rank this as a
Llama/fitz +
Post #811: Extremely protracted explanation from Nightwolf as to why he voted Llama without any particular desire to see Llama lynched. But basically, he voted Llama without any desire to see Llama lynched, so
Nightwolf/Llama ++
FINAL SCORES:
SCORES AT THE END OF DAY ONE:
Sotty
Leech: 3
Nightwolf: -1
fitz: 0
Llama: -7
Prana: -8
Llama
Nightwolf: 2
Leech: 0
fitz: -3
Prana: -5
Sotty: -7
fitz
Sotty: 0
Nightwolf: -1
Llama: -3
Leech: -3
Prana: -3
Prana
Leech: 2
Nightwolf: 2
fitz: -3
Llama: -5
Sotty: -8
Leech
Sotty: 3
Prana: 2
Llama: 0
Nightwolf: -1
fitz: -3
Nightwolf
Prana: 2
Llama: 2
fitz: -1
Leech: -1
Sotty: -1
Now let's take a look at some wagons:
Post 8-30
LML (3)
- Nexus
, CA, PranaPost 59-136
CA (3) - Llama,
iam
, Prana Post 155-208
Nexus (4)
- Xite, LML, Lat
, LeechPost 192-241
Korashk (4) -
dalt
, CA, Prana, Nexus
Post 262-288
Llama (4) -
dalt
, CA, Nexus
, fitzPost 369-370
wendy (5)
- Nightwolf, Xite, LML
, Prana, wendy
Post 375-386
wendy (5)
- Nightwolf, Xite, LML
, Prana, LeechPost 408-509
wendy (5)
- Xite, LML
, Prana, Leech, fitzPost 518-586
Xite (4)
- Lat
, Nightwolf, Leech, wendy
Post 586-611
wendy (6)
- Xite, LML
, Prana, fitz, Nexus, wendy
Post 624-End of D1
Xite (6)
- Lat
, Nightwolf, Leech, iam
, wendy
, LlamaPost 760-763
Llama (5) - Leech, Prana, Nightwolf,
LML, Nexus
Post 799-804
LML (3)
- iam
, Llama, Nexus
Post 834-836
Nexus (4)
- fitz, Nightwolf, Leech, LlamaPost 840-843
LML (4)
- iam
, Sotty, Nightwolf, LlamaPost 843-End of D2
Nexus (4)
- fitz, Leech, Lat
, NightwolfSomething that strikes me here is that Nightwolf and Leech seem to appear together quite often; most notably, they're the only two names (well, of the living) that appear on both lynching wagons. I think it's pretty unlikely that scum would stick so close together. Voting together one day or the other, sure, but I don't think they'd do it on both.
The other big big thing is the wendy and LML nightkills. There are two players that I simply do not believe would have come out with those kills on their own, and those players are fitz and Prana. On that basis, I'm fully prepared to write off fitz/Prana, fitz/Sotty and Prana/Sotty as possible pairings (No one was occupying Sotty's slot during N1, so if she's scum, her partner acted alone in killing wendy).
So, if I remove Leech/Nightwolf, fitz/Prana, fitz/Sotty and Prana/Sotty, plus anything that scored below -2 on my pairing analysis, it leaves these possible pairings:
Sotty/Leech
Sotty/Nightwolf
Llama/Leech
Llama/Nightwolf
Prana/Leech
Prana/Nightwolf
fitz/Nightwolf
Yeah, so pretty much, I think one or the other of Leech or Nightwolf is scum, but not both. I also think that whichever one it is, their partner is Prana, hence the vote. Here are some reasons.
All of the following Prana quotes strike me in some way as betraying a scum mindset:
Do I need to explain this one?Prana, iso 28 wrote:I have no clue if he deliberately lied or not, I'm just pointing out to claim he deliberately lied is to paint him scummy for your own ends, and to not actually consider all possibilities, whichwe, as town, should be doing.
If fitz was scum pushing a mislynch, which Prana was arguing, he wouldn't be convinced he was right, he'd know he was wrong.Prana, iso 29 wrote: Things aren't set black and white, you are deliberately ignoring the fact there are other potential factors, everyone is pointing this out, and you're sitting there with your fingers in your ears ignoring everything people are saying,convinced you are right.
[quote="Prana, iso 41]Now are you going to try scum hunting or are you destined to just distract town by tunnelling on me over a completely pointless issue? Because if it's the second one I may well vote for you on principle so we can get you out of the way and get on with some real scum hunting here.[/quote]
"I may well vote you on principle" - it seems like he's just non-commitally floating the idea of a policy lynch here to see if he can get away with it.
Wording issue here; the fact that he mentions that he's said it not too long ago, rather than just saying straight "CA is still one of my likely picks as scum" suggests that he is overly concerned with appearing consistent.Prana, iso 53 wrote:Actually I've not too long ago said CA is still one of my picks as likely scum.
^ This is a big one. Just, really think about what he's actually saying here. wendy has been remarkably scummy, so scummy, in fact, that Prana has seenPrana, iso 71 wrote:wendy HAS done a ton of stuff that's so scummy that I've seen less scummy scum.
less scummy scum
. Why would that be at all remarkable if wendy was scum? It wouldn't. This sentence only makes sense if Prana is saying that wendy was a remarkably scummy townie
. The first in a long series of posts on D2 where Prana continues to insist that wendy was scummy scum scum even though he died and flipped town. Basically, the purpose of this is to place the responsibility for wendy's lynch on wendy's shoulders, and thus not on Prana.Prana, iso 73 wrote:I'm not one for tunnelling if I can help it unless the person is acting considerably scummy (see: wendy).
And now I run into the brick wall of Prana and Lat's wall of text arguments, against which I beat my head repeatedly.
Kinda sounds like the old "I'm being suspecteded for the wrong reasons" tell.Prana, iso 80 wrote: I do love how I'm being made out to be scummy... for doing something pro-town.
In addition to all of that, I think the whole point about him forgetting, or "losing track" of his suspicions on Xite from Lat was a good one, and I have never been satisfied with Prana's explanation for it, no matter how many times he repeats it.
I still think Llama's no lynch push on D2 would be a huge and totally unnecessary risk for him as scum, and I just have a strong gut feel that fitz is town, so if Prana is town, that would PoE it down to Sotty + Leech/Nightwolf, but I really think it's Prana at this point.
This post might all be a little disjointed, but I've spent far too long on it already and it's holding me back from keeping up with more recent stuff, so. Hitting the submit button. Gonna respond to stuff from today in a moment.
