Chuck Season 1 - GAME OVER

[Ragnarokio]

@Ant:

1) If by "At the End" you meant "Right by the Start" then I can buy that. Dana and Peregrine are the only two people who have any feasible effort put into them. RC has some analysis but it's empty. The rest of the people have nothing real on them.

2) Looking through your posts. #6 Is the first real one, and it makes a couple comments that don't accomplish anything, and that you don't follow up on. You also vote for MBF, but unvote him as soon as he posts again. Post #10 is another real post, where you poke at someone for lurking, and shrug off an accusation by saying it's how you play. You also make a comment on me that you don't follow up on. Your next three posts involve you being excessively neutral and non-active, and the one after is you voting someone for lurking.

This pattern persists throughout the day, you do nothing that has any real impact on anything. You're way too neutral and disconnected from the game. You might as well not be here.

3) You are the first person that I have seriously attacked this game. Nice defense, though.

4) Yep. What do you have to say about your target-hopping? You didn't seem very interested in Dana for long.

5) I guess that explains why you're playing so transparently.

6) This does not seem to be the case. I double-checked a couple of your games, and you're generally involved right from the beginning. I might buy your activity going down at some points, but for the most part, you're involved, slightly aggressive, and contributing original and meaningful content. Not like your play here.

[danakillsu]

unvote vote: mikeburnfire

Blatantly ignoring someone and then voting them is incredibly scummy.

[mothrax]

votecount 1.5

Morgan: What happened, Chuck? You used to be cool.
Chuck: I used to be cool? When, when was that? When we were 13? Well, I hate to go changing on you, buddy, but if you hadn't noticed we are now, chronologically speaking, adults. So, unless you want to work retail for the rest of your life and, by the way, drag me down with you in the process, I would suggest that you grow up!

danakillsu (3): Energetic Penguin, PerigrineV, mikeburnfire
Ant_to_the_max (2): Magua, ooba
Ragnarokio (2): Mastermind of Sin, Thor665
Thor665 (2): Ragnarokio, ooba
ReaperCharlie (1): MarchHare
Magua (1): ReaperCharlie
mikeburnfire (1): danakillsu
PerigrineV (1): ChannelDelibird

Notes:
The following people should take a closer look at the ruleset: ReaperCharlie
With

13

alive, it takes

7

to lynch.
Sorry for the delay, One more paper and then I am done for good!
Deadline is Thursday May 12 at 11:59 PM (EST)

[mothrax]

@Mod: Deadline extension please?

No, however the following has been added to the ruleset:

Rules Change

From: VIII) A deadline extension may be granted; just ask.
To: VIII) If half of the living players post "

@Mod: Requesting Deadline Extension

, the request will be granted. The amount of time will vary at the mods disgression. This rule may only be used once per game.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Mod: Requesting Deadline Extension

[Thor665]

MarchHare
ReaperCharlie
danakillsu
ChannelDelibird

If any of the above players request an extension, they should than also include an explanation of why they're dorking around on single vote wagons and not screaming at us more or attempting to consolidate and move functionally towards a lynch.
I'm not voting extension.

[Magua]

Thor, goddamit. I wish to make babies with you. But Ragnarokio is still a terrible lynch.

Why are you so against a Raggy lynch though? You just screamed and dismissed it, but I was willing to say why I didn't like your case.

1. Ragnarokio is capable of playing well (evidence, evidence, evidence).

2. Scum want to fly under the radar, not make waves.

3. Ragnarokio goes out of her way to troll/provoke (evidence, evidence, evidence).

The crux of the case against Ragnarokio seems to be that she's got a lot of one-liners, glib replies, and generally useless posts. But my counterargument (nee: chainsaw defense) is that she's capable of writing cogent, well thought out posts, so the glib one liner posts are intentional. Which reads more as trolling-town, "What can I get away with?" and less lazy scum. Ragnarokio-scum could easily blend in, especially amongst say, ooba and Mastermind of Sin, but she seems to consciously not do this. This is a towntell in my book.

UNVOTE: Ant_to_the_max
VOTE: Energetic Penguin

Join me, Thor

and we can rule this galaxy as father and son

.

[ChannelDelibird]

I don't see why we need a deadline extension. Twenty pages is enough to go on for one day.

Will be doing that catching up later this afternoon.

[mikeburnfire]

We don't need an extension. At this rate, the person I'm voting will be lynched, and I'm okay with that.

[Ragnarokio]

I am sad that there is a lack of interest in the ant case.

[Thor665]

1. Ragnarokio is capable of playing well (evidence, evidence, evidence).

2. Scum want to fly under the radar, not make waves.

3. Ragnarokio goes out of her way to troll/provoke (evidence, evidence, evidence).

Well, I'll note that 2/3 of you showing her scumhunting is a tree she was barking up while apparently not understanding what I was saying at all, and that 1005 of her trolling does not appear to be for any sort of scumhunting purpose. #2 is a decent point insomuch as she's definitely avoided much appeasement and your #3 points feed back into it. Not sold, but let's see how much play this compromise candidate gets?

Unvote: Ragnarokio
Vote: Energetic Penguin

It's new, it's fresh, it's fueled by fear of having no lynch after two weeks of half the player base not even trying to get a lynch, come one come all!

@Rag - why should it go somewhere again? I thought you were mostly sheeping Magua suddenly with no real clear buildup from yourself...did I miss something?

[Thor665]

and that

100%

of her trolling does not appear

[danakillsu]

We don't need an extension. At this rate, the person I'm voting will be lynched, and I'm okay with that.

LOOK AT THIS! HE ONCE AGAIN REFUSES TO DEAL WITH ANY REAL ISSUES AND REPEATS THAT HE WANTS ME LYNCHED! DON'T LET THIS SCUM GET AWAY WITH THIS! My vote won't be on a single-vote wagon if you people would wake up and vote mbf.

[Energetic Penguin]

OOPS, fixed below, I'd like Magua to respond.

Ok I might have been wrong on that scum team call ..
- I will not support a MBF, MOS, dana lynch (Deadlines exceptions excluded but would like to avoid it - Given a choice amongst three to avoid NL I'd go MOS>dana>MBF)
- I retract my RC town read
- I would like Thor lynched

Do you still suspect Ant? Why did you change your mind on MoS?

wagon on Ant is weak.

@

Magua

: I don't like that you listed MBF as townread. Your sole reason is that getting to L-2 as scum is unlikely. Why? There's no reason why it would require both his scumbuddies to be on him either. MBF is looking quite scummy to me.

[Ragnarokio]

@Rag - why should it go somewhere again? I thought you were mostly sheeping Magua suddenly with no real clear buildup from yourself...did I miss something?

Because I tried to build a real case on him.

[Energetic Penguin]

I admit to not contrbuting to this game as much as I should.

Unvote

[ChannelDelibird]

OK, I'm rereading the whole game and writing this post as I go through. Let's start with explaining why I'm voting for Peregrine at the moment:

This post is why my vote moved there immediately. Peregrine declined to comment on the RC/Thor early game interaction which IMO was the first definable thing that happened in the game and instead made a spampost with a funny image. He also said "Let's hear everyone else's cases", which struck me as a little weird, seeing as his case was a funny image - seemed like he was encouraging more random spam rather than getting on with the game. I found it interesting, so I moved my vote to him. I didn't make any further comment because I wanted to see if/how he/others would react to it.

This post by Ant was the first interesting reaction I got, once I "bumped" my vote. This is the sort of post that I've let scum get away with before - in which I vote or announce suspicion on someone without elaboration and a scum goes "yeah, I had a funny feeling too" or similar to try and look like they're sharing my thought process. This is a big part of why I think Ant is likely scum.

Peregrine then makes this post after a few pages away. He makes a point of commenting only on the fact that I am voting for him and also some references to the early page spam shenangians. Nothing else.

Then he jumps on the Thor wagon when a couple of other people do. Exploitative.

Then all of a sudden he doesn't want Thor wagoned. It's not as if anything in between his vote and unvote actually came from Thor, or had any reasons from anyone as to why he shouldn't be being wagoned after all.

Meanwhile, Ant no longer seems to have found Peregrine suspicious after all.

This is a really interesting post from Ant, in that it

looks

like he's saying something, but he's actually not saying anything at all. He's trying to look as if he has a reaction to the fake daykill without actually giving an opinion.

In this post,, Ant makes excuses for lurkers (which he can potentially refer to later when a lurking scumbuddy comes up for suspicion). His Peregrine vote is quite interesting and I'm not sure what to make of it either way (reluctant to draw any direct connections between anyone before we get a scumflip, anyway).

Ant does get town points for giving opinions on everyone unsolicited. Gives me pause.

I've already pointed out why I think the second part of this Peregrine post is scummy, but the first part of it is, too. See Peregrine straddle the fence with expert precision refusing to make a stand either side of the RC/dana debate.

This ReaperCharlie post stood out weirdly on reread. He complains that I didn't comment on dana's iso read and subsequent vote on Peregrine then uses it as evidence that dana and I are scumbuddies. He also says that "only stupid town or scum confirm vote" which is such an incredible generalisation (I mean, blatantly false). Yes, he has the audacity to call

me

a "tunneling townie". This is RC who's been going after dana all game on pretty much no reasoning.

Back to Peregrine, and this post shows him simply dimissing a reasoned explanation from me about the psychology of scum players and why I thought one of his posts was worded in a way more likely to come from scum than town as "opinion". He also says he wants to avoid "post wars", which appears to mean "having any kind of discussion with the people who are voting for me at all".

tl;dr:

Peregrine is scum. Everything Ant has done makes me think he's scum apart from this post which came out of nowhere to give an opinion on everyone and now makes me really unsure. RC is on my radar now.

---------

In other news, nothing about the dana wagon makes me want to be on it.

Next I will look at EP and Ragna, if they're the alternatives to a dana lynch. But seriously, Peregrine is a scumbag. We should be lynching him today.

[ChannelDelibird]

Unofficial Vote Count

danakillsu (2): PerigrineV, mikeburnfire
Energetic Penguin (2): Magua, Thor
Ant_to_the_max (1): ooba
Ragnarokio (1): Mastermind of Sin
Thor665 (1): Ragnarokio
ReaperCharlie (1): MarchHare
Magua (1): ReaperCharlie
mikeburnfire (1): danakillsu
PerigrineV (1): ChannelDelibird

Not Voting (1): Energetic Penguin

[Magua]

@

Magua

: I don't like that you listed MBF as townread. Your sole reason is that getting to L-2 as scum is unlikely. Why? There's no reason why it would require both his scumbuddies to be on him either. MBF is looking quite scummy to me.

You think it's more likely that five townies would run someone up to L-2 by pg 3?

Why is MBF scummy?

[ReaperCharlie]

@Mod: I'm voting mikeburnfire, not Magua.

Nobody should be lynching dana right now. I need to re-read him and then I will give the go-ahead if he's still scum.

Also on my radar are PV and CDB, though not necessarily scum. Re-read should be coming soon, and I'll post my thoughts. Sorry about my inactivity the last couple of days, life's been really busy, and I've been catching up on a lot of things (including Portal 2, which I still haven't had time to finish...)

Sooo yeah. Nobody lynch anybody yet.

Also, I find it pretty stupid that MoS lurks all through Day 1 and then requests for an extension. WHAT THE F#$& IS THAT.

[PeregrineV]

OK, I'm rereading the whole game and writing this post as I go through. Let's start with explaining why I'm voting for Peregrine at the moment:

This post is why my vote moved there immediately. Peregrine declined to comment on the RC/Thor early game interaction which IMO was the first definable thing that happened in the game and instead made a spampost with a funny image.

Is was funny wasn't it?

He also said "Let's hear everyone else's cases", which struck me as a little weird, seeing as his case was a funny image - seemed like he was encouraging more random spam rather than getting on with the game.

So in effect I was asking them to restate thier cases and take down the randomness level but making them think about thier votes, and you decided that I was encouraging more random spam? So you ignored the actual words I wrote? Or did you merely apply new meaning to the existing words?

I found it interesting, so I moved my vote to him. I didn't make any further comment because I wanted to see if/how he/others would react to it.

This post by Ant was the first interesting reaction I got, once I "bumped" my vote. This is the sort of post that I've let scum get away with before - in which I vote or announce suspicion on someone without elaboration and a scum goes "yeah, I had a funny feeling too" or similar to try and look like they're sharing my thought process. This is a big part of why I think Ant is likely scum.

Peregrine then makes this post after a few pages away. He makes a point of commenting only on the fact that I am voting for him and also some references to the early page spam shenangians. Nothing else.

Meanwhile, back in the Bird-Cave, CDB composes his own nefarious post in this time frame, and posts it!

Nothing else.

Then he jumps on the Thor wagon when a couple of other people do. Exploitative.

Inside joke.

Then all of a sudden he doesn't want Thor wagoned. It's not as if anything in between his vote and unvote actually came from Thor, or had any reasons from anyone as to why he shouldn't be being wagoned after all.

Yes, Thor was at L-1, and one more vote would lynch him. I didn't actually want him lynched, as he seems pretty townish. So why keep him at L-1 and make it easy for someone to do? And you agree with me,

but

, it's still part of your arguement about why I'm scum?

Meanwhile, Ant no longer seems to have found Peregrine suspicious after all.

This is a really interesting post from Ant, in that it

looks

like he's saying something, but he's actually not saying anything at all. He's trying to look as if he has a reaction to the fake daykill without actually giving an opinion.

In this post,, Ant makes excuses for lurkers (which he can potentially refer to later when a lurking scumbuddy comes up for suspicion). His Peregrine vote is quite interesting and I'm not sure what to make of it either way (reluctant to draw any direct connections between anyone before we get a scumflip, anyway).

Ant does get town points for giving opinions on everyone unsolicited. Gives me pause.

I've already pointed out why I think the second part of this Peregrine post is scummy, but the first part of it is, too. See Peregrine straddle the fence with expert precision refusing to make a stand either side of the RC/dana debate.

So what I'm hearing is that in your opinion my post was anti-town and mafia-team inspired because I refused to take either Danakillsu or ReaperCharlie's side in a debate they were having?
Well, since it's your opinion, you can't really be wrong, now can you? However, I might point out your opinion has it's roots in faulty reasoning. People are allowed to debate without my interjecting anything. They are allowed to do this anytime. I am allowed to interject, if I so desire. I can do this at any time. I can interject, and state my feelings, thoughts, opinions, etc. They can be my own and not mirror one of the debaters. Or they can wholly or partially match the side of one of the debaters.
For the record, my stand on that debate is the same as CDB. Please provide the link so we both know where we both stand.

This ReaperCharlie post stood out weirdly on reread. He complains that I didn't comment on dana's iso read and subsequent vote on Peregrine then uses it as evidence that dana and I are scumbuddies. He also says that "only stupid town or scum confirm vote" which is such an incredible generalisation (I mean, blatantly false). Yes, he has the audacity to call

me

a "tunneling townie". This is RC who's been going after dana all game on pretty much no reasoning.

Back to Peregrine, and this post shows him simply dimissing a reasoned explanation from me about the psychology of scum players and why I thought one of his posts was worded in a way more likely to come from scum than town as "opinion". He also says he wants to avoid "post wars", which appears to mean "having any kind of discussion with the people who are voting for me at all".

I believe the post shows that I am pointing out that you are expressing opinions and expect us, the readers, to take them as fact. You do it again in the sentence above. You are the only person voting me, and it took you 3 weeks and 20 pages to put up a case, half of which is your suspicions of other players, and you would like "discussion" on it?
OK. Here it is.
I see your opinion, and dismiss it entirely since I know my own alignment.

tl;dr:

Peregrine is scum. Everything Ant has done makes me think he's scum apart from this post which came out of nowhere to give an opinion on everyone and now makes me really unsure. RC is on my radar now.

So far, Ant and RC haven't stood out as particularly scummy, but I haven't finished my re-read of them yet.

[ChannelDelibird]

Ugh. I spent a long time writing this post because I have had trouble expressing myself calmly and rationally.

He also said "Let's hear everyone else's cases", which struck me as a little weird, seeing as his case was a funny image - seemed like he was encouraging more random spam rather than getting on with the game.

So in effect I was asking them to restate thier cases and take down the randomness level but making them think about thier votes, and you decided that I was encouraging more random spam? So you ignored the actual words I wrote? Or did you merely apply new meaning to the existing words?

When you say "let's hear everyone else's cases" after announcing that your idea of a case at that point was one penguin slapping another one in the back of the head, that looked like encouraging random cases to me.

However, it looks like you're saying here that you were making some kind of sarcastic point in that post about how everyone's cases for votes at the time were about as good as penguin gifs and thereby challenging people to raise their games, and that's something that I completely didn't get from it but can see it now that you've explained it, so I'm prepared to retract that criticism.

I found it interesting, so I moved my vote to him. I didn't make any further comment because I wanted to see if/how he/others would react to it.

This post by Ant was the first interesting reaction I got, once I "bumped" my vote. This is the sort of post that I've let scum get away with before - in which I vote or announce suspicion on someone without elaboration and a scum goes "yeah, I had a funny feeling too" or similar to try and look like they're sharing my thought process. This is a big part of why I think Ant is likely scum.

Peregrine then makes this post after a few pages away. He makes a point of commenting only on the fact that I am voting for him and also some references to the early page spam shenangians. Nothing else.

Meanwhile, back in the Bird-Cave, CDB composes his own nefarious post in this time frame, and posts it!

Nothing else.

In the post you linked to, I think it's fairly obvious that I'm asking for other players to look at you to see if they see what I'm seeing. By asking MarchHare to stop acting like Ythan was his main, I meant that I wanted him to stop posting loads of tiny little posts, thereby reducing spam levels. By contrast, in this post, you're actually encouraging spam by making more jokes about the long-dead RVS.

Then he jumps on the Thor wagon when a couple of other people do. Exploitative.

Inside joke.

So, after 7 pages of game, you joined a fast-moving bandwagon because of an inside joke?

Then all of a sudden he doesn't want Thor wagoned. It's not as if anything in between his vote and unvote actually came from Thor, or had any reasons from anyone as to why he shouldn't be being wagoned after all.

Yes, Thor was at L-1, and one more vote would lynch him. I didn't actually want him lynched, as he seems pretty townish. So why keep him at L-1 and make it easy for someone to do? And you agree with me,

but

, it's still part of your arguement about why I'm scum?

Just because I think Thor is town (and for the record, at the time I was actually of this opinion rather than the one you linked to) doesn't mean that you unvoting Thor can't be scummy, and you don't get to say that just because you made an action that objectively made Thor less liable to death then I shouldn't find the details of it scummy. That's a fallacy. Given the circumstances - you had just voted for Thor a few posts ago in a manner that did not at all make it obvious that it was some kind of loljoke - suddenly jumping off him again looked really weird.

Meanwhile, Ant no longer seems to have found Peregrine suspicious after all.

This is a really interesting post from Ant, in that it

looks

like he's saying something, but he's actually not saying anything at all. He's trying to look as if he has a reaction to the fake daykill without actually giving an opinion.

In this post,, Ant makes excuses for lurkers (which he can potentially refer to later when a lurking scumbuddy comes up for suspicion). His Peregrine vote is quite interesting and I'm not sure what to make of it either way (reluctant to draw any direct connections between anyone before we get a scumflip, anyway).

Ant does get town points for giving opinions on everyone unsolicited. Gives me pause.

I've already pointed out why I think the second part of this Peregrine post is scummy, but the first part of it is, too. See Peregrine straddle the fence with expert precision refusing to make a stand either side of the RC/dana debate.

So what I'm hearing is that in your opinion my post was anti-town and mafia-team inspired because I refused to take either Danakillsu or ReaperCharlie's side in a debate they were having?
Well, since it's your opinion, you can't really be wrong, now can you? However, I might point out your opinion has it's roots in faulty reasoning. People are allowed to debate without my interjecting anything. They are allowed to do this anytime. I am allowed to interject, if I so desire. I can do this at any time. I can interject, and state my feelings, thoughts, opinions, etc. They can be my own and not mirror one of the debaters. Or they can wholly or partially match the side of one of the debaters.
For the record, my stand on that debate is the same as CDB. Please provide the link so we both know where we both stand.

Not exactly. What I'm saying is that you made a point of wading into the debate in order to come down square on the middle of the fence with your options wide open. You said "I doubt RC's intentions but I like his case on dana" - looks a lot like you're trying to give yourself room to manoeuvre later if the dana wagon gets serious. I didn't say you couldn't interject on the debate, but you had nothing to contribute to either side. You just wanted to look like you were having an opinion without having one.

This ReaperCharlie post stood out weirdly on reread. He complains that I didn't comment on dana's iso read and subsequent vote on Peregrine then uses it as evidence that dana and I are scumbuddies. He also says that "only stupid town or scum confirm vote" which is such an incredible generalisation (I mean, blatantly false). Yes, he has the audacity to call

me

a "tunneling townie". This is RC who's been going after dana all game on pretty much no reasoning.

Back to Peregrine, and this post shows him simply dimissing a reasoned explanation from me about the psychology of scum players and why I thought one of his posts was worded in a way more likely to come from scum than town as "opinion". He also says he wants to avoid "post wars", which appears to mean "having any kind of discussion with the people who are voting for me at all".

I believe the post shows that I am pointing out that you are expressing opinions and expect us, the readers, to take them as fact. You do it again in the sentence above. You are the only person voting me, and it took you 3 weeks and 20 pages to put up a case, half of which is your suspicions of other players, and you would like "discussion" on it?
OK. Here it is.
I see your opinion, and dismiss it entirely since I know my own alignment.

I'm not trying to force anyone to accept my opinions as fact. I never said that I was offering anything other than an opinion, but I gave reasons why I held that opinion based on the psychology of playing scum, and your rebuttal to those reasons were "that's an opinion". Of course it is! Telling me that it's just an opinion doesn't somehow make that opinion more baseless.

Again I have a problem with how you are representing me here - why do you say "a case, half of which is your suspicions of other players"? That post was my catchup post of the entire thread, it wasn't all about you, obviously. At the top of the post I said "let's start with explaining my vote on Peregrine" and that was what I started with, but it wasn't saying that everything that followed was part of why I was voting for you. You're trying to make out like the points that I brought up against you are less valid because I also talked about some other people in the same post.

Mafia is about opinions. Expressing yours and examining others. Giving reasons for yours so that you can convince other people to agree with them. I've given opinions. I've given reasons behind them. You keep dismissing those opinions out of hand for being opinions rather than engage with me about the reasons behind them.

Ugh. I want to bang my head against a wall. Whether it's deliberate or just natural personality friction between us, you are really getting under my skin. I don't want to insult you, and I don't want to get so worked up about this that I get biased. Parts of your last post felt more townish than your previous ones. Other parts I'm trying to decide if they're scummy or if I just want them to be because they're working me up. I hate these kinds of wallposts, but I feel like I have to make one here because I feel like you're misrepresenting me either deliberately or through misunderstanding. I am also having a bit of trouble expressing myself and hope that everything in this post is clear and understandable.

Apologies in advance if I come across as a dick in this or future posts.

[ChannelDelibird]

Eh, I previewed that about a million times but I still feel like there are some things I can't quite put my finger on that I haven't said properly or addressed or made clear or eehrdhmlrmsh. My head's in a bad way at the moment.

[ChannelDelibird]

OK, I'm second-guessing everything now. Am I getting tangled up in the Peregrine thing because of a culture clash rather than because of his alignment? Is that suddenly-here's-my-thoughts-on-everyone post Ant made enough to not lynch him today? Am I ignoring someone like ooba because I like him and would prefer him to be town?

Feck. The only read I'm confident on at the moment is that Thor is town. That better not fucking backfire on me later.

[PeregrineV]

Spoiler: Post under discussion

Ugh. I spent a long time writing this post because I have had trouble expressing myself calmly and rationally.

He also said "Let's hear everyone else's cases", which struck me as a little weird, seeing as his case was a funny image - seemed like he was encouraging more random spam rather than getting on with the game.

So in effect I was asking them to restate thier cases and take down the randomness level but making them think about thier votes, and you decided that I was encouraging more random spam? So you ignored the actual words I wrote? Or did you merely apply new meaning to the existing words?

When you say "let's hear everyone else's cases" after announcing that your idea of a case at that point was one penguin slapping another one in the back of the head, that looked like encouraging random cases to me.

However, it looks like you're saying here that you were making some kind of sarcastic point in that post about how everyone's cases for votes at the time were about as good as penguin gifs and thereby challenging people to raise their games, and that's something that I completely didn't get from it but can see it now that you've explained it, so I'm prepared to retract that criticism.

I found it interesting, so I moved my vote to him. I didn't make any further comment because I wanted to see if/how he/others would react to it.

This post by Ant was the first interesting reaction I got, once I "bumped" my vote. This is the sort of post that I've let scum get away with before - in which I vote or announce suspicion on someone without elaboration and a scum goes "yeah, I had a funny feeling too" or similar to try and look like they're sharing my thought process. This is a big part of why I think Ant is likely scum.

Peregrine then makes this post after a few pages away. He makes a point of commenting only on the fact that I am voting for him and also some references to the early page spam shenangians. Nothing else.

Meanwhile, back in the Bird-Cave, CDB composes his own nefarious post in this time frame, and posts it!

Nothing else.

In the post you linked to, I think it's fairly obvious that I'm asking for other players to look at you to see if they see what I'm seeing. By asking MarchHare to stop acting like Ythan was his main, I meant that I wanted him to stop posting loads of tiny little posts, thereby reducing spam levels. By contrast, in this post, you're actually encouraging spam by making more jokes about the long-dead RVS.

Then he jumps on the Thor wagon when a couple of other people do. Exploitative.

Inside joke.

So, after 7 pages of game, you joined a fast-moving bandwagon because of an inside joke?

Then all of a sudden he doesn't want Thor wagoned. It's not as if anything in between his vote and unvote actually came from Thor, or had any reasons from anyone as to why he shouldn't be being wagoned after all.

Yes, Thor was at L-1, and one more vote would lynch him. I didn't actually want him lynched, as he seems pretty townish. So why keep him at L-1 and make it easy for someone to do? And you agree with me,

but

, it's still part of your arguement about why I'm scum?

Just because I think Thor is town (and for the record, at the time I was actually of this opinion rather than the one you linked to) doesn't mean that you unvoting Thor can't be scummy, and you don't get to say that just because you made an action that objectively made Thor less liable to death then I shouldn't find the details of it scummy. That's a fallacy. Given the circumstances - you had just voted for Thor a few posts ago in a manner that did not at all make it obvious that it was some kind of loljoke - suddenly jumping off him again looked really weird.

Meanwhile, Ant no longer seems to have found Peregrine suspicious after all.

This is a really interesting post from Ant, in that it

looks

like he's saying something, but he's actually not saying anything at all. He's trying to look as if he has a reaction to the fake daykill without actually giving an opinion.

In this post,, Ant makes excuses for lurkers (which he can potentially refer to later when a lurking scumbuddy comes up for suspicion). His Peregrine vote is quite interesting and I'm not sure what to make of it either way (reluctant to draw any direct connections between anyone before we get a scumflip, anyway).

Ant does get town points for giving opinions on everyone unsolicited. Gives me pause.

I've already pointed out why I think the second part of this Peregrine post is scummy, but the first part of it is, too. See Peregrine straddle the fence with expert precision refusing to make a stand either side of the RC/dana debate.

So what I'm hearing is that in your opinion my post was anti-town and mafia-team inspired because I refused to take either Danakillsu or ReaperCharlie's side in a debate they were having?
Well, since it's your opinion, you can't really be wrong, now can you? However, I might point out your opinion has it's roots in faulty reasoning. People are allowed to debate without my interjecting anything. They are allowed to do this anytime. I am allowed to interject, if I so desire. I can do this at any time. I can interject, and state my feelings, thoughts, opinions, etc. They can be my own and not mirror one of the debaters. Or they can wholly or partially match the side of one of the debaters.
For the record, my stand on that debate is the same as CDB. Please provide the link so we both know where we both stand.

Not exactly. What I'm saying is that you made a point of wading into the debate in order to come down square on the middle of the fence with your options wide open. You said "I doubt RC's intentions but I like his case on dana" - looks a lot like you're trying to give yourself room to manoeuvre later if the dana wagon gets serious. I didn't say you couldn't interject on the debate, but you had nothing to contribute to either side. You just wanted to look like you were having an opinion without having one.

This ReaperCharlie post stood out weirdly on reread. He complains that I didn't comment on dana's iso read and subsequent vote on Peregrine then uses it as evidence that dana and I are scumbuddies. He also says that "only stupid town or scum confirm vote" which is such an incredible generalisation (I mean, blatantly false). Yes, he has the audacity to call

me

a "tunneling townie". This is RC who's been going after dana all game on pretty much no reasoning.

Back to Peregrine, and this post shows him simply dimissing a reasoned explanation from me about the psychology of scum players and why I thought one of his posts was worded in a way more likely to come from scum than town as "opinion". He also says he wants to avoid "post wars", which appears to mean "having any kind of discussion with the people who are voting for me at all".

I believe the post shows that I am pointing out that you are expressing opinions and expect us, the readers, to take them as fact. You do it again in the sentence above. You are the only person voting me, and it took you 3 weeks and 20 pages to put up a case, half of which is your suspicions of other players, and you would like "discussion" on it?
OK. Here it is.
I see your opinion, and dismiss it entirely since I know my own alignment.

I'm not trying to force anyone to accept my opinions as fact. I never said that I was offering anything other than an opinion, but I gave reasons why I held that opinion based on the psychology of playing scum, and your rebuttal to those reasons were "that's an opinion". Of course it is! Telling me that it's just an opinion doesn't somehow make that opinion more baseless.

Again I have a problem with how you are representing me here - why do you say "a case, half of which is your suspicions of other players"? That post was my catchup post of the entire thread, it wasn't all about you, obviously. At the top of the post I said "let's start with explaining my vote on Peregrine" and that was what I started with, but it wasn't saying that everything that followed was part of why I was voting for you. You're trying to make out like the points that I brought up against you are less valid because I also talked about some other people in the same post.

Mafia is about opinions. Expressing yours and examining others. Giving reasons for yours so that you can convince other people to agree with them. I've given opinions. I've given reasons behind them. You keep dismissing those opinions out of hand for being opinions rather than engage with me about the reasons behind them.

Ugh. I want to bang my head against a wall. Whether it's deliberate or just natural personality friction between us, you are really getting under my skin. I don't want to insult you, and I don't want to get so worked up about this that I get biased. Parts of your last post felt more townish than your previous ones. Other parts I'm trying to decide if they're scummy or if I just want them to be because they're working me up. I hate these kinds of wallposts, but I feel like I have to make one here because I feel like you're misrepresenting me either deliberately or through misunderstanding. I am also having a bit of trouble expressing myself and hope that everything in this post is clear and understandable.

Apologies in advance if I come across as a dick in this or future posts.

I won't wall it again, as that will make it too big, but I'll address some of it.
Thor vote: There were three on him, I made a fourth. No big deal. But within 6 posts ooba and RC voted him to L-1. So I unvoted.
But, I do see you trying to call me out for voting him and then for unvoting him. In my opinion, you can't have it both ways.
And the only person meant to get the joke was Thor. But now, everyone can share in it.

Dana/RC: I already had suspicions about RC, but his case on dana I felt had some pretty good points. However, those good points mitigated the argument, so I did not buy fully into it. I had no problem letting the debate continue and making a decision based on more information. In my opinion, using the most information possible helps to make a better decision.

Opinions: Yes, but wanting me to discuss your opinions I will do so based on the knowledge I have. Of course, others are free to form an opinion based on your opinions, but I just wanted to point out that in any discussion with me about me, I will weigh my facts more heavily against your opinion.

And didn't intend to misrepresent, I used the first sentence as the basis of your thread. I apologize if you meant it only as a starting point.

Getting under your skin: Now you know why Thor joined.

My main point is if you want me to discuss your case on me, I will accept your opinions as opinions, but probably won't agree with them. Since, you, know, it's actually about me and I know why I didn the things I did. But, as I said, others may put more stock into them, so please continue. Your posts are clear and I think I understand what you are trying to say, but just disagree with parts of it.

Don't worry, your posts are perfectly accpetable game wise- I see no dickishness at all.
And don't sweat it too much, it's just a game.