Mini 343: Donnie Darko 0:0:0:0 Game Over

[Chess83]

wow, okay I am here as a replacement. I have to say I was going to vote for Chamber also, he looked way to guilty. Not to bandwagon, but I really honestly thought you guys had a scummie there. I am going to read some posts again and post later on my findings.

[Chess83]

I'm not sure how someone can tell if a murder was done by somebody the murderer knew, just by wounds. My guess would be that because middlesex didn't seem to be a big town, people probably got to know each other.

I kinda wanna see what happens if I

Vote: Anix

Save The Dragons, [STD! sorry couldn't help myself] one could surmise that theory based on there not being any signs of a struggle. If the wounds looked sudden but the victim not having skin under the nail, pulled hair, brusies, etc. Signs of a fight or struggle equate to a sense of discomfort when the attacker first made his/her move.

[Chess83]

WARNING: LONG POST

I promised my thoughts thus far and I deliever...

I became suspicious of Save The Dragons when he never let up off of Chamber and pretty much led the charge against him. Chamber was posting coherent logic, STD simple was clouding it and people were listening to STD instead of re-reading Chamber’s posts and thinking about them. STD led the town into lynching a townie. For whatever reason, it looks like possibly to protect a possible partner, MeMe. Or maybe STD saw an chance to get a townie lynched and was not protecting his partner. But his partner came back in later… Scalebane. [throwing it out there for you guys to chew on].

As a recap…
Post #15

Unvote vote : meme lurker hunting is unproductive

Her response “Prove it.” (Post 16, made 4 mins after chamber)

MeMe posts a list of questions in post 17, chamber answers them in 19

chamber: I'll pose a couple questions since you've apparently got no answer for my challenge (and, to be fair, I know it's impossible to prove your blanket statement "lurker hunting is unproductive" -- just thought I'd try to make you stand behind your words): --If I'd simply switched my vote to AniX without saying why I was doing so or by saying "bandwagon" -- would that have made you hurry to vote me? --If I'd voted Der Hammer (who currently has no votes) with the same "yet to post" reason -- would that have made you hurry to vote me? In other words, is the fact that it's AniX that bothered you? Or the number of votes? Or, truly, the "lurker hunting" as stated? --Do you consider AniX a lurker at this point in the game? (For the record: I don't) --Do you think that a player who does something you deem "unproductive" is somehow more likely to be scum? --Do you think that simply waiting for everyone to post once while NO ONE posts a second time (as was the case before my vote change) is a better idea (or more productive) than making something happen?

Thats a lot of questions to answer, out of respect I won't ignroe them this time, but don't expect such at future times.

1 no, I would note you switched without stating a reason for future analysis but not vote you immediately.
2 yes, Its the lurker hunting reason that bothered me, you tried to right off your vote with a commonly accepted tactic.
3 This early in the game I wouldn’t really consider him a lurker, but hunting player who have yet to post is as unproductive imo.
4 Its no that you were doing something that was unproductive, but that you covered your vote with a bs reason.
5 Making things happen is fine, you just ousted yourself as scum in the process, good for the town, bad for you. I encourage your fellow scum to make the same mistake.

chamber pretty much answers the questions here. However, he makes it clear that he is not calling unproductivity scummy, but the motive she gave for her vote scummy. At this point I disagreed with chamber on his call of MeMe being scum, he claims this in answer 5.

MeMe responds in the next post,

you just ousted yourself as scum in the process

Do you really believe this? Because it kinda looks like a "bs reason" for your vote.

Basically she calls him out on his claim, as I would have done. It was a bad claim for chamber to make. As a result a small argument ensues concerning his claim on MeMe.
Then in post 26, STD jumps in the conversation, clouding things up.

Unvote vote : meme lurker hunting is unproductive

Unproductivity = scummy?

5 Making things happen is fine, you just ousted yourself as scum in the process, good for the town, bad for you. I encourage your fellow scum to make the same mistake.

Productivity = scummy?

How is this not clear STD? Did you not read his entire posts? It was not the action itself that was scummy it was her reason for the action! Chamber points this out in post 31.

Der Hammer votes for chamber. In 27. This makes 2 votes, as STD already had his random vote on chamber. In post 33, Scalebane votes chamber because he is not making sense. STD’s plan is working, a bandwagon is forming.

In post 35

Chamber: Honestly, you aren't making much sense. Sorry to tell you that. I think there are a lot of other people in this game who will agree with me. Vote: Chamber

Is he not making sense because his last post was a little grabled? Or because you don't agree with the angle he took with Meme?

Unvote: Anix

right after that in post 36

Well, I do not like people who can not type well, but that is something I normally try to keep out of my lynch decisions.

I think his logic is poor, his ability to reason is poor and he seems ready to attack people for things that are in the benefit of the town. That is the reason for my vote.

So STD’s plan is now reinforced by scalebane’s own confusion. In 38 Sotty7 voices her disagreement on Scalebane’s call of bad logic. But suggests the possibility of a clash of play styles.

Maybe Scalebane was not confused but caught on to what his partner was doing… [possible partner]

(just to get my position straight and out there) I think "lurker" hunting (lurker being used in a fairly loose sense there) in the early game is productive, and I haven't agreed with any of Chamber's logic so far. The fact that it happened to be a clash between MeMe and Chamber instead of *me* and chamber is that MeMe happens to be a little more active and vocal (or happened to be, RIP). I just plain don't agree with him. hence the vote.

Chamber's logic, roughly seems to me to be:
MeMe decided to switch votes because she's really scum but she tried to hide her scumminess by claiming it was a common early game tactic to try and get people to at least post by voting them (which it *is*)

Occam would argue:
MeMe switched votes in order to try and get Anix to post, and claimed it was a common early game tactic *because it is a common early game tactic*

Does the former not sound like an attempt at a bandwagon to anyone else?

It does not to me, and frankly I don’t remember this being posted by chamber. It was actually posted by MeMe… Behold post 17!

If I'd simply switched my vote to AniX without saying why I was doing so or by saying "bandwagon" -- would that have made you hurry to vote me?

In fact chamber never mentions the word bandwagon on this thread up to this point. However, it seems that you are trying desperately to convince the town that chamber is guilty of being the mafia, without mentioning so.

Now STD gets back involved. Post 41

Save The Dragons wrote:

Unvote vote : meme lurker hunting is unproductive
<<Snips and pieces>> In the same psot as your second qoute I said it wasnt that she was doing something unproductive, but that she was usign it as an excuse to vote, I found that scummy.

I see that. I also see a word in red, and unless I'm mistaken, you are accusing her of being unproductive by saying lurking hunting, which I can only assume to be your interpretations of her actions, is unproductive. You've confused me.

3 This early in the game I wouldn’t really consider him a lurker, but hunting player who have yet to post is as unproductive imo. 4 Its no that you were doing something that was unproductive, but that you covered your vote with a bs reason.

In response to question 3 you say that she is doing something unproductive.
Then in question 4 you say that she isn't doing something unproductive.

Either I'm just completely dumb and can't see what's wrong when it's right in front of me, or your the one ignoring some of what you've said.

By the way, I'm gone from Saturday to Saturday, I don't know if that's going to be a problem or not, but day has just started.

He is saying her actions are unproductive, but her reason for the actions are scummie.
I don’t think you are completely dumb, if you are mafia. If you are a townie, then you are. Because you are chasing him for no reason. How can you not see this? He says that lurker hunting early is unproductive. [this is the point where I don’t think MeMe is scum] Then in 4 he says her unproductivity is not what he was going for her, it was her lack of a solid reason for her actions. [Note: Scalebane is backing STD in this disagreement a lot, the first two on chamber, backing an argument based on a misconception.]
In 43 Colonel Kurtz comes on board and votes Chamber. Stating the Occam quote did it for him.

From here it just gets ugly. All people pretty much begin to jump onto chamber, and he slowly descends closer to the gallows
On page 3 it seems that the intelligent thing to do would be reexamine the facts.
1) a disagreement (probably based on play style) erupts between Chamber and MeMe.
2) STD calls it bad logic and begins hunting chamber.
3) Scalebane soon follows continuing STD’s claim of bad logic and clouded facts.
4) Chamber never makes a mistake under the pressure, sure he does answer all the questions, but EVERYONE IS ASKING THEM! It is kinda difficult to get them all answered. I am reading this and I have to make notes in a Word document about questions and answers just to keep it clear for myself and I am not even under the gun!

In post 81 Colonel realizes how close he placed Chamber to a hammer vote. He unvotes and calls for a claim from chamber.
In post 82 EmpTyger calls for Colonel to elaborate on his reasons for unvoting and calling for a claim.

In 86 EmpTyger gets what he wanted.

just thought that the post I quoted implied that chamber was more pro town than others who are pro-town. I might be misinterpreting, but I think that it implies that he is Donnie Darko. I am not saying that I believe that he is definitely pro town, but I think that that post was his attempt at a flavor claim. Therefore, I wish to hear more from him, claimwise, if I am to help lynch him. I am not, I repeat, not, saying that I believe he is pro town, but I think that is what he was trying to say. I don't see how anything I said was a "slip".
I would also like to say that I am not assuming anything, I just want to hear chamber claim. That's it.

He does not believe chamber is pro-town but wants to hear his claim.

In 87 chamber foolishly refuses to claim, but does say that he is defiantly not Donnie Darko.

Sotty7 points out the Chamber wagon in 88 and points to EmpTyger and Olio for voting with little reasoning. Espically considering that the argument was with MeMe.
Well done Sotty7; However you fail to mention the first person to jump into the argument. Save The Dragons who was followed by ScaleBane

Hombre [we keep bumping into each other] in post 89 makes a recap of how he views the people in the town. Nicely done.

The rest of the posts are bickering about who chamber thinks is scum, worthless in my opinion. I personally still wanted a claim from him and agree with those who called for it. It is the wise thing to do. Claim if you are under the gun, it can’t hurt you, unless you are dumb enough to claim mafia.

At post 100, MeMe announces that she will hammer the next day if nobody else does or if there is not a good enough reason not to. I found it amazing that MeMe had not voted for Chamber yet, this was a compelling reason for me to believe that she is not scum.

MeMe drops the hammer vote, a small spat between Sent and Scale flares up, then Nonny announces the verdict. We awake to find CK is dead. This was kind of a surprise to me and frankly I did not catch this until now.

3:30 exactly after Nonny announces the death of CK, Scale posts (109)a great recap of who may have had it out for him. This is convient as he INGORES the charge that STD led on chamber and he seconded and followed!
[yeah sorry I should have noted that I replaced Boi]

in post 110, STD votes for Anix for seemily private reasons.

In 112 MeMe writes on the interest she has about the Sentinel99 and ScaleBane spat.

Well, I warned you this was a long one.
Sorry for it being so long, but I think this charge of Chamber was just to big of a deal to push aside and not take a second look at, seriously this argument bascially took up day 1 and 4 pages of posting. I think it deserves another look now that we know the truth of chamber's alignment. Also I think the fact that STD and Scalebane both avoided it once it was public knowledge that chamber was a townie is more evidence that they are scum. STD for getting in an agrument that was not his, not even based on good grounds and then leading a charge to the gallows with chamber held high and Scalebane for so quickly suggesting possible avenues for links with CK's tragic murder. What if it was the mafia framing them? Personally I would have been more afraid of the people who lead the charge on chamber than someone who was suspicious of me. Suspicion is one thing but the ability to lead the town to kill someone for a stupid little reason like chamber's is a power to be reckoned with. (granted he did no help matters by not role claiming.)

I urge all Townies to really look into this and think about it for yourself. If you decide that it was simply a mistake and STD was not acting scummie for jumping in there and leading a charge [which I do think he is scum] then post saying such. However, I believe STD is scum and he played the town like a fiddle. His partner is likely to be either Scalebane [most likely] or MeMe [possible but not as likely in my mind as scalebane.

It is for this reason that I

VOTE: SAVE THE DRAGONS

.

[Chess83]

Scale, how did chamber say he was going after Meme for changing her vote? That is my point. He never did. He began going after her for "luker hunting" voting for a player that was not being active (I don't think it is lurking and I think he was wrong for it.) I said in my post that chamber's lynching was in part of his own stubborness, espically with the no claim thing.

Also for your information I read the posts from D1 not knowing the result of the lynching, or even who was lynched. I thought there was something wrong then, I went back with the knowledge of his innocence and looked at who led the charge. It was STD. With you following. I am not accusing everybody nor am I disreguarding the night kill, as you can tell in my last post. I am accusing you and primarily STD as I feel incredibly strongly that you two are in fact mafia. Him more so than you. But I encouraged the other townpeople to re-read the posts of d1 and form their on conclusions concerning you two's innocence/guilt.

[Chess83]

STD, you made more jokes than responses, as a counted tally of your responses will show. The Fluff is just to keep track of the silly things that I wrote to which he was responding, they are not in question. However, the fact that there were 2x as many jokes as there was defense is a bad play, regardless of alignment. It is unproductive and it does, frankly, in my opinion make it seem like you are dodging the questions and thus are scum. Since you would dodge the question to either buy time or hope that it is passed over and forgotten.

ACTUALY DEFENSE
5
JOKES
10
FLUFF
3

I am going to try and quote as little as possible.

I made the statement that Chamber’s logic is coherent logic, did you read the whole thing? Or just that line? You responded prove it, prove otherwise, good logic is just that, logic which cannot be disproved; therefore the burden rest on you to prove his argument was fallacious.

Then in post 26, STD jumps in the conversation, clouding things up.

Unvote vote : meme lurker hunting is unproductive

Unproductivity = scummy?

5 Making things happen is fine, you just ousted yourself as scum in the process, good for the town, bad for you. I encourage your fellow scum to make the same mistake.
[

Productivity = scummy?

How is this not clear STD? Did you not read his entire posts? It was not the action itself that was scummy it was her reason for the action! Chamber points this out in post 31.

I am not concerned with her actions at all. He states that something unproductive is scummy, and later he implies that productivity is good, but it's also a scumtell.

USE THE ENTIRE ENTRY!

Here is the actual entry in question where chamber supposedly contradicts himself.

chamber: I'll pose a couple questions since you've apparently got no answer for my challenge (and, to be fair, I know it's impossible to prove your blanket statement "lurker hunting is unproductive" -- just thought I'd try to make you stand behind your words):

--If I'd simply switched my vote to AniX without saying why I was doing so or by saying "bandwagon" -- would that have made you hurry to vote me?
--If I'd voted Der Hammer (who currently has no votes) with the same "yet to post" reason -- would that have made you hurry to vote me? In other words, is the fact that it's AniX that bothered you? Or the number of votes? Or, truly, the "lurker hunting" as stated?
--Do you consider AniX a lurker at this point in the game? (For the record: I don't)
--Do you think that a player who does something you deem "unproductive" is somehow more likely to be scum?
--Do you think that simply waiting for everyone to post once while NO ONE posts a second time (as was the case before my vote change) is a better idea (or more productive) than making something happen?

Thats a lot of questions to answer, out of respect I won't ignroe them this time, but don't expect such at future times.

1 no, I would note you switched without stating a reason for future analysis but not vote you immediately.
2 yes, Its the lurker hunting reason that bothered me, you tried to right off your vote with a commonly accepted tactic.
3 This early in the game I wouldn’t really consider him a lurker, but hunting player who have yet to post is as unproductive imo.
4 Its no that you were doing something that was unproductive, but that you covered your vote with a bs reason.
5 Making things happen is fine, you just ousted yourself as scum in the process, good for the town, bad for you. I encourage your fellow scum to make the same mistake.

Notice that he is answering two different questions?
The first is the question of unproductive=scum, he says that is not true. Within this answer he writes that he voted because he felt she had a BS reason.
The next answer was to the question of basically productivity=good? His answer is echos the above answer, again...

5 Making things happen is fine, you just ousted yourself as scum in the process, good for the town, bad for you. I encourage your fellow scum to make the same mistake.

He could have been more clear but what I think he was saying is that the productivity is not what was in question, it was her reason for voting, trying to get someone to participate (once again, I disagree with his actions... I think it was not intelliegent to call someone on this that early in the game.

Looking at the whole entries this becomes clear, but looking at only one line from each it is clouded and confusing.

Because you are chasing him for no reason.


I hope I won't have to say this to any female in my lifetime, but: just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

so what are the reasons?
Again,

in post 110, STD votes for Anix for seemily private reasons.

Not true. I stated clearly why I voted Anix.

Then why not state them in the form of a quote, instead of making me write concerning this again... once again it seems like a dodge.

This one seems the most idiotic response to me...

What if it was the mafia framing them? Personally I would have been more afraid of the people who lead the charge on chamber than someone who was suspicious of me. Suspicion is one thing but the ability to lead the town to kill someone for a stupid little reason like chamber's is a power to be reckoned with. (granted he did no help matters by not role claiming.)

Thank you for saying I have such a power, I'm flattered. However, I don't see the relevence to town or scum, as such an ability could easily be utilized by both sides, for good intentions, or for evil ones.

To make it clear I am suggesting that Scale was framing the people he posted about early in d2. Along those line I was saying that if it Scale and STD are not the mafia, I would think the mafia would kill them as they would be a great benefit to the town, give them a thread and they will make a noose to hang you with the entire town behind them. Also, STD is correct, having the ability to lead the town like that is a good thing for either side, but we must look at where that leading got us and whom they are leading us to now. Scale already made a suggestion on possible links for the night kill.

In my book, poor logic and failing to claim are not enough to hang someone. There must be better grounds. I posted that I thought he was mafia, that is true. However, I also said that we needed more evidence. I know looking back with the knowledge that chamber is innocent can turn alot of fingers on many people. I have been accused of accusing all bandwagoners... ONCE AGAIN I WRITE THAT I AM ACCUSING TWO PEOPLE! Not 7, two. Those two people are accusing me of accusing all 7. Does that look like an attempt to blend in? Once again I urge all townspeople to make their own decisions and read the entire posts that are being quoted. Also, quote as much of the post as you can [obvious exception to long posts] this will help maintain an element of clarity when hunting scum, we need clearity.

Hombre, I beleive it is our third game in a row togeather... also, what is with the number games you been playing with my name? Is there any reasoning behind that or you just forgot the numbers and said "what the heck, I will have some fun!" lol.

Yea I am reading the same posts, and I am seeing logic that is coherent. Maybe it is because I study philosophy and am used to looking for coherent logic in pages and pages of text that seem much like ramblings of a mad man, or maybe it is because I read all the posts a number of times and realized that some people [STD] were not posting the entire entry, either maliciously or unintentionaly.

In the 14th post MeMe puts a third vote on somebody? That does seem suspicious, possibly lurker hunting, but not really. chamber calls her a lurker hunter and votes for her, not needed in my opinion. He is voting for her because she was lurker hunting, something that happens to be unproductive [this early I agree with him that is it unproductive, possibly a scum tell, but most likly not.]

Go back and read just page one, clear your mind and read it. Does it seem like chamber is contradicting himself or is he saying that lurker hunting is a bs reason and unproductive? then read post 26, STD posts saying he is contradicting himself, does not quote the entire post mind you, just two lines, a technique called "card stacking" using only the information that is favorable to you and ingoring the rest.

Good point with Anix's posts, did not catch that.

Bottom line for me is that I beleive wholeheartedly that one scum has been found, possibly his partner also. If we have a cop, I ask them to check those two players tonight and tommrow night, that is if the town sees fit to deem them innocent.

I will post any more information regarding their guilt/innocence as I find it or in defense of my theory.

To those in question, specifically STD, please stop dodging the points, reply to them so that we may discover your true alighment. If you are town then you have nothing to fear by addressing the points. If you are scum then you are only lynching yourself eitherway. Also, while sarcasim and fluff are fun, lets keep the fluffly sarcastic responses to the fluffly sarcastic questions.

Again, sorry for the long post.

[Chess83]

For clearity I need to write a correction that I missed in the preview...

[quote="Chess83"

Because you are chasing him for no reason.


I hope I won't have to say this to any female in my lifetime, but: just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

so what are the reasons?
-------------------------
Should be

Because you are chasing him for no reason.

I hope I won't have to say this to any female in my lifetime, but: just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

so what are the reasons?

[Chess83]

Firstly I will handle the second issue, you framing two people with the night kill...

Sotty7, however, was somewhat interested in Kurtz so IGMEOY.

The only other person who even mentioned him in any posts was MeMe. I'm not quite sure what other information can be gained from trying to figure out motivations for killing Kurtz, as he just wasn't a high profile player.

That mentions 2 PEOPLE in connection with CK. Like I said, I am not going after you right now, but that in conjunction with your actions with STD makes me think you are probably scum.

The first part is that you accused me of accusing everyone on the bandwagon, I was incorrect in that entry. I do apologise, I thought you wrote it and did not bother looking for the text to back that up. Again I apologize. Upon further review of your response, you seemed rather calm. This makes me more at ease with the possibility of you not being mafia. However, it does not change my opinion one bit about STD. He has got some explaining to do. For now, IGMEOY. I do know what it means yes, but you still implicate two people by connecting them to the night kill. Again, I am not saying definatly that you are scum, just that your posting that makes me think you deliberatly set them up planning on posting that entry the next day.

Again, I do apologise for me putting words into your mouth.

[Chess83]

In my book, poor logic and failing to claim are not enough to hang someone.

This isn't a court of law, this is mafia. In my book, that's an excellent reason to hang someone.

I never claimed it to be a court of law, that is what makes the game of mafia so great, people weight evidence differently. As I said, in MY book. I did not say that everyone was wrong for voting for him, I said in my book it is not enough.

I am also not saying that he did everything he could have done to save himself, he messed up. He was unclear at times and he refused to claim. However, you did lead the charge and did misrepresent him with your quotes, you also furthered the miscearities, none of which helped him or looked like you were truly trying to figure out what happened or what he was saying.

It's not really a dodge if you can be bothered to write a bitchload in a post but can't be bothered to scroll up the page to see where I clearly say "I wonder what will happen if I vote Anix."

But if you need a quote, here it is.

I kinda wanna see what happens if I Vote: Anix

Good thing I did quote, I was off. [13!]

So you reason is that you are curious to see what happens if you vote? Sounds like a silly reason. You are not curious for any reason, just curious? This sounds like a reason from d1, like a random vote. Surely there is someone whom you think is scum for a specific reason... Maybe there isn't, maybe you don't know who is scum and you are just trying to get discussion moved along.

I.e. you accuse me of having a plan. I can either take the boring route and say "Pishaaw! No way!" or I could use sarcasm.

Or you could just not respond to it. When you use sarcasim it tells me that you are giving the appearance of it not affecting you, you are trying to play it cool. Whereas I think most townies would just ingore it or reply attacking the supposed plan itself, not the accusation of simply having the plan.

------
Hombre
------
I just re-read this about 5 times to make sure I was reading it correctly...

--If I'd simply switched my vote to AniX without saying why I was doing so or by saying "bandwagon" -- would that have made you hurry to vote me? -------- 1 no, I would note you switched without stating a reason for future analysis but not vote you immediately.

He says he would not vote her for voting without a good reason yet later in the post

Its no that you were doing something that was unproductive, but that you covered your vote with a bs reason.

Note he voted her because she

voted...without a good reason?

Chamber says that he would not have voted for her had she simply voted for no reason, or claimed a bandwagon, rather he would have made a note that she voted for no reason for later reference. I added in some text to help show this...

1 no, I would [make a] note [that] you switched without stating a reason [for your vote] for future analysis but

not vote [for] you immediately.

It is not the action of her placing the vote as chamber says, had she not given a reason he would not have voted, but it was the reason that she placed the vote, to make anix post. Chamber saw this [wrongly] as lurker hunting.

Three players yet to post...of those, two have been elsewhere on the board since the game started...of those, one already has votes. I'll help out there.

As I said he was not clear often but it was logical. It was the fact that MeMe said she was placing her vote on somebody to in essence wake them up so they would post. That is productive? How is putting a third vote on somebody that early in the game for the purpose to make them post productive? Anix probably hadn't even been back on the forum by then. MeMe place the thrid vote on Anix [Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 8:22 am Post subject: 14] Anix's FIRST post is Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:04 pm Post subject: 28, 14 posts and 36 hours later. Confirmation deadline was not even untill Tuesday evening. MeMe was placing a thrid vote on someone for not posting 12 hours BEFORE the deadline to confirm!
I do not agree with calling it lurker hunting and probably would not have voted for her because of it, but I would have noted if [if I caught it]. It just is too darn early to lable someone a lurker.

Keep in mind that this also stuck out to us at the moment, even though he cleared it up later.

Unvote vote : meme lurker hunting is unproductive

So lurker hunting is unproductive...

yes, Its the lurker hunting reason that bothered me

So lurker hunting is still unproductive...

Its no that you were doing something that was unproductive, but that you covered your vote with a bs reason.

Keep in mind that at this point, we thought that he was contradicting himself.

Okay, this was alittle tricky. I can see how it looks like he contradicts himself, however keeping in mind that it is the reason he voted for MeMe, it becomes more clear. He is saying that MeMe's action [lurker hunting] is unproductive. To chamber the bs reason MeMe used was lurker hunting. I don't think that was MeMe's intention there. I think she was just applying a little pressure trying to get Anix to post, not accusing Anix of being a lurker. Reading this series of quotes with that in mind, chamber does not appear to contradict himself. The lurker hunting bothers him BECAUSE that is MeMe's bs reason [according to chamber]

Alle ist klar?

Final Notes:

Maybe I am onto a scum

Maybe I am not. I don't know. I would like to beleive that we know who the scum are but we don't. So in the interest of the town if there is not another voted added to STD by Friday 12 noon CST I will stop talking about this topic. Unless someone specifically asks tells me not to.

Apoligy accepted STD. As you can see by my last post in response to Scale, I make mistakes also.

PS, you can just quote it as Chess, forget the numbers... notice I forget the "Ixnayonthe" part?

Once again, sorry for the long post everybody.

[Chess83]

Wow, I didn't get a email informing me of the posts, what a surprise. To make it clear I do not have anything to add, yet. I write yet because as we all know this game changes, people write things and that changes the arguments against them. I would like the clearification of your claim, Emp. You said that you killed CK, I also am asking why him? Also, by claiming this you are saying that there is a role-blocker. If that is true then they now know that they hit a scum, in which case they just did the cop's job.
I would like them to say who they got, but I am not going to ask them to come out, because we need more information, not to mention that they would die after they claimed.

To reiterate, I want to hear more about this claim and everything surrounding it. Please make it clear what role you are claiming and why you targeted CK.

[Chess83]

Okay, I just reviewed the CK/Emp discussion prior to the lynch. It is obvious as stated by MeMe stated above. The question remains what we gain by this claim of Emp. Why claim now Emp, you cast some doubt on Scale in reference to my accusations against STD, but nothing really solid at all. What is the purpose of claiming now? Why not wait for the scum to stick their heads out so far trying to figure out what happened that it is obvious, then go back and list everything at once, the catalogue of their demise as it were. This lack of planning on your part makes me suspicious of you. Please explain because seemingly I don't see any knowledge coming from this action except that CK was killed by you, our Vig? But that does not get us closer to the scum, which is the point of the game correct? Just lets the scum know who the Vig is.

[Chess83]

Okay, here is my two cents. I really have nothing to add to the discussion right now, but I want to say this. In my gut I think Emp is telling the truth. I posted earlier that I think it is Thok and Scalebane. Thank being said I am okay with getting rid of Scale before Thok.

unvote , VOTE: SCALEBANE

Emp, has said that he will reveal everything in due time. I trust that. Out of safty I ask that we not exceed 4 votes on Scalebane untill said information is out and Scale has a chance to defened. I say 4 because 6 lynches, anybody dumb enough to hammer before possible damning information is out must be an alien/scum whatever.

My final thought is this, if Scalebane comes up clean then we take out Emp, unless Emp can convince us otherwise. Those are my two cents.

[Chess83]

ack... sorry got my other game crossed in. Ingore the alien mentioning.

[Chess83]

yeah, sorry... like i said, wires got crossed. been a long day. For clearification Thok = STD.

[Chess83]

Chess, I'm getting really bad vibe from your last post. You say don't have anything to add, and yet you:
a) set up a point when EmpTyger should reveal his information
b) impose a restriction on voting (I assume "safty" means "safety" in your post)
c) plan a course of action for the whole town

Point a)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to assume that Scalebane will get (at least) 4 votes today. Why do you think EmpTyger will reveal his information when Scalebane is at 4 votes? Why do you want to hear EmpTyger's information today?

Point b)
In case EmpTyger won't reveal his information we can never lynch Scalebane, right? Or if he gets lynched, that dumb hammerer must be scum? Where do you base such an assumption? If you're so sure that the person hammering Scalebane is scum (in case EmpTyger's info isn't out), why didn't you put your restriction of votes to 5 votes and get that possible hammerer-scum tomorrow?

Point c)
EmpTyger hasn't claimed a cop with guilty result on Scalebane, now has he? Where do you base your logic that if Scalebane is innocent, EmpTyger is scum?

Dude, are you serious?
c) I am not adding any information, just stating a possible plan of action.
b) I am not restricting votes, I am warning about the possibility of a 1-2-3 by the mafia on scale, if he is not scum.
a) I am assuming that pressure on Scalebane would force him to react to not only Emp's post but the pressure from the town. This is how you make scum trip, apply pressure. If we fail to apply pressure Scale can just ingore Emp's post as the town is not seeing, or applying, the connection to him.

Point a) I want to hear Emp's information because this game is centered around the sharing of information. If information is hidden the scum win, specifically information such as who is scum. Furthermore, Emp said that he would release the information later, so apply pressure and wait for later. Nothing can hurt by applying pressure to somebody. Just maintain a reasonably safe distance from lynching to avoid the 1-2-3 by scum. This notion is continued in the next point.

Point b) This is a no-brainer. Putting someone with some uncertainty over their head in a -1 vote situation is never a good idea. Whereas placing someone in a -2 vote situation applies pressure and keeps them a safe distance where if someone else jumps on, someone has the oppertunity to unvote before a scummie can hammer an innocent. If the town wants to lynch Scale prior to Emp's release of information, that is the town's decision. But I am trying to make sure the town wants to and it is not one person's decision, thus a -2 line is drawn, one person cannot make the lynch call, it will take two and give us a buffer zoe to unvote.

Point c) That is exactly my logic. Emp did not claim cop, Emp claimed vig. and is pointing to Scale claiming he has more info to release at a latter time. Therefore, if Scale turned up innocent, then Emp mislead the town. in which case, normaly he [based on my expereience] would be lynched in return. The logic goes like this, if someone claims a power role that is pro-town, then harms the town, most likly they are not pro-town in truth.

It is interesting that you unvoted and voted for me based on one of my posts. I think it is a bad idea to vote for anyone based on one post. One should have more evidence than that. For instance, I had been suspicious of Scale because of the STD/Scale connection, so when Emp came out with a theory on Scale, it sounded solid and as I posted, I was game for lynching Scale just as well as STD, so I changed and stated that I would like to see the information from Emp, prior to Scale's lynching. But I changed my vote to apply pressure to Scale an hopefull get his defense to Emp's information that has yet to be released.

[Chess83]

Olio, you last post came across as kinda of jumbled, I only got the second part out of it. Maybe the "In your own words" part could be explained a little better?

As for my logic, IF Emp IS a Vig, then he knows who he killed.
If he knows who he killed then he knows that the mafia's kill did not occur.
If the mafia's kill did not occur, then they know there is an SK or a Vig out there, thus wanting to get rid of that character, they would try to discover them.
If Emp knows all of this, then he can sit and watch who is "fishing" to discover who killed CK.
Emp then comes foward when he feels he has discovered a mafia member.

However, I am becoming more unsure as Emp continues to post. For one thing my theory still could stand if Emp is telling the truth. They could have both chosen CK.

For another thing, Emp's thinking is skewed, there is nothing to loose by telling everybody your name, all the mafia cares about is that fact that you are a threat to them, SK or Vig, you are not pro-scum and thus a threat that will be dealth with. However, telling us your name will help us to determine the validity of your statements, as your role will fit into the movie.

With this knowledge in mind I yet again

Request that Emp name claim

[Chess83]

Sorry Chess, I tried witty answer and failed. I was answering to your bewilderment how I can judge you based on one post with your own words: put pressure on scum and they trip. To make it more clear - I put pressure on you and you tripped.

You have still to answer this question:
Why do you think EmpTyger disclosed information (the things he hasn't told us after he claimed) has anything to do with his vote on Scalebane?

Okay... That was pressure? Also, how did I trip? I am missing something? For one thing I didn't even notice the pressure by you, for another one post cannot really apply pressure. Furthermore, part of making scum trip is getting them in a situation where they have no outs that make them look okay. So, how am I in a corner? I am really confused by that. So basically my question is,

How did I trip?

As for your second part, discolsed means to divulge(sp) or tell. Maybe a better word to use in that sentence would be conceal. I don't recall saying that it did directly effect scalebane, if I wrote it I was mistaken, if it was implied, again I am sorry. I do make mistakes and this maybe one of them. I think that the information Emp is not releasing will shed some light on the validity of his claim, thus strenghting his accusation agaisnt Scale. Right now it is a toss up of "Do we believe him or not?" If we had a name then it may help with that decision and thus help us decided on what to do with Scale. Is that clear?

[Chess83]

I am cool with that Olio, espically considering we just keep saying the same thing. However, I would like you to explictly say where I tripped because I am not seeing it, thus I cannot really defend myself from, or explain the supposed mistake.

Also, I still think a name claim is a good idea, but if it is just Scotty and I calling for it I will let it rest as the town does not want it.

Just for your info Olio...

Actually, I think Sotty and Chess are distracting this game with their constant asking of EmpTyger's claim. Let it rest and get on with the game.

Just claim your name and make it a valid claim.

Wow, could you please fecking give the name of your role?

Still, I'd like EmpTyger to clarify what he's claiming. Your ability's out there, so why hedge?

MeMe kinda asks for it here. Maybe I am misreading that...
THe best one in my opinion is this...

I'd like to hear your rolename

without any more info from Emp...

I believe your claim at the moment. I do disagree with you that your rolename wouldn't give any extra information, but at the same time I see the benefit of keeping it disclosed. Latter seems to be better now.

Then you jump on me with you post of questions, then you supposedly have me trapped. Going after me for why I think Emp's information damns Scale and clears himself, all the while you have your vote resting on Scale. Seems a little contradictory. It seems to me that YOU are in fact the one distracting what is going on. You still have yet to really explain this "trip" of mine. But my suspicion on you is building. I am starting to think there may be 3 scum. Or maybe it is two and they are somewhere in the group of Scalebane, STD, and Olio. I am suspicious of all. My reasons are known for STD and Scalebane, but Olio... this seems sloppy. You charge after my throat when I began to go for Scalebane, while your vote is on scalebane... interesting.

Sorry for the long list of quotes, just a little more dramatic when I let the facts speak for themselves. 7 people out of 9, ask for the name, including yourself. That leaves two people... Anix and Sent, neither post that much so I am not suprised they have not asked, also they probably figure with 7/9 people asking it will happen.

As for AniX's play style, I can vouch for his 11th hour thing, I have seen it in action and have seen it work. He could be using it as a cover for scum, or he could be telling the truth. In short, the laid back low number of posts is just his play style, really proves nothing. Like my playstyle of being very aggressive and out there. I am always this way reguardless of alignment.

Also, I will be unable to post for a few days,

possibly

untill Aug 10th or 11th, sorry about this, it was just sprung on me. I will make a post as soon as I return.

MOD PLEASE NOT THE ABOVE

[Chess83]

Chess:

<snip>Also, I still think a name claim is a good idea, but if it is just Scotty and I calling for it I will let it rest as the town does not want it.<snip>

Just checking, but you mean just me nameclaiming, or a massnameclaim?

I mean you nameclaiming. I think a massnameclaim would be more of a disruption at this point than anything else. For reference I have no quams with claiming either my role or my name. I have nothing to hide, I just was a majority of the town to ask for it, if they do I will willing give it. Personally I think it is the duty of a pro-town player to do his/her part to help the town, that includes sharing suspicions and claiming when asked by a majority. That is just my take and my play style. Chamber never claims under pressure, that is his play style, as much of a mistake I think it is, I cannot fault him for sticking to his playstyle.

FYI, the chamber comment is just an example, I am not trying to raise that conversation again.

[Chess83]

Okay, I am still on the road. We just happen to finally be at a hotel with internet access. This is just for tonight and now the family is talking about driving to Kansas City from East TN before going home to Mississippi... so it may be 2 more days before I post again.

Going after me for why I think Emp's information damns Scale and clears himself, all the while you have your vote resting on Scale.

You charge after my throat when I began to go for Scalebane, while your vote is on scalebane... interesting.

These quotes up here are lies and I think you did it on purpose. You repeated the lie so it would work and at least it worked on EmpTyger, as I understood that he wants answer to those questions.

When I got bad vibe from your post Chess, I voted you. My vote didn't rest on Scalebane after that like you're saying.

I suggest Chess as a vig target for following night.

Olio, maybe my post was not written as clear as I should have made it. I did not mean to say that your vote rested on Scale while you began to charge after me, I meant to convey that you were charging after me WHEN your vote was on scale, of course you switched it to vote for me. I wrote about the fact you voted for me based on one post back in post #171. Also I am getting confused by your posts. You wrote...

Like I said, your constant name-calling is distracting in my opinion. Others - including me - have given it a rest it seems to me. You have to ask yourself the question I presented to Sotty and the question by EmpTyger:
How big is the probability that there isn't a vig in this game in your opinion?
How big is the probability that EmpTyger would know that there weren’t a real vig in this game?

Then you suggest me for a vig target? Have you answered your own questions?

Also for clearification the post that spooked you was #164, if I am correct.

Okay, here is my two cents. I really have nothing to add to the discussion right now, but I want to say this. In my gut I think Emp is telling the truth. I posted earlier that I think it is [STD] and Scalebane. [That] being said I am okay with getting rid of Scale before [STD].

[unvote , VOTE: SCALEBANE]

Emp, has said that he will reveal everything in due time. I trust that. Out of safty I ask that we not exceed 4 votes on Scalebane untill said information is out and Scale has a chance to defened. I say 4 because 6 lynches, anybody dumb enough to hammer before possible damning information is out must be a scum.

My final thought is this, if Scalebane comes up clean then we take out Emp, unless Emp can convince us otherwise. Those are my two cents.

This is the corrected version, as I had made some name mistakes pointed out in the posts following 164.

So I suggest that if we do lynch Scale and he is town, that we then consider lynching emp, unless emp can convice the town otherwise... on the grounds that emp mislead the town. That seems logical to me. To me someone who leads the charge on a townie looks guilty. That is partially why I went after STD, as mentioned. He was the one who really led the charge on Chamber, not trying to dig that conversation up again.

In short Olio, u are really starting to look scummy to me personally. You are taking some heat and attetion off of scale, which is a known scum tactic, trying to save your partner.

Check the last two lines. If you choose to display my previous posts, to check this - which you should - it's the post number 9.

I may be a moron but I just don't understand what you mean by this.

Also you have still not said how I tripped.

This is like the 3rd or 4th time I think I have asked.
Was it the fact that I was calling for a name? To explain that I think the mafia really does not care, personally if I were mafia all that would matter to me is that Emp was a vig, and therefore a major threat, regardless of the name. The name really only stands to help the townspeople, except that the mafia know not to claim that name. But in honesty any name could be mafia, IMO.

I'm still waiting to hear from Chess.

I am on vacation with the family. As posted in #197

[Chess83]

Okay, I am back home... To defend two points, the first by scale...

Chess: Is currently trying to draw attention towards Olio, with the argument that Olio is trying to argue for the fact that I'm innocent when clearly chess thinks I am scum and Olio's actions therefore seem scummy. I, however, have a bit more information than that about myself, kthx.

I find it amazing how Olio comes after me for distracting the town and me defending myself is then distracting. Scale did it occur to you that OLIO CAME AFTER ME FIRST? What am I supposed to do ingore him? I HAVE to defend myself. In otherwords, I think this line is wrong. I do not think I was distracting the town, I think I was defending myself. I do have the thought in my mind that you saw this thing between me and Olio slowing down and thought you might stur the pot a little to keep the heat off of yourself, IMO.

So I suggest that if we do lynch Scale and he is town, that we then consider lynching emp, unless emp can convice the town otherwise... on the grounds that emp mislead the town. That seems logical to me. To me someone who leads the charge on a townie looks guilty. That is partially why I went after STD, as mentioned. He was the one who really led the charge on Chamber, not trying to dig that conversation up again.

Woah... I don't agree with this and I think I can see what Olio's problem is with you now. Emp hasn't claimed any investigative knowledge on Scale. Emp is working purely off a tell he picked up from Scale in that he was analyzing the single night kill like mafia trying to figure out where it came from. (correct me if I'm wrong). Sure if we lynch Scale today, Emp will be pushed some more tomorrow but setting up the lynch like that is crazy. This means if we lynch STD today after your points against him then you should be the next lynch. Also, Emp has stopped pushing Scale, he's now voting and pushing me, kinda makes this whole paragraph void, no?

Wow, I wrote this awhile back. Sotty, did you notice that I wrote that we lynch Emp, UNLESS he can convice us otherwise? That is basically the rule for everybody. All I was suggesting is that if Scale would turn up innocent then we should look into and put some heat on Emp, BECAUSE HE DID MISLEAD THE TOWN. To answer your question, yes I would EXPECT the town to look into me and apply some heat on me if we lynch STD and he is innocent. I would assume that any good town player would. It kinda makes the paragraph void, except that we can simply sub your name in for Scale. Buy yeah it is kinda void, so why are you bringing it up? I originally wrote this is 164, repeated it in 216 making a note that it was originally posted in 164 and being repeated for clearification... so again, why are you brining it up if it is void?

[Chess83]

Awhile back? It was Tuesday.

Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:41 pm Post subject: 164

That was the original post.

Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:08 pm Post subject: 216

That was the second post, in which clearification was being made.

The fact you were still talking about it without noticing Emp had moved on, struck me as strange.

You never said that me repeating it was strange, you just wrote a reply to it, which caused me to point out the lapse in time between the original post and your reply over 1 week later.

As for me still talking about it while Emp moved on, it is irrevelent. In case you did not notice, that part was in responce to Olio who had been on my case since post 164, which I was repeating to clearify that it was indeed that post that spooked him. Please read more carefully, there is plenty of confusion already in this game, we don't need anymore.

I AM STILL AWAITING OLIO'S RESPONSE TO POST 216

[Chess83]

Sentinel...
I think you should just sit down and read the posts. Personally I see it as your own fault that so much has happened while you were not here. You never left a note saying you would be absent or even posted anything for that matter. Sit down and read the posts, make your own opinions and for God's sake... KEEP UP.

[Chess83]

Okay Olio, here you go...

How big is the probability that there isn't a vig in this game in your opinion?
How big is the probability that EmpTyger would know that there weren’t a real vig in this game?

Vig is a fairly common character in my experience, therefore I would suggest a near 50/50 chance of their being a Vig. So, I tend to believe Emp with the vig claim.
The probability of Emp knowing that there is no vig in the game is a thing of chance. Again there could be and there could not be, if Emp is not the Vig then he is taking a chance on there being a real vig to counter his claim.

Are you afraid that your scheme is exposed to those still not seeing it?

What scheme?
FYI: I don't really see the advantage of ansewering these questions but there they are. Now if you don't mind explaining how you are able to contradict yourself... saying Emp is not a vig then calling for a vig on me tonight.

That was a good try to twist your own words. Are you implying that my vote was on Scale during that post in which I charged you and thus your point was well-placed and well-thought? Your post about my vote being on Scale did nothing but caused confusion and you did it on purpose.

I am twisting nothing, I am posting fact, quoting your posts! You had your vote on Scalebane when you posted your attack on me, then switching your vote to me. I quote you post AGAIN!

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:08 am Post subject: 169 Reply with quote
Chess, I'm getting really bad vibe from your last post. You say don't have anything to add, and yet you:
a) set up a point when EmpTyger should reveal his information
b) impose a restriction on voting (I assume "safty" means "safety" in your post)
c) plan a course of action for the whole town

Point a)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to assume that Scalebane will get (at least) 4 votes today. Why do you think EmpTyger will reveal his information when Scalebane is at 4 votes? Why do you want to hear EmpTyger's information today?

Point b)
In case EmpTyger won't reveal his information we can never lynch Scalebane, right? Or if he gets lynched, that dumb hammerer must be scum? Where do you base such an assumption? If you're so sure that the person hammering Scalebane is scum (in case EmpTyger's info isn't out), why didn't you put your restriction of votes to 5 votes and get that possible hammerer-scum tomorrow?

Point c)
EmpTyger hasn't claimed a cop with guilty result on Scalebane, now has he? Where do you base your logic that if Scalebane is innocent, EmpTyger is scum?

unvote
vote: Chess

Again, this is adding nothing. I am asking for Emp's hidden information in your point A. Point B is a warning about quick-lynching Scale before discusion. Point C is simple as I have said many times, someone who leads the town to lynching a townie deserves to be checked out. I said in my post and I quote...

if Scalebane comes up clean then we take out Emp, unless Emp can convince us otherwise.

Read that carefully, note the words

UNLESS EMP CAN CONVINCE US OTHERWISE.

This does not mean that if we lynch Scale and he is innocent then we just blindly kill emp, no we allow him the chance to dialogue, see your point B above, DON'T QUICKLYNCH.

Oh yeah your post before your attack on me...

Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:49 am Post subject: 154 Reply with quote
You're right, it isn't perfect claim for SK. For SK with something extra in his/her role it could be a perfect claim. For normal SK it's a very risky gambit with not so great chances to succeed.

That said, I believe your claim at the moment. I do disagree with you that your rolename wouldn't give any extra information, but at the same time I see the benefit of keeping it disclosed. Latter seems to be better now.

vote: Scalebane

It seems to me that the problem you have with me is two fold.
1) I said I have nothing to add then seemingly add to the conversation (I say I did not ad anything, you say I did)
2) I make a connection to Emp's accusation/suspicion on Scalebane, saying that if scalebane is innocent and we lynch him, then we "take out" emp, providing that he cannot convince us otherwise.

Does that about sum it up?

So I suggest that if we do lynch Scale and he is town, that we then consider lynching emp, unless emp can convice the town otherwise... on the grounds that emp mislead the town. That seems logical to me.

That's fine crap-logic, if I may correct.

How is that crap logic? If someone leads the town to lynch an innocent person, they deserve no investigation or to be considered the lynch for the next day? That is just stupid.

So why aren't you voting me?

Obviously because I feel that there are more scummy people out there than you.

Your biggest mistakes so far:
- you say you don't have nothing to say and yet you present a plan based on crap-logic how town should proceed
- you say that EmpTyger's unrevealed information has something to do with Scalebane
- you blatantly lie, accusing me of having my vote on Scalebane while attacking you
- you're trying to twist the meaning of your own words
- you don't have guts to vote me, when you know I'm pro-town

But hey, you'll learn from this, I'm sure!

My biggest mistakes...
1) this has been covered, but please explain the falacy in my logic, how it would be better to NOT go after Emp is Scale is innocent.
2) Actually, I do not. I say that it would lend creedence to Emp's claim. Knowing his name would help us to better trust his claim of Vig.
3) Read your post. You place you vote on Scalebane, then attack me and move your vote to me in the same post. YOU need to stop twisting words.
4) Yeah, how exactly again?
5) Is that a claim? Are you claiming pro-town? Furthermore, if I know you are pro-town why would I vote for you? That is just stupid. And if you took the time to notice, I have mentioned time and time again that the two most suspicious people in the thread to me are STD and Scalebane, so again. Why SHOULD I vote for you? Yes, you appear scummie to me, but that is not enough to vote for you. I should be voting for the scummiest person that I see who actually has a chance of being lynched. That being said, if there was some other people who thought you were being scummie for dragging all this up and distracting the town away from Emp's claim and everything surrounding that for so long, then I would seriously consider joining in that pressure being placed on you.

So "taking out Emp" is now transformed to "putting some heat on Emp"?

Um... if you read the entire post...

UNLESS EMP CAN CONVINCE US OTHERWISE.

How is this still not clear?

Also, is it safe to assume that this long post was your response to how I tripped? If it is then it is built around the two points of
1) I said I have nothing to add then seemingly add to the conversation (I say I did not ad anything, you say I did)
2) I make a connection to Emp's accusation/suspicion on Scalebane, saying that if scalebane is innocent and we lynch him, then we "take out" emp, providing that he cannot convince us otherwise.

Which seems to be a misunderstanding of what I wrote, granted I may have not been all that clear in my writing.
If this is settled I would like to get back to hunting scum.

[This post is soon to be availbe in paperback form just for Hombre 8)

[Chess83]

Okay olio, quick question...

Do you think I am scum? If not, then leave me alone, if so then make it definitively known.

You attacking me while your vote was on scalebane was a bit nit-picky. However, I ususally try to unvote at the start of the post and cast my new vote at the end of the post.

That being said I am only replying to two points because most of this is back and fourth garbage.

Emp did not claim cop, Emp claimed vig. and is pointing to Scale claiming "he has more info to release at a latter time. Therefore, if Scale turned up innocent, then Emp mislead the town.

Therein lies my biggest problem with you, the third point you didn't include in your list above - the third point you actually try to wriggle yourself out now.
You base your "EmpTyger is misleading the town" -logic to the information EmpTyger hasn't told us. That information has nothing to do with EmpTyger's vote on Scalebane. That effectively makes your second point above moot, unless you really think that everyone who accuses player, who turns out to be pro-town when lynched, is guilty of "misleading the town".
In other words: EmpTyger isn't the one misleading the town, you are.

Okay, so you admit that you are reading what I wrote in your own way (thank you for explaining YOUR line of thought by the way). Perhaps it would be better if I had wrote the problematic quote this way...
Emp is claiming vig and voicing suspicion on Scale. He is also saying that he has more information to release later." How is that? That clear? My God I was nit-picky, you are basically admitting that you are reading it differently because you see that his nameclaim would add nothing to his role claim, I disagree and you are coming after me because you read my statement differently. Chill out, open you mind... ask a question or two before going off the deep end.

FYI: I clearified my statement about emp's hidden info back on Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: 189

I don't recall saying that it did directly effect scalebane, if I wrote it I was mistaken, if it was implied, again I am sorry. I do make mistakes and this maybe one of them. I think that the information Emp is not releasing will shed some light on the validity of his claim, thus strenghting his accusation agaisnt Scale. Right now it is a toss up of "Do we believe him or not?" If we had a name then it may help with that decision and thus help us decided on what to do with Scale.

How am I misleading the town? By saying that Emp should name claim? Or by saying that we should pressure him if we were to lynch scale and he was innocent? Or is it the part about Emp's hidden information making scale look more guilty, which I never claimed. Or is it that Emp's role name would lend creedence to his claim, which I still think it would.

You're not answering the question, but wriggling again. First you said: lynch him, unless he can convince us otherwise. Now you say: put some heat on him, unless he can convince us otherwise. Why the change of tone?

Excuse my change of tone. I don't know why I changed it from "lynch him unless he can convince us otherwise" to "put some heat on him." Maybe, because the first post was on Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:41 pm and the second post was on Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:12 pm. That is 10 days, 1.5 weeks. Alot happens in that time, things like 3 pages of text. Unlike, me changing who I think is the scummiest after one post. There was 64 posts between my two comments. Between you vote on Scale and you vote on me there was 15 posts. So which is more drastic, changing of wording or changing of vote. After that consider which had more time between the two. This point of yours looks excessive.

As a final note, before accusing me of trying to worm out of a question or a point, you may want to ask it again and mention that you want me to specifically answer that point/question. As you can tell I have not shyed away from anything you have brought up against me. I have tried to answer all the points, even though it is getting very redundant at this point.

I appreciate your zeal to find scum, I think you should be redirecting that zeal to another player right now and not directing it at me, a I think this has basically come down to a misunderstanding. However, if you choose to continue this discussion please order your points/questions against me in a list, include everything that you want me to address and I will address them point by point.

[Chess83]

I am here just to let everyone know. I am watching the whole sotty issue, will post if I notice anything or feel that I maybe able to contribute in some way.

[Chess83]

Okay, I just recieved a "prod" for this thread while I was online again tonight checking for updates. The message stated a deadline of August 25. It also suggested that we begin talking. So here it my scummiest list. It is not very solid since I am unsure of a lot. It basically is going on what I feel is the underlying consistant suspicisions I have.

SCUMMIEST (these are not pairings, the fact that there are two for each number just means I consider both to be equally scummy.)
1. Scale/STD
2. Sotty/MeMe

The rest I am fairly convinced are town. However, as everyone knows these games can change in a heartbeat. I suggest we all begin posting more often and try to give something to the game, even if it is not much. Starting with a scummiest list.

[Chess83]

It is more of what he has not done MeMe, although he is far from an active player (something I like) he does not strike me immediatly as scum. However, he has not done anything that strikes me as town. To be completly honest, I forgot about him (that is the goal of lurkers.) After some consideration I realized that I don't view the rest of the town on the same level of suspision. However, I do view basically from #4 down as innocent.
Revised (Complete)
1. STD/Scale
2. MeMe/ Sotty
3. Sentinel
4. AniX/Ixnayonthehombre
5. EmpTyger/Olio
5. Me (of course I am at the very bottom.

This list is complete, unless of course I forgot someone else.

[Chess83]

Sotty, to sum up why I think you are scummy, you are not dealing with the pressure on you very well. That is why I am going to continue to watch the conversation you are having with people.

Also, convient that you are already starting to tear into two people's lists who are under some suspicision but not willing to give your own... why did you not post your list?

@Emp, you mean why I see MeMe as scummier than Sentinel and Anix?
It is nothing more than I feel MeMe is detracting more from the town in her posts, she rarely adds anythign constructive and hardly even posts, yet she is going after some other people who rarely post (granted they are flat out missing at this point) As for Anix being below Sentinel, I have seen his 11th thing work in chat games, I know this is not the same but I have some faith in the man. However, I think he needs to start getting involved as the game is fast approaching the "11th hour"

As for the "sotty issue" comment I ment the whole discussion involving the play style change and all that surrounds it. I had nothing to add to the discussion but I thought it was an interesting point and I wanted to see Sotty's reaction to the pressure and accusations.

[Chess83]

Anix, can you at least give us a most scummy list for now? Something to help the town take a small step foward, I don't ask for much.

[Chess83]

Bascially the reason is this, your defense against the play style difference (something that is rare, IMO) was bascially "oh well".

I feel I should mention that in my mind there is a large gap between the numbe 1 spot and the number 2 spot. I don't feel that Sotty and MeMe are very likely to be scum, but they have not proven them selves worthy of being declared townie in my mind, Sentinel is closer to town only because he has basically said/done nothing this game.

@Sotty and MeMe = Basically just don't screw up or look scummy and I won't be going after you guys, but I will be watching you a little more than the people at the very bottom of my list. I am way more concerned with STD/Scale (my number 1 spot) and to answer Scale's blurp about my rankings, yes the early day 2 conversation about chamber's wagon does is being factored into my placement. Yes it has been hashed over many times and it was dropped when Emp claimed responsibility for the nk.

I move for a replacement for Sentinel

It has been long enough for him to catch up since his last post.

[Chess83]

I believe you're scum. No matter what you say now, at one point you said that EmpTyger has info about Scalebane's scumminess, and if Scalebane turns out to be innocent, EmpTyger should be lynched because he mislead the town, unless he can convince us otherwise. I think it's convicting evidence that you're trying to rewrite the history.

I think you need to stop paraphrasing and start quoting. This line has been talked about and quoted enough for you to know this.

Emp, has said that he will reveal everything in due time. I trust that. Out of safty I ask that we not exceed 4 votes on Scalebane untill said information is out and Scale has a chance to defened. I say 4 because 6 lynches, anybody dumb enough to hammer before

possible

damning information is out must be an scum.

The word possible denotes the fact that the information may or may not damn Scalebane or even effect him directly. Again this has been discussed many times. If you don't see how that is please try to see it, if not then just say, "I don't see the possibility of Emp's information not directly effecting Scale in your statement." And we can go from there. I did not intend to say that Emp's information will, with all certainty, directly effect scalebane.

Sorry mate, you did claim that earlier, no matter how much you try to change that now, no matter how sorry you are and no matter if you think it was a mistake or not. I think it was a mistake on your part.

This ties into the above. Obviously you did not read the word POSSIBLY in my oiginal statement, if that is the case just say you were mistaken, I won't think you scummer for it, I doubt anyone will. There are a number of people who are saying it is tonwie on townie in this arguement already, I am one of them.

Emp, has said that he will reveal everything in due time. I trust that. Out of safty I ask that we not exceed 4 votes on Scalebane untill said information is out and Scale has a chance to defened. I say 4 because 6 lynches, anybody dumb enough to hammer before possible damning information is out must be an scum.

Defend against what? EmpTyger's name? EmpTyger's name as damning information?!?

Now this is just unfair. At this point Emp had not said that his name was bascially the only thing he had yet to reveal. I, like everyone else, did not know how much more information Emp had. I was trying to allow for the possibility that something may furter incriminate Scale. As I have also said before, Emp's name would add an element of validity to his claim. Thereby, allowing the town to trust him more.

Excuse my change of tone. I don't know why I changed it from "lynch him unless he can convince us otherwise" to "put some heat on him." Maybe, because the first post was on Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:41 pm and the second post was on Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:12 pm. That is 10 days, 1.5 weeks.

Sorry mate, in my opinion there's a good probability that you saw that EmpTyger won't be lynched after all and are now trying to soften up your earlier tone, so you won't seem so pushy about lynching him. I doubt you can convince me otherwise.

While there may be a good probability that I saw emp would not be lynched (don't think there was ever any probability in that) and that is the reason I changed my tone, there is a chance that I just changed it unknowingly. You seem to be making a huge deal about this little thing. The two statements in question are bascially the same. In essence, "If scale is innocent, go after emp; unless he can convince us otherwise."

Also, if it took me 10 days to realize that people were quasi-buying his claim, then I am an idiot. Furthermore, the only advantage scum would have about lynching the claimed vig is that they would avoid his night action. With what I am saying he would still have his night action tonight, so why would the scum not just kill him tonight instead of trying to lynch him and reveal themselves? It is illogical for scum to push for someone to be lynched the next day, espcially someone as dangerous to the scum as a vig.

[Chess83]

*sign* Okay Olio, lets try this again....

Emp, has said that he will reveal everything in due time. I trust that. Out of safty I ask that we not exceed 4 votes on Scalebane untill said information is out and Scale has a chance to defened. I say 4 because 6 lynches, anybody dumb enough to hammer before

possible

damning information is out must be an scum.

PLEASE NOTE THE WORD

POSSIBLE

. For the love of everything holy, you think I am changing what I wrote I am not, I wrote POSSIBLE DAMNING INFORMATION, meaning the information maynot be damning or even have anything to do with scalebane. OPEN YOUR EYES! You are arguing in circles, you simply ingore what I am writing. This is starting to get really frustrating.

You know how people catch good scum players? From little things. Unknowingly changing your tone is even bigger tell, which makes me ask the question: "Why would he soften his tone unknowingly?". Basically, it's a slip you made without noticing at first, and I'm pretty sure you have your WIFOM -answer ready for this point.

Actually, I have no answers prepared, I read what you write and try to correct the misguided assumptions you are coming up with. As for the tone change thing, it seems that you, while mentioning the possibility of me being innocent in this sitution, you simple blind yourself to accepting the reality that I may in fact not be scum. Instead you are clawing and biting your way into me like a rabid cat.

It is illogical for scum to push for someone to be lynched the next day, espcially someone as dangerous to the scum as a vig.

WIFOM much lately?

Um, yeah this is nt WIFOM. Read it again...
If the scum were to wait untill tommrow to lynch the vig then they are taking a chance he will not be lynched, therefore the vig will get ANOTHER night action the following night. However, if the scum were to nk the vig tonight then he would only get tonights action. Obviously, the best senario is for the mafia to lynch the vig today to avoid his night action.

Does that help show why the scum pushing to lynch a claimed vig tommrow is illogical? It is dumb, too risky. If I did want to lynch him I would have waited for him to make a few small mistakes and then try to quitely blow them out of proportion, kinda like you are doing with me.

Please, for the sake of not distracting the town any further, unless you have something NEW to add, don't reply... just read the posts in question and try to see them from my viewpoint. I understand how you are reading these, but that is now how I ment them to be read. Sorry for the confusion.

[Chess83]

Simplified WIFOM then:
Scum would be stupid to do thing A. I did thing A, thus I'm not scum.

Olio, I never claimed that I was not scum because I did something that was illogical for scum to do. I simply said that it was illogical for scum to do that. You were saying it was a scummy thing to do, I am saying it would be illogical for scum to do that. This is not a WIFOM argument, I am simply rejecting your premise that it is a logical action for scum to take. I actually gave a logical argument for my standpoint, what is yours?

Um, yeah this is nt WIFOM. Read it again...
If the scum were to wait untill tommrow to lynch the vig then they are taking a chance he will not be lynched, therefore the vig will get ANOTHER night action the following night. However, if the scum were to nk the vig tonight then he would only get tonights action. Obviously, the best senario is for the mafia to lynch the vig today to avoid his night action.

Does that help show why the scum pushing to lynch a claimed vig tommrow is illogical? It is dumb, too risky. If I did want to lynch him I would have waited for him to make a few small mistakes and then try to quitely blow them out of proportion, kinda like you are doing with me.

Also,

In my opinion, that Possible Damning Information in that sentence doesn't automatically add to the previous sentence where you only mention Said Information.

The point stands, you said nobody should put on the 5th vote until said information is out, thus you imply in that sentence that said information has something to do with Scalebane's guiltiness.

Well, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it, provided you allow for the possibility that I was NOT SAYING THAT. The fact remains that I allowed for the possibility of the information to not directly affect Scale.

As for me telling people not to drop the hammer on him and keep it to 4 votes, yes it does imply that the information may regard his guilt. However, I never wrote that the information DID regard his guilt or that it MUST regard his guilt, I always allowed for the POSSIBILITY that it did not regard his guilt.

Furthermore, if Scale is at lynch-1, he should claim (he is not right now for the record). If he claims, then Emp could reveal his information (name claim) then there would be no fear of the possibility of Scale taking his name, or if he did then Emp could bust him on it.

So we are clear, you opinion is not fact. Neither is my opinion or anyone elses. It is find, IMO, to state your opinion, but please do not state it in a factual way.

Basically your case is built on assumptions and opinions, no hard evidence. Also, this is the last I am going to type on this subject unless something new comes up because this is really dragging on way to much. My peace is spoken.

[Chess83]

For the record, I think the whole knowing their killer thing is flavor, and thus a mute point. Being flavor it adds to the story of the game, but for the MOD to lead the town to the scum would be a cheat, a violation if you will. This is just my opinion.

[Chess83]

Actually, I don't really follow the last comment... so no I dont have a comment on

that

.

[Chess83]

Actually, I don't really follow the last comment... so no I dont have a comment on

that

.

[Chess83]

Sorry about the multi-post, seems scumnet is having some "Debug" issues.

[Chess83]

I am here but have nothing to really contribute right now, just to let you know I am present and reading.

The only thing I have to offer is my stance on the Sentinel replacement issue which is not dealing with the GAME in truth. I think if you are free now, you should try and catch up, it is more responsible of you to handle it that way rather than tucking your tail in and running.

[Chess83]

I knew you were going to write that. And that is why I wrote this...

The only thing I have to offer is my stance on the Sentinel replacement issue which is not dealing with the GAME in truth.

This does not deal with the game in itself, it deals with how stays/is replaced. Contribution to the game is more of dicussing who is scum and why, suspicions and what not. I think you are digging a little too deep on this topic now.

As for the rest.

I've never said it's logical for scum to want EmpTyger dead. Stop making false assumptions.

I never said you did. I was just point out that you calling me scum and giving that reason was illogical, as the action in question was an illogical scum move. You need to stop reading into posts so much. Read what was written, not what you think.

Think WIFOM as a gambit in chess: you deliberately create a weakness in the opening so you'll be stronger later.

Can you unpack this a bit?

Why did you allow such a possibility to remain? Why weren't you blunt with your words? Why did you want to cause confusion?

Now you accept the possibilty in the statement? I was uncertain. I wanted to try to help, but I did now know what the information was at the time.

Why do you take them as facts? I've never said they're anything but opinions, opinions which I believe in.

You have closed your mind to the possibilty that you were wrong, thus accepting your own opinion in a factual way. This happened many times, if you want quotes I will give them to you. I accept no opinion as fact, you gave the impression that your opinion was "unchangable" which is a bad stance, only facts (what was literally written) are unchangeable.

@EMP - Yes I realize that, and I again say that Sentinel is free and should not be replaced. The only thing that Sentinel's signing up for another game proves is that he signed up for ANOTHER game, be it a week ago or a month ago. Sentinel said he had time now, so... catch up and play the game. Again, responsibility, you signed up for this game you play this game.

[Chess83]

For the sake of distracting the town this is the last post I am making on this topic.

My comment on be it a week ago or a month ago was ment to convey the fact that I don't care when he signed up for the game. It is his responsibility to finish what he began, thus I am asking him (it seems he is doing this anyway) to continue to play this game by making an effort to catch up and contribute to the game as it is currently going on. Personally, I find the fact that his new game post was 12 mins after his post on here. IMO, he should finish this game. Again, I don't care about the time frame, my "beef," as it were, is responsibility. I thank S99 for taking up the burden of responsibility and catching up, provided he does what he says he is doing.

[Chess83]

@ Sent99 - I think the logic was something like this... "A Vig is a common character, Emp claimed Vig without a counter claim; therefore, Emp is probably a vig." That and it just would not make much sense for anyone else to claim Vig and the nk. It would be a strech of reason for scum to do that. and a SK would be stupid as they would just draw attetion to themselves, which is something most SKs would not want to do. So yeah, for the time being it was just kinda silently accepted. "Consent by silence" I believe is the political term.

[Chess83]

Honestly, I am unsure of who I find the scummiest. I have been distracted as I think most of us have by my discussion with olio. I still have some reservation and think there may be a link between you and Scale but have seen no recent evidence to substatiate such a claim at this time.

So... yes and no. I still find you scummy but not as much. I still think there may be connection between you and scale, again, not as much.

[Chess83]

I will be out of town this afternoon till monday evening

sorry about the double post, wanted to make sure everybody saw this.

[Chess83]

Firstly,

@olio, read your post nothing new, so no response from me.

@emp, I was waiting for someone to catch this. I was surprised that it was CK, someone who was not extremly active or leading the town, those people (IMO) are nk targets. My contradiction about saying I would have voted for him is based on my skimming of the thread. I glazed over it trying to get the basic points down and failed to see the actions of the STD/Scale pair in front of me. As for the MeMe being scum thing, yes I mentioned it, but had (IMO) more evidence and likelyness of STD/SCALE being scum.

Right now, I am not completly sure who is scum. I am just watching and waiting till I see something that I can write about. When I do I will. I think I am still voting for Scale, but since I don't really know what is going on right now I and going to

UNVOTE

and seriosuly consider rereading d2 before voting again.

At this time, I have nothing further to add.

[Chess83]

Emp, I think any good player having seen his own mistake would keep it in the back of his mind and hope that nobody notices it. However, if someone does find it they should have they reply ready. I see how you would say it is scummy and personally I see how you think I would be scummy. However, my waiting for someone to find that mistake is simple, I changed my mind and I know that anytime someone's opinion changes in these games that makes them a target for discussion, which I am not afraid of. I still fail to see how I am cornered by Olio's argument. To me it seems that his argument and points against me are based on his unwillingness to admit the possibilty of my innocence. He reads my posts in the light of the preconcieved notion that I am scum, instead of approaching it in a logical way to discover if I am innocent or not.

As a note of warning, when/if I claim I will claim my role and name. I know this was an issue with Emp's claim so I wanted to give a heads up on that. I will claim at lynch-1. I believe I am at 2 votes now, 6 to lynch. So 3 more votes and I will fully claim.

Personally, I think going after me is a waste of time. Obv. I know my alignmnet, but there are now two people who are uncertain about me and seem to want to poke and prode me to discover my alignment. I am okay with that, it will satisfy your questions. I just ask that people excercise some reason and not charge after me or anyone else blindly

@Emp, are you suggesting a Anix/Chess team? Because if you are then if you lynch one of us and find them to be innocent, should you still vig the other?

[Chess83]

@Emp,
I was not linking Anix and I, I was asking if you were proposing a link. Because if you were then in the event that one of us were lynched and be proven innocent then other (being the second of the pair) would not necessairly be guilty. However, you clearified in saying that you found us to be scummy independiantly of each other, so no attempted pairing exists, this makes my point void.

If there is 6 people (being the majority) who type "@Chess - Please claim" I will also claim.

As for the plausible explanations the key here is that they are plausible in both directions. While I am unable to give a factual defense for Olio's points the truthful defense I give can only give air to the possibility of innocence which opposes the possibilty of guilt. I wonder why everone assumes guilt instead of assuming the possible innocence. Keep in mind that these "plausible" defenses are for plausible accusations.

[Chess83]

Sentinel, can you expand on those accusations? I am not following how Emp is hurting the town and what not.

[Chess83]

Okay, it seems my desicison not to point out my own faults was a bad one. All I can say is that I generally do not point out my own faults. I will admit when I make those mistakes but I never point them out. I never have seen the advantage to pointing out my own misteps to bring them all to light, bascially building an argument against myself. I do however, see the advantage of pointing it out so that 10 pages down the road if someone brings it up I would be able to say that I explained it already or already pointed that out way back when. However, I think I make enough mistakes (as pointed out by olio) that I don't need to add any more rope to that noose by pointing out my own faults.

Other than this there is really no defense for my decision to wait. I just ask that whomever is going to vote for me or persue lynching me considers all the facts and not just this one. Look at what Olio is saying about me and read my posts.

As for a claim from me I will either claim with a majority (6) asking me for my claim or 5 votes (lynch-1) being placed on me. Please pay attetion to the deadline. I feel that I am quite under the gun here, espically with the claimed vig taking a hard look at me. So please, if you want me to claim say so. I have nothing to hide with my claim, I am just waiting for the town's desire to be known. I actually want to claim, because I think having my name out there will clear me. But I won't claim without the town's consent because I know that is a scummy move. So make up your minds and let me know.

[Chess83]

Emp, since we have been discussing my claim and when to claim and what not. Given the deadline and the fact that I very possibly will be holding the majority votes, how do you think I should handle the claim in that situation? Basically, should I claim Sat? That would give people Sunday to change their vote if my claim made a difference. I just don't want the town to look back at my name and think "well if we had known that I probably wouldn't have voted for him." (Do not take that statement as a hint to my claim, it is strictly hypothetical). What are your thoughts.

this question is open to everyone, I have been diagloguing with emp about this already that is why I am directing it to him.

[Chess83]

You know, seeing how I am in the lead of voting and I don't see that trend chaning anytime soon. Two people are really after me with a third not that far off. Also, considering how this game is moving really slowly, I decided that I want to make sure people have time to read my claim. So I am giving it out now.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

Elizabeth Darko, Donnie's big sister. Vanilla Townie.
I hope this will convince some people that I am not scum.

[Chess83]

pardon my newbieness, but so that I may completly understand you, what does "OP" mean?

[Chess83]

Emp, how is this an obvious parellel to chamer's non-claiming?

[Chess83]

Where is Ixnay?

Can we get a prod on Ixnay?

[Chess83]

It seems that there is a bandwagon forming on Sentinel. Given the deadline I am going to place my vote in hopes that Sentinel will claim.

Vote: Sentinel 99

Emp who is your proposed vig target for tonight, so that they may be able to say something before their possible death tonight.

[Chess83]

For reference I don't want to kill Anix, I don't know where you got this from.

As for defending myself.
I have made some mistakes, yes. I cannot provide a reason for these mistakes that grants some element of certitude. My reasons leave too much possibility. These are the arguements leveled against me.

To these I say that I have already argued, as stated above. My arguements have been deemed unworthy (as it were) of being certain. I state the truth and hope you will see it. I have claimed in hopes that some will see that I am not scum. I think some have seen that. While I have seen Anix's "11th hour" work, I would like to see him post a little more and contribute, espically since we are under a deadline right now.

As for other comments.
I want Sentinel to claim. There is not much time left and I don't foresee his claiming having a large effect on the outcome of today. As for the vig target, I don't know who would be the best.
I want to suggest STD or Scalebane. But this is based on my "chamber" arguement that has been dropped from public view.
Other than that MeMe stands out to me. She has been hunting less active players yet she herselve has not been the rolemodel for an active player.

[Chess83]

Allow me to clearify, your posting as of late is not active, nor is your content helpful. Example, your reaction to my claim was "Don't worry about me voting for you." You gave no reason.

Your response to Emp's long post was "wow, I'm impressed"

I am paraphrasing these quote because I am in a hurry, but basically you are just making side comments and not really contributing, and you are not posting a whole lot, as of late.

[Chess83]

Also MeMe, can you do a D2 vote count, interested to see what that looks like.
And can you tell me how you are doing these vote counts, I am sure you are not passing through all the pages counting them one at a time. Where are you going to see these vote counts?

[Chess83]

For everyone's reference...
Those who posted at some point on Monday thus far,
STD
Chess83
MeMe
Scotty
Emp

Those who have not posted at some point on Monday thus far,
Scale
Ixnay
Anix
Sentinel
Olio

I think it is safe to assume silence in the face of a deadline is generally a scummy thing to do. Thus the scum probably resides in the non-posting group (half the town, I know). Also, I am not trying to remove suspicsion from myself by pointing this out, just trying to help.

Those who have posted since Yesterday (Sunday),
STD
Chess83
MeMe
Scotty
Emp
Sentinel
Inxay

Not posted since Sunday
Scale
Anix
Olio

Again, not posting in the face of a deadline is scummy. Not posting for two days before a deadline seems all the more scummy to me.

Question for the town to think about, how many possible mafia are we looking at? 2 or 3?

Olio and Scalebane's last post was Friday
Anix's last post was Wednesday

I know I said that Anix's 11th hour thing works. Given the fact that he reads but does not post he should have seen the deadline and at least commented about the vig target, since it is him from what I understand.

I am posting this information because I think it interesting that 3 people are not posting for 3 days prior to a deadline. I doubt I will be the target for the nk tonight as I seem way to scummy in the town's mind, IMO. But this will give the town time to think over this stuff during the night while we await the NK and vig results. I would suggest that we review how people reacted upon the news of the deadline and what events happened BECAUSE of the deadline. Basically, who tried to stall for the deadline and who tried to get info into the public's view before the info. I think this would say alot about someone's alignment if we can conclude anything from it.

@ Emp - I am split on the vig target of Anix, while I have said before I have seen his method work, he is just not doing anything about the deadline which, as noted above is scummy IMO. The decision is yours as for the vig target. You have heard my claim already, Anix is silent. I would suggest looking at those who are not posting in the face of a deadline. Even Olio, I know he seems Townish but he is not saying anything right now and we have a deadline in like 1 hour.
That is my opinion and what I have to offer at this point. Do as you wish.

[Chess83]

I know this is after the posted deadline, but it was not posted so I will continue posting untill it is posted that we are in fact in the night phase.

I ... don't really agree with Chess on this one. Not Posting != stalling for the deadline != scumminess.

If you ask me, I think the people who wound up on the sentinel bandwagon are who we should be examining tomorrow. It basically came down to "well, yeah, he really is actively participating now, but still, he used to be lurking! look!" which is just ... ugh ... to me. I just don't get it.

Let me break this down Scale because your first part is not making sense to me.

1) If a player does not post in the face of a deadline then they are willfully not helping the town.
2) Player X [anyone on the list I posted] is not posting in the fact of a deadline.
Therefore, Player X is willfully not helping the town.

1) If Mafia want to win the game, why should not help the town.
2) Player X is willfully not helping the town.
Therefore, Player X may be mafia.

Now, what part do you not agree with?

[Chess83]

I disagree Hombre, I think Emp may have not given this information because he figured someone would have suggested Donnie could be Mafia. Also, it seems to me that either we do not have a doc or the doc didn't believe Emp's claim.

It would make sense that Emp vig kill MeMe, if nothing else to protect himself. I want to say that we should still look at STD and Scalebane, but I want to reread the past day before I say anything. I should be able to get a post up later today about whom I think we should go for.

[Chess83]

I was kinda wondering the same thing hombre, so I looked it up.

A Tracker is a fairly common information role. They can target a person at night and learn who, if anybody, that person targetted the same night. In this regard it is strictly better than a Watcher, who only learns whether or not that person targetted anyone, but not who they targetted.

the above can be viewed here
http://www.mafiascum.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/Tracker

I am going to wait untill Scale has a chance to reply and probably untill they both begin a discussion concerning this new info before I comment on it.

[Chess83]

This came to me while I was rereading...

Hello Mistress Godfather.

Her accusation is void as she and Emp are dead. My thought is this. Could Jack be a godfather? This is not to detract from the topic at hand (STD's question about Scale's night time activity) but is just me sharing some insight I saw.

[Chess83]

Okay... I think I can post this now. Seeminly STD really has no basis for this and upon some digging I think STD is scum. So,

VOTE STD

Below is a copy/paste of a word document I made on my reread of Day 2, this focuses in on STD's role claim of tracker and the fact that he claimed to have tracked MeMe on N1... Enjoy.

Okay…
First STD’s unprovoked claim was weird. It something about it didn’t jive with me so I set out to see if his “following” MeMe was evident in D2. This of course would prove his role because he would have seen that MeMe took no actions during the night as she was townie.

This is the first thing

Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2006 7:22 pm Post subject: 18
Things I'd like to point out:

Another interpretation that just came to me: CK and Scalebane know each other in real life, though 1)

I have no idea if nonny's aware of that and 2) outside-of-game information probably wouldn't be used as

flavor text.

Meme tries to link Scalebane and CK's

Later as clarification he writes,

My biggest beef was that you actually brought the two names together, as if planting a seed in our minds. Subtle tactics.

I will not quote some of these posts as they are very large rather I will highlight parts that should be noted more so than other parts of the posts…
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:35 am Post subject: 20
STD writes,

If you're town, of course not. But I'm not accusing you of being town, so suggesting I would consider you to sit on the information seems silly. If you're scum, of course not; I've already explained why.

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:17 pm Post subject: 21

I'm trying to figure out where you're at. You shared information benevolently or malevolently, and I'm not going to know until this game is over. But I can pick at it.

right after that

If she's scum, she's sharing the information with bad intentions. That's what I'm suggesting. Do I think she's scum? Maybe. Maybe not. I need more information, which is why I'm bringing this up. But I've said all of this already.

In Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 3:54 pm Post subject: 28 STD makes a list of MeMe’s posts, seemingly to cast some suspicion on her.

Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:29 pm Post subject: 39 STD role claims and says he followed MeMe N1 and Scalebane N2, he says something about his information being “strange” and proceeds to ask Scalebane to confess what he did last night.

My points are simple, these are hypothetical.
1) STD saw my continued suspicion on him and Scalebane. Decided to try to point me in the direction of Scalebane like Emp did yesterday
2) Basically alludes to him knowing MeMe was innocent (by saying he followed her)
3) Name claims in addition to his role claim, possibly to attempt to add some element of truth to his role claim. This name, by the way, represents a very minor character in the movie. Churita Chen is not a major character and most likely would not be a candidate for a role in this game, IMO.

I would like STD to strighten this up. I also would like to ask the town's opinion of how likely Churita Chen would be a character in this game. If Churita is not a likly canidate for this game then it makes the name a semi-safe claim for STD.

[Chess83]

STD, for now I am dropping this thing, but believe me that we probably will be revisiting it.

Scale, what did you and Emp discuss?

[Chess83]

Okay I feel like an idiot. I missed Sotty7 and STD's post at the end of the previous page, don't know how but I did. I have to say that I am feeling a little more comfortable with STD's claim and the looking into of scale.

I want to again ask scale to

CONFESS ANY INFORMATION DISCUSSED WITH MEME DURING BOTH NIGHTS.

This can only serve to help you and basically the longer you take the more suspicious I am that your are going to post something that is false and made up.

@STD
1) Elizabeth has probably about the same odds as Chen; however, the rest of the family is here, so why not Liz? (rethorical question)
2) "Chess, yes. Damn you are a good. You figured me out. I'm totally bussing my partner." Where is that from? I looked at it a number of times and just can't figure it out.

[Chess83]

I did mean Emp, not MeMe. I am sure that your sarcasim is noted by all.
It is interesting that you do have time to post something which basically has no meaning to it other than to take a shot at me (on a personal level) and to buy yourself some more time, yet you don't have time to simply say something so simple as what the topic of discussion was, and promise more later when you can type it. For the record I do not doubt that you have classes and are busy, I am also taking classes, just an easy day today.

[Chess83]

This has absolutly nothing to do with this game but...

GO SAINTS

Had to write it. I go to school near New Orleans.

[Chess83]

@Scale - if that is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth... it is not very convincing.

@ Hombre - what do you think about STD's claim and Scale's confession of his night action.

@Anix - Anytime with the 11th hour thing.

@STD - interested to see your response to Scale's last post.

[Chess83]

STD, what are your thoughts that "Frank the bunny" is a name that would be pro-scum, either just a stright scum OR a godfather?

I don't really know what to make of the discussion. While the role makes some sense, you would think that Emp would have opened up a liitle to him and the discussion would have entailed something more than "there was not a whole lot said." Even if Emp chose to feed him some disinformation, who he thought was scum or that he was convinced CK was innocent, then Emp vigged CK. That if nothing else would possible confuse the other guy. In short, what I am trying to say is that there are too many avenues that the night conversation could have taken and "there was not a whole lot said" does not seem like a probable one.

something that does strike me as weird is the word choice of Scale...

Most of the nights

"Most"? there were two nights. Grammatically it is impossible to have a partial majoirty that the word "most" suggests. Furthermore, nothing in fact was said. No information was given. You (scale) asked for 2 things...
1. Name
2. Abilities
Both of which Emp refused to answer. It seems kinda basic and simple to ask for these. Why not collaborate or offer information instead of asking for it? To me it makes sense that if night discussion is taking place then obviously if you are town the person you are talking to is town. If that is so why not share some ideas or information. I would imagine N1 may consist of "Dang, chamber was innocent. Well I am really suspicious of X, what do you think?" Instead of

"What is your name... what is your quest... what is your favorite color?"
(Written purely for humor, not drawing a comparison at all)

It just seems fishy to me. With 7 alive, 4 to lynch and 2 votes on Scalebane, I am

FOS SCALEBANE

I do want to vote him, but lynch -1 is a little to close for comfort right now. I don't care for LyLo situations and if we lynch wrong today that is what we will be in. So that being said, I will probably vote sometime this week, unless things change.

[Chess83]

FYI, this makes Scale lynch -1. As I said before unless event change I will probably be voting (regardless of vote count) later in the week, probably tommrow or Thursday.

Scalebane, defend thy self or perish... or perish even if you defend yourself, depending on the defense.

[Chess83]

I WILL VOTE SCALEBANE TONIGHT

IF you don't want him lynched yet, unvote. If you are Scalebane, you may want to defend yourself. I gave him yesterday to defend and he will also have today to defend himself.

[Chess83]

Warning, sorry for the confusion.

[Chess83]

VOTE SCALEBANE

Sorry to be late, seems that Scalebane does not even want to defend himself. So there it is. Take it away Mod.

[Chess83]

I agree on the mass claim thing

Anix
Olio
Hombre
Sotty
STD and I already claimed.

@Anix, I have back you and your 11th hour thing, don't fail me now.

@hombre, u have been quiet lately. Speak up, it is the late game and we need to nail the last mafia.

@olio, it seems that you are less convinced that I am mafia. I would like to hear what you think about the other people in the game.

@Sotty, I would like to hear what you did last night and possibly your role. However, that is your call. If STD says you are okay, then I will be content with that for now.

@STD, I have something to say to you. But it can wait untill some other stuff comes out. I may never say it, if what I think is about to happen happens.

[Chess83]

yeah, to my understanding. We are waiting on Anix to claim, and give any information he thinks is helpful.

[Chess83]

I Emp's story would confirm this story. There was alot of questions about if Emp was an SK portraying a Vig or if Emp was just a Vig. Granted this could be scum doing a hindsight story, filling in the gaps. But Anix did not wait very long between the call for his claim and him actually giving his claim and his story.

As for his godliness, and Scully's beauty... I seriously doubt both. 8)

next up is olio.

[Chess83]

Why have you been protecting him everynight?

[Chess83]

Chess, why didn't you ask why I protected STD for N1 and N2 only? Why did you include N3 in your question?

um...
[quote="Chess83]
Why have you been protecting him everynight?
[/quote]

I said nothing about any night in particular.
But it would be logical for you to protect him N3 as he claimed a tracker role on Day 3.

Hombre's up.

[Chess83]

4 is lynch. I don't see us having any more than 1 scum left. I think the best course of action is to

VOTE ANIX

@Sotty - the remote possibility of STD's guilt did cross my mind, but after hearing your claim and knowing yesterday's result I trust him.

1. Yesterday he went after and lead the lynch of a scum (in theory possibly his partner)
2. Today he says he checked you, but is not forcing your hand. He knows you did something and that you are town.

If he were scum, how would he KNOW you did something?

I propose that we lynch whomever's claim is the weakest and move from there. If we don't get the last scum today then we come back tommrow and discuss the night event and choose someone else.

My list of weak claims...
Anix (weakest)
Olio
STD (strongest)

I believe Sotty, therefore I trust that sotty and hombre are innocent.

[Chess83]

STD, what do you propose for the lynching order?

[Chess83]

Me too, but I do have a question. Sotty is not on your list, which makes me assume that you believe the claim. So why do you have Myself and Hombre, who have been cleared by Sotty, above the someone who has not been cleared by Sotty?

[Chess83]

I just realized I misread your post about N1, N2 and me INCLUDING N3. I read "did not include" N3. My bad.

I didn't stop and think about when STD claimed, I just saw that you protected him all three nights, and thought it was odd. You explained it well enough that you protected and innocent N1 and figured it was a safe enough bet to protect him again, since you knew he was innocent. Then he claimed, and you protected him yet again. My bad, again.

[Chess83]

Or possibly the 11th hour didn't work because you had nothing to go on. I am just glad that I can chalk up another Win.