Mafia 60: Face-to-Face - Game over!

[Adele]

vote: AndrewS

. A vote for no lynch is a vote for scum power.

[Adele]

Well, unless Stoofer went crazy with role assignment, chance is responsible, Glrok.

:lolposting:

[Adele]

Who is?

[Adele]

I was asking Fritz, though.

[Adele]

It's very easy to try a scummy gambit, get called up on it, and protest "I only said something scummy to see if there were any scummy reactions to it!" - I can understand the tactic, but couldn't youi have thought of something controversial to say that wouldn't've hurt the town if we'd taken you up on it?

[Adele]

huh? Man, if I

had

just stated a rule, then okay. I have before; I've probably quoted LAL more than anyone else (I appear to be the only person who still truly believes it) and I'm probably a relative newbie here. I don't always have time to write an essay like the opne this post's gonna be, and if I wait 8 hours until I

am

free, I might have another page to deal with (I cannot believe I signed up for another normal; I'm a sucker for punishment).

However, I wasn't stating a rule, but my opinion; that a vote for no lynch is a vote for scum power. Pardon me for being concise about the crux of the issue: no lynching is of greater benefit to the scum than town, since scum have more strength at night and the town has the lynch to balance it out.

This whinging that it was so obvious that scum'd never try it, though? Honestly, it looks WIFOM to me.

You suggested a plan of action which held only potential harm for the town if it was taken up, then backtrack that it never

would

be, and you did it for the reactions. Well, we all reacted negatively toward your scum-friendly plan. Shock horror.

[Adele]

btw, check out IH's post 99. I missed it when I wrote the above.
/agree with IH

[Adele]

The wifom argument is fallacious, but I don't think use of it is necessarily scummy; I think that it's a fallacy that a lot pf players are easily prone to, and not indicative of scummyness. All it does is invalidate the argument. So, I don't think AndrewS is scum because he used it, but I do distrust him quite a lot (enough for a vote) for what he

did

do and I don't consider his defence good enough to merit an unvote.

[Adele]

Um, does Glork usually say helpful stuff? Because looking at his posting record, he's changed votes 4 times, Fos'd a bunch, made flip comments, and not really said anything useful. But, I don't know if that's his MO offhand.

[Adele]

AndrewS, I don't get your vote on mgm.

This is invitational only.
You would assume that would mean better teams of scum and town.
You would also assume town would pick up on things more.
A scumtell appears.
Town jumps on it.
Town jumps off of it for it going to fast.

._. anyone see what I'm saying?

lol. Qft. That's where I was coming from earlier.

Although I am now thinking that this might have been blown out of proportion.

AndrewS, I think the nolynch suggestion was really dumb. Unhelpful. Crap. I don't like the justification for it either; I don't think that end justified those means. I dunno. I need to re-read, but for now,

unvote AndrewS

-

igmeoy

still though.

[Adele]

Not really, IH. Scum will staunchly defend townies at time to make themselves look good. In fact, if Ether turns up scum, at this point, I'd be more inclined to believe that AndrewS is

pro-town

.

But that's WIFOM too. Ugh, at some point you have to give up drinking wine.

[Adele]

but scumvoid's not on Thesp's The List Of Scum...

meh, alright then. If Zindybuns agrees too...

vote: Spectrumvoid

[Adele]

MGM, nobody thought that Glork was serious. Nobody other than you. This shows that you weren't reading the game. That is why I was voting for you.

I wasn't certain ; honestly, I wan't sure whether it was a joke or if he was about to spout some stats to back it up, or what. I chose to wait and see.

[Adele]

Unvote

.

If I was a vig it'd be a tossup between Andrew/MGM/maybe Glork if those two weren't an option.

Perhaps even literally.

My ideal vigging scenario (I know you're all on tenterhooks ) would be if SV took town input, picked out about 3 solid targets (and told us who, possibly) and random.org'd between them. Randomisation is a valid methodology in Game Theory precisely because of WIFOM issues (although the textbooks don't call it that), and I'm always uncomfortable playing stone-paper-scissors if I don't even know who the opponent is.

I'll try to pick a better target for my vote today - if not, I'll try to present a valid reason for failing. I may well be unable to post over the weekend, so please excuse that, but I'll certainly be back Monday. I'm not lurking.

[Adele]

Well, maybe she doesn't want the scum to know who she's targeting, or the scum won't want to hit the same target, so we'd also be limiting their pool. If she were to announce that she's vigging a scum, it's possible that they'd hit her in a vain hope that their choice is entered before her, and I won't presume that she's ok with us knowing who she's killing, but at the same time her role's provable and I'd ideally like it proven, y'know? - Which is why I'd like a commitment from her that X, Y or Z'd be dead come morning. Then if one of them is we can treat her as confirmed.

[Adele]

Bad logic there, Glork.

As for SV's claim, I completely believe it. If there are 2 kills tonight, then obviously there is a vig.

Or the vig could be blocked while a serial killer is still active.

The First Post Is Your Friend.

For this purpose I'm going to use mith's

Mafia Cards Deck

. I've shuffled together the following cards:

• 3 scum: Michael Corleone (Godfather) Tom Hagen and Luca Brasi
• 9 Innocent Townspersons
• 3 randomly chosen town power roles (see further below)

No SKs.

[Adele]

Whatever. SV said she didn't want to tell us who today.

I'm open to discussion about my vig target, but I'll only reveal who tomorrow.

You want to argue this out, she's the one to yell at. I was just rying to figure what we could most effectively do within the parameters

she

's set; I'm done trying to defend the parameters. I respect them, and if you don't - that's fine, but it's not up to me.

I would support an Adele vigging at this point, too.

boo. Why?

[Adele]

wow, disallowing bahs. Harsh.

I think disagree with the mgm bandwagon, but I don't suspect Glork either.

[Adele]

Fair point, Glork. EBWOP:

I think I'd disagree with an Mgm bandwagon, but I don't suspect Glork either.

[Adele]

Wow. As ever, love the analysis, MBL. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but it's a really useful document to work from.

Adele
Most likely of anyone to be scum. Mealy-mouthed near-complete lack of genuine suspicions, and significantly, seemed to take for granted that sv was actually a vig before that was confirmed.

To the first point, I

am

having difficulty keeping up with a larger-than-mini game (I expected it to feel only slightly larger, but with it being invitational too there's been a lot of content to keep up with). I'm hoping that today and tomorrow you'll see me transform back to my usual opinionated self.
To the second, my requests to SV as to whom she should vig were in large part because we

couldn't

assume she was vig but only take the NKs of the night as evidence. With such an eminently confirmable role, I'll certainly agree I no longer thought she should be the lynch victim.

Read Adele's comments about sv after her claim though and you'll see why Adele stood out as scummiest before that observation about Thesp.

Well, let's see:

Unvote

.

If I was a vig it'd be a tossup between Andrew/MGM/maybe Glork if those two weren't an option.

Perhaps even literally.

My ideal vigging scenario (I know you're all on tenterhooks ) would be if SV took town input, picked out about 3 solid targets (and told us who, possibly) and random.org'd between them. Randomisation is a valid methodology in Game Theory precisely because of WIFOM issues (although the textbooks don't call it that), and I'm always uncomfortable playing stone-paper-scissors if I don't even know who the opponent is.

I don't get it. Having realised that there's no SK, I'm acting as though SV, claimed vig, would take input from the town as to the vig victim if he is vig, and be shown up as a liar if he's not. Why's that bad?

[Adele]

Ether, for her defense of AndrewS (which I still think was a little odd, though I can't place exactly why)

It's difficult to pin down, but I think I can see it too. Things like

Off the top of my head, I don't remember even newbie games on 'Scum where an unoptimal no-lynch agenda actually got through. It in no way made Andrew more town; just, I didn't find it scummy. (

Now, his own behavior after the vote...well, if his wagon didn't go ridiculous, I'd probably still be on it.

)

I loathe the misrepresentative voters more than [uI loathe Andrew himself, and although Andrew has done little to help his position[/u] since then, the votes were already there.

In pretty much every defense of AndrewS she seemed to slip in a backhanded dig at AndrewS, as if she were ready to turn on him if and when it were useful to her. As it is, she gets to be the stalwart defender of the innocent townie, but she also left the door open to hammer him, point out her ongoing low-level mistrust and say that she was going with the town's wishes. Or something. Anyway, it certainly is odd.

Glork, do you have anything to say about Mgm's reply to your accusation? I think

someone

owes someone an apology...

[Adele]

So, just to be crystla clear: Nine days is "extremely long," in your opinion?

I thought I explicitly mentioned it's usually better understood by posts than real time, and here there was already plenty of substance.

And the Day was young by any measure.

/disagree.
In terms of numbers of posts, this game is already longer than the average mini theme game, with only 25% extra players. Just sayin'.
I can see what Thesp is getting at. Once you reach a certain point, it's somewhat belaboured to try to get more info out of the day than there is already. However, I don't see how it follows (in an a priori fashion; obviously it went bad this time) that the info likely to come out is info the town want kept quiet. What if SV had claimed... unnightkillable vigmason? OK, not that, she's not dumb and that's pumpkintastic, but you get my point, I hope.

(I found the mean of the number of posts in complete theme games on the front page of Coney island to be 431 (SD=194) and the median to be 468, for the geeks)

I'm more likely to trust thesp than adele.

...if you have a tendency to trust Thesp more, yet he and I are just as likely to draw a scum role, shouldn't you be counterbalancing you inclination to trust Thesp rather than use it as an excuse? Or do I misunderstand you with my brain being all in stats mode?

...I just noticed that "Stats" is a palindrome

[Adele]

I work with a Mormon. In, like, RL. Why?

[Adele]

Adele, your post on Ether moved the game forward. Your most recent post was twice as many words but doesn't appear to have stated anything particularly relevant to finding scum. Making neutral observations on Day 2 without attaching significant opinion to them is something I find detachedly scummy. Do you concur?

With which bit? I'm not certain it's a scumtell, and I don't think I'm doing that. After all, the Ether post was today; I'm just not always on top form. I pull myself in here after a long day (insert game-irrelevent self-pity here) and I know I

have

to post, because if I don't post in every game pretty much every time I come onsite I'll slip into lurking in whichever's toughest. It's not all gold, and I never said it was. A typical game with me - whether pro-town or not - usually has a mixture of helpful posts and less helpful posts, with the occasional spam mixed in.

I do find it scummy, though, that you attach scumminess to a single post, not because that particular, individual post has anything scummy in it but because it's not as contributory as you'd ideally like. In fact, most of your attacks on me today seem (to me) to be a bit straw-clutchy.

[Adele]

I'll try.

[Adele]

RL=Real Life.
Internet's real, but it ain't life

also, I'm not

[Adele]

Hello? Anyone in?

[Adele]

Whoa, awkward silence.

The failure of folks to comment on the Glorkwagon is curious. Scum is clearly waiting with bated breath to see how things develop, regardless of Glork's alignment.

Pipe up, scum! Do you want him lynched or not?!

FOS

for lurk-encouragement

[Adele]

Wow. Like, *bang* that happened fast. Sorry for my absence (at exactly the moment the rest of you turn up), and I'll post properly in a couple hours.

[Adele]

I swear that I posted yesterday, but that post's not here now, and I don't remember what I said

[Adele]

lawlscum

"lawl"? o...kay. And I especially like the "scum" bit. We'll be coming back to that later.

This is interesting. And very strange.

Glork thinks MGM, Thesp, Ether, Adele, possibly CDB are scummy.
Thesp finds CDB scummiest.
Adele supports Glork's suspicions of Ether (though I find it odd that she's not voting for anybody... any reason for the lack of a vote, Adele?)
CDB find Ether, Thesp, and Glork scummy.
MGM finds Glork, CDB scummy.
Ether is gone for a couple more days, but I think I remember her suspecting MGM yesterday.

Glork's really enjoying jumping on people (heck, see his last post for an example). He seems more wanting to find excuses for accusing people than trying to actually figure out who

is

scum.

Sometimes you'll see Adele correct people's logic without making a statement on whether or not they're scummy--it's more conversational.

Well, bad logic's like a hanging bracket...

I find myself agreeing with Glork and, even more, MBL. Thesp is setting off alarm-bells in my head, and so is Adele.

I don't agree with the Glorkwagon. I could be wrong, but Glork isn't setting off any alarm-bells with his play so far D2. In fact, I'd expect Town-Glork to up his game after a bad Day 1. I agree with MBL's observation that Thesp doesn't really seem to be trying to catch scum.

In that post, he says he doesn't trust me or Thesp. Then he says a bunch of other stuff, including several comments about Thesp, but none about me. Was I just stuck in there as an easy target? Actually, probably not, he probably thought it wasn't necessary since it's a reasonably common opinion that I'm shifty.

I'm watching Ether, Glork, and Patrick. Really like what Nightfall's just given us. I find it difficult to get a read on Zindaras because I like him so much (cats rule ok). CES is being CES-y; could be more helpful. Fritz needs some serious pokitude, Ether had better give us some useful stuff in the post she promised. I need to reread CDB to make my mind up about him, ditto Thesp.

finally,

See I think that both mgm and Adele have acted pretty scummy, but I could see them as scumbuddies. They don't address each other much, or express any suspicion of each other, and Adele keeps slipping in small defences of MgM. Like in post 318, where she makes MgM's attack on Glork seem more reasonable by saying that she actually wasn't sure whether Glork was serious either. Post 444 disagrees with the mgm 'bandwagon' of one vote. And I still don't like the last line of post 477 which seemed like another way of not taking a side.

I mentioned that I'd not been certain of Glork's seriousness because it was relevant that more then one person made the same mistake (at one point Glork expresses a similar sentiment). Post 444 I wanted to say that I'd oppose an mgm wagon today. There's been a lot of attention on him for what I've come to believe are not very good reasons.
For example:

Patrick wrote:
That's quite a strange sort of a defence. Obviously we don't know whether or not you were, but the wording and timing suggests it. This isn't a game of certainties.
My point was that Glork is assuming the worst with no evidence to back it up.

...something he's been doing a lot btw...

I never tried to lynch CDB, so assuming that was my aim has no basis in either fact or logic.
Try Occam's Razor it works like a charm.

So, ouch, yeah, he shouldn't be calling on Occam's Razor in mafia. That's a... logical error. (um, insert MBL's laughter here?)
But anyway. The question - did Mgm do anything directly or indirectly to contribute to a CDB lynch - is relevant. The fact that there are indirect tactics at play in Mafia's not the point - the question as to whether Glork can point to some indirect machinations or simply hallucinated this relationship

is

. At any rate, I trust Mgm at this time.

[Adele]

Ok, to comment a bit on your post:

This is interesting. And very strange.

Glork thinks MGM, Thesp, Ether, Adele, possibly CDB are scummy.
Thesp finds CDB scummiest.
Adele supports Glork's suspicions of Ether (though I find it odd that she's not voting for anybody... any reason for the lack of a vote, Adele?)
CDB find Ether, Thesp, and Glork scummy.
MGM finds Glork, CDB scummy.
Ether is gone for a couple more days, but I think I remember her suspecting MGM yesterday.

Glork's really enjoying jumping on people (heck, see his last post for an example). He seems more wanting to find excuses for accusing people than trying to actually figure out who is scum.

I'm just wondering why you quoted that post by Glork when you made that assertion. He wasn't exactly jumping on ppl there, he gave his opinion on how the suspicions of various ppl interwine and how that leads him to believe that there might be one or two lurker scum.

You're right, that was badly constructed; the opinion on Glork wasn't meant to be evidenced by the quote. Rather, the quote's summary interested me and I wanted it on the radar and on hand. After all, it's not like Glork could safely lie in it, is it? So even if he's scum it's still potentially a useful analyitical point.

Incidentally, I'd like to know why you're suspicious of me, especially given that you've just critisised someone for not explaining his suspicions about you.

First off, I didn't actually say "suspicious", but that you were one of the people I'm watching; it's really more igmeoy than FOS. I disagree on so many counts of who you say you trust and distrust, I'm inclined to look more closely at you (and others for whom the same can be said). It's just a constant trickle of your opinions being different to mine, and you pressing points that don't seem worth pressing to me.
I'm still a ways off being ready to vote; like I said earlier, I'm finding the size and verbosity of this game hard going (if it hadn't been for CDB, I'd've just forgotten Fritz was ever in this game), so I need to reread some stuff. The people I'm planning to focus on, though, are Ether, Glork, you (Patrick), CDB and Thesp, like I said; the first three are already people I have some negative feelings about, but I wouldn't go any further than that just yet; it's just gut.

[Adele]

also, its becausei've been helping the town, and i have the most memorable posts (and been lost in glork's eyes)

You focuesed yesterday hard on SV and AndrewS; both town (which is not to say that others didn't make the same error). In any case, you still need to hang out and say stuff, you know.

Not like you to be a wallflower.

[Adele]

...are you claiming a PR? If you are allowed to contribute, it'd be really great if you still would, what with the whole "town needing to work together" thing.

[Adele]

Mgm pls read 617. This is a blind alley.

[Adele]

I too would like to hear more helpful things from Fritz. What I'm saying is, I don't think the lack of them so far is something to get hung up about.

[Adele]

I could see myself on a Thespwagon.

[Adele]

So I started making a PbPA on Adele, but around Post 10 my gut feeling that she was scum had already disappeared.

YAY! <3

So your tossing out suggestions that its suspicious, but but distancing yourself from saying it's suspicious?

Explaning both sides of an argument does not equal scummy. Again your behaviour doesn't seem right. Do you care about finding scum? Not that I can see. You seem instead very eager on arguing with Pat here over precisely nothing.

vote: Thesp

.

[Adele]

Q: Do you think Professor Plum killed Mr. X?
A: Well, some people would say the bloody knife he was caught with would indicate he killed him, but I'm not sure if he killed Mr. X or not.

That's a really leading example; a bloody knife is bloody good evidence (reasonable man clause) the confusion much more quesitonable. It's more like:

Q: do you thing Professor Plum killed Mr. X?
A: I don't think so. We know his fingerprint was on the steak knife Mr. X was murdered with, but the Professor had helped lay the table for the dinner Mr. X was going to attend, and the murder weapon was taken from that table. There's every chance that's how the fingerprint got on there, so I don't think that the fingerprint is strong evidence.

(geez, it was meant to be a counterexample, not a plot)

[Adele]

That's a really leading example; a bloody knife is bloody good evidence (reasonable man clause) the confusion much more quesitonable.

I agree that it's exaggerated to illustrate a point. What do you think of Patrick's consent to the validity of the exaggerated model?

I didn't interpret his response as agreement that your analogy was valid; I saw him consider the repsonse within the example valid, which is a different thing.

[Adele]

If Thesp is pro-town, Adele and MGM are

so

dying next.

Am I to understand from this that you have some kind of opposition to the lynch?

Glork thinks MGM,

Thesp

, Ether, Adele, possibly CDB are scummy.

(my emphasis)

[Adele]

There's cliques happening here.
I don't like it.
Because I'm in the unpopular gang.
I'm gonna go cry in the bathrooms now.

/flees


...ok. I'll post late this evening, but the cliques thing really has confused/frustrated me.

[Adele]

I know that Fritz and I are vocal enough to count as four or five people, but I wouldn't exactly call us a clique. In fact, Fritz has actually stated recently that he's making a conscious effort

NOT

to favor any of his buddies for non-game-related reasons. I think you're being a little paranoid over nothing. It's joking and posting style, Adele. If you actually think there's a serious problem with clique-ness and buddying-up, I can request replacement.

:shock:Oh, gosh no. I don't mean that. I just meant that there seem to be some very definate groups of ingroup trust and outgroup suspicion

within the game

; I certainly don't think for a second that there are any out-of-game factors going on.

All I mean is that the people who distrust me are the same people who distrust mgm. The people who distrusted ether earlier also seem to show distrust for Thesp... things like that.

I'm really sorry if anyone thought I was feeling, like, victimised as a person or anything. I'm just having trouble picturing the trust-distrust relationships in this game, because they're very complicated,

like

social relationships are.

[Adele]

Glrok, hop on the wagon! If, for some reason, he comes up town, you'll have lots of juicy info on Mgm and Adele. It's win-win.

This is a very suspect/dangerous attitude.

FOS: Cogtio Ergo Sum.

Although my comment wasn't really serious, I'll ask you to state the problem you have with that type of attitude. After all, hypothetically, if a mislynch were to give us two scums, then the lynch would certainly have been in the town's interest.

But even if I'm wrong and Thesp's a nice guy, I'm still not scum!

Why am I on Thesp? It started out with the undercontributing that everyone noticed, then he did some stuff that just didn't seem at all likely to be from pro-town motivations:

So your tossing out suggestions that its suspicious, but but distancing yourself from saying it's suspicious?

Explaning both sides of an argument does not equal scummy. Again your behaviour doesn't seem right. Do you care about finding scum? Not that I can see. You seem instead very eager on arguing with Pat here over precisely nothing.

This is from the post where I voted him. Prior to this I'd been reading and rereading, but this comment stood out as an example of someone looking to make trouble/have a discussion when I have real trouble believing he found anything genuinely suspicious/ discussionworthy in the orginal post (Pat's).
The analogy he presented to back up his case was a strawman. Just... "picking people out to try to undermine

and then

searching for something that can be twisted into problematic-y", rather than scum-huntery.

Now he's doing the same with CES; taking a sentence that doesn't have any real meaning - we aren't machines, we do post jokes and exagerations and offhand thoughts and whatnot - and turning it into something uber-sinister.

I think he's a Bad Man.

[Adele]

I could have sworn I'd acknowledged that the case was an exaggeration, and I'd explained how my FOS of him wasn't for "Explaning both sides of an argument" (which you had actually strawmanned

me

on), yet you're bringing it up again. That's odd.

Someone asked me to explain why I was voting you. I was answering.

I also saw this which I've neglected to follow up on:

That's a really leading example; a bloody knife is bloody good evidence (reasonable man clause) the confusion much more quesitonable.

I agree that it's exaggerated to illustrate a point. What do you think of Patrick's consent to the validity of the exaggerated model?

I didn't interpret his response as agreement that your analogy was valid; I saw him consider the repsonse within the example valid, which is a different thing.

What did you think of his acceptance of the model I presented as a reasonable one? You interpreted his response as I did (though perhaps that didn't come across clearly enough in how I asked it of you), what do you think of it?

Did we interpret it the same way? I'm not convinced; you still seem to think that he considered the "model" reasonable, I think he thought the action of one person within it reasonable. I could be wrong, you could be wrong, and I honestly don't think it matters. Why are you still obsessed with his response to your invalid analogy anyway? Are you so happy that he fell for it that you have to keep dragging it out?
If so, I'd be grateful if you'd actually show the flawed analogy next time you bring it up, so the town can see your shame anew.

I'm serious. It's easier for town to fall for craplogic than it is for town to present it, so if you're right, and he treated your invalid analogy as valid, that still reflects worse on you than him.
And, in the future, seperate your rhetoric from your arguments, and make your analogies as close to the situation you're mirroring, as exaggeration can completely undermine their validity.

[Adele]

(I think it's patently absurd to think

A

's response is not scummy.)

In the context of others pointing at the bloody knife - which IIRC the equivalent was happening in this game - I'd say almost any response

other

than A's is scummy. He can't just ignore what everyone else is saying.

[Adele]

O joy. So we've basically made no prgress whatsoever?

Hands up, everyone who thinks I'm a poopyhead

[Adele]

OK. Say Stoof sets a deadline. What do we do then?

[Adele]

Unvote, Vote: Adele

Yes, yes, you hate me, I know. My question stands. We've had a dealdine on us before, it's been floated by the mod as possible again, and if we get one, we'd still have to get to a standard majority or be left with a no-lynch, so: is there someone that we can unite against, or are the various factions in possession of too oppositional view?

[Adele]

Adele, got a read on Fritz?

Adele's reads are worth shit.

1)Fritz is a twat.
2) He seems flippant-townie to me, though he

is

pretty good at faking that
3) He's said some stuff he's going to have to back up later. In a day or two I'll be asking more of him. 'Til then, I'm happy

[Adele]

Adele, what gives you the idea that he's flippant townie instead of flippant scum? Unsubstantiated, it looks like a lazy "read" by lazy scum.

I said that the flippant-townie mood is fakeable. When someone's said as little as Fritz has, you gotta go on your vibe, and the vibe seems townie-ish to me; though that is just my feeling.
Was there something specific that tweaked you, or was it just "lazy read = lazy scum"?

[Adele]

The quote was only relevant to the first point (your twatitude)

Duh.

[Adele]

I'll repeat the question, Glork. What is so scummy about Adele apart from the supposed Mgm-connection?

Her mannerisms in dealing with the SV and Andrew bandwagons did not sit well with me. I got the feeling that she was trying to appear helpful while just sitting back and letting things happen.

Was I? I'll have to reread before I can answer that (but I have time, since you're out of town)

I *REALLY* did not like the way she said that I "owe [MGM] an apology" in 477 when MGM responded to my attacks on him a few posts earlier.

That was a joke, dude. I was playing kindergarten teacher. Sorry if it annoyed you, but I was just needling you for a bit of fun. "You were wrong, hahaha" might've been more obvious.

As far as I can tell, she never responded to my question in Post 537 asking why she wasn't voting.

I sorta did, but to be fair, it was ages later, and I didn't state at the time that I was answering a question.
The thread was dead, then suddenly everyone flooded in and posted when I was away for a couple days. By the time I got back, there was like a page and a half. If I miss a question, it's worth repeating it.
Anyhow, I said later that I was a ways off being ready to vote, because I hadn't formed any strong enough opinions, and there was too much going on that I needed to sort out in my head.

I'm put off by the way that both MGM and Adele jumped on Thesp.

Thesp was, from the start, a compromise candidate that people across factions found something amiss with.

Post 597 is more evidence of my supsicions. When somebody loses a post, even if it was a day or two before, they usually at least have an idea of what they were thinking. This type of carelessness/forgetfulness ("I forgot what I wanted to say," "I forgot who I was voting for," and so on) is, IMO, a very legitimate scumtell in experienced, intelligent players... which Adele certainly is. I feel as though that was another post that tried to make it look like Adele cared/particpated more than she actually has.

You call me intelligent in the same post as you say you usually think I'm scummy.
Anyway, yes. I lost a post, and I still don't remember what I said. This game is tough. There's no flavour to use to remember it, it started with more players, all very good, very high posters, and MBL's in it (I'm playing another game with it and I'm getting the two hims confused). So when I actually spend an hour doing research writing a notepad doc of my findings and then can't see the post (which I'm 95% sure I

did

post), I'm gonna stomp my foot about it and make sure you all know about my plight. That's just the kind of player that I am.

[Adele]

Damnation.

I'm the cop. I got an innocent on mgm last night. He could be GF, but it was enough for me to oppose his lynch today.

I'm sorry I didn't defend myself better, and had to resort to this, but with less than 36 hours to go, it seemed necessary.

[Adele]

Adele, why didn't you investigate Thesp last night?

mgm seemed a sensible pick because directly before the hammah, he was on the third most votes, after the lynch victim and vig victim.