Mini 427 - Clue Mafia 2 - GAME OVER

[chaotic_diablo]

accuse chaotic_diablo

[chaotic_diablo]

Accuse:chaotic_diablo

You call that dancing?

No, it's a sexual assault with my ass. Next question.

[chaotic_diablo]

unaccuse

Let's hear from Ectomancer! Name claiming this early is indeed baaaaaad...

suspect ectomancer

[chaotic_diablo]

unaccuse

Let's hear from Ectomancer! Name claiming this early is indeed baaaaaad...

suspect ectomancer

Who said I claimed?

unaccuse, accuse chaotic_diablo

for jumping on a joke. Mrs. White in the

panty

with a

polish sausage

. Hello?

Phbbt, my mistake. I caught the joke, but thought it was quite possible that you would actually give us your real role name and claim it to be a joke so that we wouldn't believe you. I got this mostly because we were talking about Mrs Peacock then all of a sudden a Mrs White came out. I didn't catch al_ko's post.

[chaotic_diablo]

I think Ectomancer's post was overdefensive. Quite an aggressive counter againt a fos. Even with the exaggerated and repeated letters in one word, he failed to catch the looseness of the accusation and tried to exaggerate the action as a "jump" and falsely accused me of "failing to catch the joke".

[chaotic_diablo]

I think Ectomancer's post was overdefensive. Quite an aggressive counter againt a fos. Even with the exaggerated and repeated letters in one word, he failed to catch the looseness of the accusation and tried to exaggerate the action as a "jump" and falsely accused me of "failing to catch the joke".

Blah blah blah. I realize you are trying to stir up conversation in a very slow thread here, so whatever.

Then you should know that keeping the conversation open should help us. We can have two going on at once, make a defense for yourself. You should never try to attack a person without defending yourself first, it just tell us you're trying to divert the attention.

But if there is anything we should look at, it is your claim that "you didnt notice" al_ko's post that was only 2 before mine and made

3 days before

. You are trying to say that you aren't actually reading the thread, but are making replies anyhow? I dont find that to be a town tell, more of a lazy scum one.

al_ko's post is also part of a series of spam posts that continued through the game at a very boring and uncontributive rate. Reading, remembering, and skimming through those posts will always cause people to miss a couple details. Given that there were 3 days of near inactivity after al_ko's post, I might have read it once, then ignored and forgot it when the next post came. I'm not going to remember spam and joke posts for three days.

[chaotic_diablo]

A vote count would help indeed.

[chaotic_diablo]

I threaten TCS with a hammer vote.

It wasn't scummy to move to L-1 Day One in the other game, right? So it's not scummy for me to go

vote: TCS

, right?

Consistency. Billy?

Not entirely the same. Billy made a -1 lynch based on the behavior and actions in another game to influence his judgement. Your vote is simply there to piss him off. The fact that you're intentionally playing in a way that you think is scummy also makes your vote different.

fos MBL

BM's claim is simply due to poor judgement. The only way I can see scumplay on TCS's part is if he tried to exploit BM's poor playstyle. Unfortunately for him, I can also see that happening.

[chaotic_diablo]

What a waste of food.

MBL, what are your thoughts on the soup, and why did you pitch it? Given that we do not know what the soup will do, I think waiting and seeing how people first respond would have been the better course of action.

[chaotic_diablo]

Read a few pages back.

I don't really understand the significance of this soup thing.

Depending on what your role is, you might be more or less than willing to try something unknown. Pitching the soup might imply that you have a power role while eating it might mean your role is sucky. dahen's post 204 pretty much outlines it. When I look back, it actually makes MBL more suspicious.

So who would have eaten the soup and who would have pitched it, and why?

This could possibly be rolefishing. I think al_ko asked a similiar question?

[chaotic_diablo]

vote Ectomancer

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm willing to believe MBL isn't scum since his behavior in the other games when he's close to a lynch differs from this game.

Then again, the stalling seems like a reasonable excuse to place a lynch that is full of BS.

[chaotic_diablo]

BM, it isn't that MBL is unlynchable. It's probably because someone has the ability to prevent a lynch. It's probably only a one-shot, so if we attempt to lynch MBL again, it might succeed this time.

[chaotic_diablo]

i dont know how you came to that conclusion, but assuming it is true, there is probably a damn good reason why someone saved MBL. Thus we may need to rethink our stance towards him...
BM

It's easy. I've had the same role before in a different game.

[chaotic_diablo]

CD: Do you mean "the same role", or "that role"?

A similar role in an unrelated game that isn't Clue Mafia. I was given the the ability to cancel a majority lynch only once. My memory is a bit sketchy, but I believe that's how it went.

[chaotic_diablo]

Accuse: chaotic_diablo

Why is he still alive?

I don't know. Do you?

[chaotic_diablo]

Wishy-washy "I want to hammer but I won't" post, he threatens the hammer,

Completely wrong interpretation. It isn't "I want to hammer but I won't," but "I will hammer if he doesn't claim." That isn't wishywashy. Overall, there should have been no reason to force TCS to claim if I were scum with him.

wanders off to MBL and then comes back and says that he isn't sure TCS is scum.

MBL was justifying his actions by referring to a similiar one even though the conditions and situation were different. A -1 vote based on support is completely different from a -1 vote based on pissing someone off.
As for TCS, I try to do my best to see how every person can be scum and see what motivates them. While I see only one possible way TCS can be scum, that doesn't mean it is unlikely. In Clue 3, al_ko claimed watcher, yet there was still an open possibility of him being scum.

I noticed that he also garnered some attention from other players on day 1, but that seems to have died off completely since then. It seemed like a good time to remind people of that.

Okay, then make a case about it. How is it scummy?

[chaotic_diablo]

Then TCS' wagon builds some more until finally he asks to be able to claim. BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS. The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum. Now roleblocker can be proven, but he didn't offer that up (not that he could have, but he could have bought some time). I would say let's see if BT can prove his roleblocking ability, but he was very careful back then to say he had not claimed a role at all, only the name.

It also comes to mind that BT was the one who

hammered

TCS the instant BT called TCS a liar. TCS had no chance of countering anything whatsoever once the results roll in. If you're already lynched, then what's the point in trying to prove your claim? What exactly is he trying to fight for now that he knows he's dead?

Singing telegram girl. Roleblocker.

Liar.

unaccuse, Accuse: TCS

.

Jack asked if this was a bussing, BM asked the same question later but what happened then was that the soup came out. We got on to that discussion, and the question of Billy never was answered by anyone. On a side note, Billy was offered the soup and turned it down. Dahen later posted a breakdown of why scum would be more likely to turn down the soup than town would be. I couldn't refute his logic then, nor now.

I'll get to this once I feel like rereading.

Now later on BM does get an innocent investigation on BT, so he's ok right? No, he then tries to get BM lynched with this deal about a "fake claim". Now I admit that it is plausible what he is saying (which makes it even better for scum), but he really wants to lynch a claimed cop with 9 still alive and 1 scum down? I dont think so. He wants his cake (an innocent investigation) and wants to eat it too (lynch the cop and get 'confirmed' while doing it).

I haven't reread the issue for this part yet so I'll get back to it when I feel like to.

Now think back to TCS, why would he fold so easily? He knew that BT would come up innocent on the counterclaim and knew his role. When TCS claimed Billy's name role, Billy spotted the setup (TCS was going down) and took advantage of the situation for a little "confirmation" on Billy.
I think BT is the Godfather, whether he really is the Singing Telegram Girl or not.

TCS was hammered so he folded early. To prove my point, check this page
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &start=125
Right after I force TCS to claim, TCS claims only to be hammered in BT's next post.

Since Ectomancer reread the isue already, I'm kind of suspicious on how he could miss MBL's post.

Wow, that was a confident hammer. Two games in a row, I'm thinking Twilight is late for a hot date or somethin.

It's on the same page as the hammer.

[chaotic_diablo]

Whether his vote was the hammer or not and so TCS' lack of defense could be attributed to it is irrelevant, it was still a bussing setup and the collaboration angle still works. BT didnt want to put his vote on until TCS basically said lynch me by claiming BT's role.

Either way the today goes, Billy shouldn't get away with it.

Your argument is that BT was bussing TCS. What is this assumption based on? Why do you believe it was a bussing setup? Wasn't it because TCS gave in so easily? Why are you know telling us that it is irrelevant?

Then TCS' wagon builds some more until finally he asks to be able to claim. BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS.

The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum.

Now roleblocker can be proven, but he didn't offer that up (not that he could have, but he could have bought some time). I would say let's see if BT can prove his roleblocking ability, but he was very careful back then to say he had not claimed a role at all, only the name.

Now think back to TCS, why would he fold so easily?

He knew that BT would come up innocent on the counterclaim and knew his role. When TCS claimed Billy's name role, Billy spotted the setup (TCS was going down) and took advantage of the situation for a little "confirmation" on Billy.
I think BT is the Godfather, whether he really is the Singing Telegram Girl or not.

BT's hammer does indeed make a difference. Chronologically, BT hammered before his counterclaim. TCS had no chance to give a defense. He could not have bought time or fooled us for very long since the lynch results would only prove him to be scum.

[chaotic_diablo]

Bussing. Scum lynching scum. It's so later they can defend themselves as town for voting for scum, just as you are doing right now. Whether TCS had a chance to defend himself is a small part of the case. He claimed Billy's role. That's the communication that says "Go ahead and lynch me Billy, Im dead anyhow. Here's your reason for doing it."

What you're failing to understand is that you have an argument without the support. You said that TCS's claim was a scum sign. Prove it. Why should we believe you? Based on your previous arguments, you came to your conclusion because TCS gave in too easily. However, now you're saying that it's irrelevant.

Isn't TCS's lack of defense to BT's counterclaim when TCS could have bought time the exact reasoning you used to imply bussing? You left out that TCS was already dead before the counterclaim. You even went so far as to label the events in the wrong order.

BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS. The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum.

What really happened was that BT hammered and then counterclaimed a few posts later because people were discontent with his hammer.

Speaking of which, did Billy lose his keyboard? Or are you the appointed public defender?

I'm not Billy's appointed defender. I'm trying to explain the how your argument is faulty. Scum are more likely to create arguments based on crap than real arguments based on logic. It's our job to evaluate whether your argument is valid or not. I read back and saw that your argument is full of BS.

Why do you think TCS's claim is a scum sign?

[chaotic_diablo]

I didn't have the current vote count when I was reading. Sue me. It still doesn't matter if BT's vote was the hammer or not. It was a setup and call by TCS for BT to vote for him by simply claiming BT's role. BT's vote being the hammer, and me missing that doesn't make the argument full of BS.

I already explained how TCS claim was scum chat.

You sir are straw manning the overall argument. It certainly doesn't hinge on TCS having the opportunity to fight harder afterwards. In fact, since there was only 1 vote left to get on him, it makes even more sense for TCS to force the hammer on himself when he did by claiming BT's role. He had very little time to try to pull something positive out of his lynch.

Thank you for completely ignoring his attempt to lynch BM later. If you were doing such a bang up job of assessing the argument you might try addressing the entire argument. Twice you stated that you would "get back to this" after a re-read. How about finishing your re-read before nitpicking what is a minor point overall. That's a straw man and really is full of BS. How can you say you are trying to determine whether the argument is valid or not when you twice admitted that you didnt go back to read it?

I took my time to reread the parts you mentioned. I'd expect that someone who made an argument based on an issue to look over all the posts related to the argument. If you did, you wouldn't have missed it.

BT being scum certainly doesn't hinge on the possibility that he could have bussed TCS.

I'm not ignoring your other argument. I have stated that I would reread it when I

felt like it.

It isn't a gurantee that I'll spend the extra effort to find the issue and properly discuss it with you.
To me, you have two different points. One is based on scum association, and the other is scum by individual actions. While I can see how BT could be scum and may be motivated to buss TCS, that only applies if BT is scum. You're supposed to make an argument to prove someone is scum, not the other way around. Therefore scum by association is an extremely weak case. It's an argument that's full of BS if it isn't properly supported.

[chaotic_diablo]

unaccuse

Let's hear from Ectomancer! Name claiming this early is indeed baaaaaad...

suspect ectomancer

Who said I claimed?

unaccuse, accuse chaotic_diablo

for jumping on a joke. Mrs. White in the

panty

with a

polish sausage

. Hello?

Phbbt, my mistake. I caught the joke, but thought it was quite possible that you would actually give us your real role name and claim it to be a joke so that we wouldn't believe you. I got this mostly because we were talking about Mrs Peacock then all of a sudden a Mrs White came out. I didn't catch al_ko's post.

FYI, I am Mrs. White. I didn't like how quickly c_d jumped on what was a softclaim of sorts. I still don't see what his point was back then. If you are town and suspect someone is couching information in the guise of a joke, why dont you file it away for future reference? Why make such a big deal of it?
I'm also not impressed by your defense of Billy. I noticed that you really didnt come to life until a fairly easily deflected case was given, and then you were ALL over it. Seriously, getting an investigated innocent lynched is tough to do. My wild accusation now is that c_d is choosing an easy topic to defend to get all active in this game with an opportunity to look pro-town.

Go back and re-read c_d please. It's only 1 page, so shouldn't take long.

unvote, vote chaotic_diablo

You are not guranteed town. When you

nameclaimed

, al_ko immediately jumped on. I had thought that al_ko also caught your mistake and knew something, so I jumped on as well. As I said, I missed al_ko's previous post and the "whole" joke.

I'm bothered by the fact that I was correct when I accused you of nameclaiming that early. If you were town, why the hell would you need to disguise yourself in a form of a joke in the first place?

If you were to create an easily deflectable argument then pin someone for attacking it, wouldn't that just mean you were trying to fabricate a lynch and set someone up? You're just trying to grasp straws just to see which method works. Attacking an easy argument doesn't mean I'm scum. It means your argument is crap and easily argued.

[chaotic_diablo]

I never said I was guaranteed town, what I did was name claim with no doubt or joke involved this time.

I do things to get reactions. You reacted to my joke in a manner that makes me wonder why you would do that if you were town. It was you who said anything about that "joke" being a name claim at all. Neither I, nor anyone else had done so.

I have already explained why I interpreted your post as a nameclaim. I explained it when it happened and when you asked for it now. If you took the time to actually read my post you would find an argument to counter my explanation rather than repeating your points over and over again when they have already been argued. I also remember that you let me off because the town motivation was to "stir up a lagging game."

CD is just trying to stir up a lagging game.

unvote, vote: al_kohaulec

for attacking CD instead of helping him put pressure on me.

Just for your sake, I'll explain it again. At the time, Jack had stated that he was Mrs Peacock. I missed al_ko's post mentioning Mrs White and then DOS stated he wasn't Mrs Peacock. Since I missed al_ko's post on Mrs White, I thought it was strange that You would suddenly come up and say you had Mrs White. al_ko voted for you and I thought al_ko also found that particular event strange so I added my vote as well. As it turned out, I completely missed out on the most important detail and jumped to the wrong conclusion. Despite having missed the detail, I now know I was actually right even though I reached the conclusion the wrong way.

You miss my point I suppose in the 2nd half of my case, which is it took an easy argument to draw you out, and you chose one that let you take an easy "pro-town" approach to the question. You did it despite the case being directed towards BT. It was his response that I was looking for. But you chose to take advantage of that moment to attribute some pro-town statements to yourself.

That's because I'm protown and lazy, not scum and manipulative. I also argued only one part of your argument since it wasn't BT's responsibility. I'm not inclined to defend others for their own individual actions. However, you drew a conclusion that BT was scum based on TCS's actions. BT had indirect involvement in that single point, therefore it was up for grabs to anyone. However, your second point is something I consider best to leave to BT since BT's involvement was direct. I believe the action was that BT attempted to lynch a claimed cop. My choice to argue which points it mostly based on how much effort it takes and whether arguing is actually worth the effort. It isn't a method to look more protown, I'm just lazy and not up to it at that moment. If you read back to the parts that I said I would reread, I added the "when I felt like it" to convey the fact that I was unwilling to do so due to laziness.

HC, it might be worth looking into to see if someone did save him. I also think it worth noting that C-D's phrasing when talking about the mechanic gave me the impression that he was trying to lean us towards trying to lynch MBL again, since he is pushing the one shot prevent a lynch theory.

Lynch MBL again? Not my intention. Look in the other clue games and make the connection. Think "Mr Boddy." That is my idea.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm tempted to just lynch Ecto and go on with night, but I haven't been paying close attention to this game so I'm not really sure if that's the best choice. I'll reread and post something.

[chaotic_diablo]

vote Ectomancer

[chaotic_diablo]

vote Ectomancer

You're 2 days too late. Try something more productive.

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

[chaotic_diablo]

Really? You could have lynched me, but you chose not to do it. You waited until 2 people fell off my wagon. So why now? Why did you vote for me? It shows me that you don't really mean it if you didn't use it when it would have counted.

I was prodded and I really didn't want spend time to create a good post, so I skimmed the vote count and added my vote.
I believe those players unvoted because they thought your bandwagon wasn't going to go anywhere. If they decide to add on their votes again, then I don't think my vote is unproductive.

[chaotic_diablo]

Really? You could have lynched me, but you chose not to do it. You waited until 2 people fell off my wagon. So why now? Why did you vote for me? It shows me that you don't really mean it if you didn't use it when it would have counted.

I was prodded and I really didn't want spend time to create a good post, so I skimmed the vote count and added my vote.
I believe those players unvoted because they thought your bandwagon wasn't going to go anywhere. If they decide to add on their votes again, then I don't think my vote is unproductive.

vote chaotic_diablo

That's a load of crock. What the fuck did you add a vote for if you didn't want to spend time on the game? Once again, why didn't you add it when I was at L-1. You're wasting my time and everyone else's.
All you did was look for a "safe" move and since everyone was on Ecto's wagon, may a well vote him right? Well it wasn't safe, it was scummy. You were just looking for a hole to hide in.

vote chaotic_diablo

Is it really necessary to pin me for being unproductive when we've had an entire bitch worth of unproductiveness? The way I see it, you're the one wasting our time. Both BM and DOS unvoted you to pursue a wagon that is far more unproductive than mine. However, you specifically target me for trying to keep you on the radar. If you have problems with me not hammering you, then you should have problems when people just suddenly lift off your wagon for no reason. Especially when one of them guranteed to revote.

I think you're just bitching because you wanted to get into the safe zone yourself.

[chaotic_diablo]

In case you hadn't noticed, I could give a rat's ass about being in the "safe zone". Those 2 didn't unvote to pursue a more productive wagon, they unvoted me because there is no case on me in the first place, so no, I have no problem with people unvoting without reason when they had no reason to vote in the first place except to get me to post a review. You on the other hand, have made the scummiest move that I've seen all game. You have no idea why you are voting me either, except to "keep me on the radar" in a game you have stated you don't have time for.

My vote is staying on you. If the rest of the town wants it off, they can remove it by lynching me.

I think you do care about your survival. Both BM and DOS unvoted to pursue a wagon on Ergo. Since you obviously have problems with players voting you for no reason, it's strange that you would let both BM and DOS slide. Considering that both of them were on your wagon before, my only explanation is that you don't want to engage them in fear of being revoted. So while those two players are off in lala land whatever, you decide to attack me for having unproductive vote that is coincidentally on you.

Keeping you on the radar is far more of a reason to vote for you than simply having no explanation at all. In fact, you managed to get a bandwagon on what you claim to have "no reasoning" behind it. There is no such reason why we should drop you off the radar without a reread.

[chaotic_diablo]

I know why BM was on my bandwagon, and I know why he got off of it. Do you? Clearly not, yet you have no problem tossing your vote around, despite admitting that you have no clue at all of what is going on this game.

If that were the case, then I would have hammered you. Clearly, my vote isn't there to make significant moves on things I don't understand. However, tossing it into something minor isn't a problem.

I don't think the issue is that BM got off your wagon. I think the issue is that he went to pursue a wagon an unproductive wagon on Ergo, yet you let it slide and specifically targetted me for having an "unproductive" vote on you.

You aren't keeping me on the radar, you are just trying to keep you OFF of it by joining the bandwagon with the most votes without even understanding the bandwagon in the first place. You don't even know WHY you would want to keep me on the radar, other than you hope people don't slide off of my wagon and on to you. "Oh shit, this wagon is falling, better shore it back up quick and save my own ass"

I don't have a wagon on myself, therefore there is nothing to keep off of me. If I'm trying to save my ass, what exactly am I saving my ass from?

I'm keeping you on radar because the wagon was falling due to inactivity. I want to at least be able to look over your case one more time before it disappears completely. You seem to have a problem with that.

The bottom line is, you didn't have the balls to lay down the hammer. You didn't want the attention when I turn up town. There is very little else to go on this game, so the hammer would surely garner some attention.
Oh, but after a couple votes dropped, allowing you to put me at L-2, you had no problem laying down your vote in a safe slot on the wagon.

Correct, I didn't have the balls to hammer a wagon I didn't understand. I'm not going to buy the crappy argument that it's going to "garner attention". That's bullshit. We have little else to go on because everyone is inactive, not because there is nothing to catch. If players actually held their word to "reread" and "look back" through the thread, I'm pretty sure we would have more suspicions to explore. Or did you have something to support the "I need to save my ass" argument?

As I said, vote stands until I get lynched or you do.

I don't really care if your vote stands. However, it is apparent that you're just being stubborn if you intend to keep it there until one of us dies. That isn't an effort to catch scum, that's an effort to look stupid. Your argument isn't even justifiable for a lynch.

[chaotic_diablo]

Day One: In chronological order. My thoughts will change as I reread through each day. Skip to bottom if you're one of those lazy asses who didn't bother rereading.

DOS votes TCS claiming that random.org turns him scum. In hindsight, DOS was right. However, this type of accuracy whether random or not needs to be observed carefully.
Ectomancer votes DOS, presumably random
Jack follows suit and hops ion Ectomancer, using the very same excuse DOS comes up with. Let it be known that Ergo replaces Jack.
Ancalogan votes CES, who is later replaced by HC
Al_ko votes Jack/Ergo. This vote is can be ignored since al_ko’s later behavior reflects as such.
TCS(scum) votes Jack(ergo).
Jack(ergo) speculates that ending of movie, Mrs. Peacock was guilty
DOS shoots down the idea with decent logic
al_ko shoots back by implying DOS is peacock
As a side note, it’s possible that movie themes may be implemented into the game, as the other clue games have done so.
Ectomancer responds with a Mrs White. In hindsight, ectomancer was indeed Mrs. White. With this possible proof, look back at DOS’s TCS vote. Jokes are for chumps.
Alko switches vote to Ecto
CD(me) hops in the bandwagon, mistaking the scum signs and crap.
Ectomancer jumps on CD, accusing him of missing joke
CD says that he caught the joke but thought it was just a psychological trick. Turns outs, I’m right
CD’s next post just tries to get discussion running by playing along with the situation
Ectomancer retorts with a blah blah blah wtf u suxxors response
Al_ko jumps on the CD wagon, gives no explanation other than CD is the scummiest
Ectomancer criticizes al_ko and votes him. Pretty bad logic.
Jack mentioned that TCS(scum) and CD want control over the game.
BM shit happening. Best not to pay attention to the crap here.
Jack votes dahen. I’m still trying to determine if this is significant. It’s dahen’s first mention of the game.
Jack switches to TCS(scum)
BM hops on the TCS wagon
CES comes in with a CD vote, where the hell has he been?
Ancalagon votes TCS
BT unvotes and votes BM. His previous vote was on DOS
BM claims cop
DOS switches to TCS
TCS goes with the Scummy I’m so scummy look at me style
TCS request prods on CES, DOS, Ecto, and dahen. Is this a cry for help? DOS later questions the prod, which brings up this theory
ECtomancer hops on TCS
BT goes with the TCS is odd, but Ectomancer deserves an FOS
DOS questions TCS’s prod request
TCS long posts a vote on Ectomancer
CES tries to coerce TCS and BM to hop on CD
MBL puts TCS at -1 to show up BT
TCS won’t claim unless hammer is threatening
Dahen long posts and says alko is most suspicious, but gives no reasoning. He barely or never mentioned al_ko in the long post.
CD threatens a forced claim out of TCS
TCS claims singing telegram girl, RB
TCS tries to squeeze out BM’s name claim
BT shuts that out by hammer
People question BT’s hammer
BT claims singing telegram girl
Alko votes TCS though the hammer was already pulled
Ectomancer does the same thing
Ancalogan says that BM and TCS are most suspicious
Jack mentions BT’s unnecessary claim of RB
BM says BT never claimed RB
TCS is lynched, he’s scum
End of Day One

My thoughts:
There are three major events in the day. The first is CD(me)’s mistake on Ectomancer’s name claim. It can be said that CD is definitely looking for clues to pick on. With hindsight, he was definitely right about Ecto’s claim. The wagon that followed CD’s vote was put to a stop with Ectomancer’s defense that CD attempted to stir up a lagging game. The logic used was pretty bad. This part is incomplete since it doesn't include the events later in the game that tie it in. I'll get to that later.

The second event was the BM wagon. The wagon built up with crappy reasoning, so I’m getting the impression that it was scum driven. Scum searching for an easy lynch target. I need to look back over this. Again, BM's claim ties in later in the game, so it's incomplete.

The third event is TCS’s lynch. TCS was definitely scummy for a lynch, but the counterclaim brang up several issues. I believe that BT is town because he shut down TCS’s suggestion for BM’s nameclaim with a hammer. The only issue is his claim, which was unnecessary and would be the target of future suspicions. As a result, this section is also incomplete.

I'll get to day two later.

[chaotic_diablo]

I got lynched, but whatever. I'm Mr. Green, town aligned.