Open 20 - Pie E7 (Game over) - before 453

[Patrick]

Skruffs, what's going on?

[Skruffs]

grrrr
power outages over the weekend.
yay rain.
tonight.
i appreciate the patience, it's NOT stalling, i promise

[Guardian]

I'm back. I knows you missed me.

Keep posting and stuff, or else I'ma carry out my empty threats.

[Skruffs]

I finally finished rereading, and I appreciate you all's confidence.
Okay, first of all, I have a huge post which is saved on Google, and I can post it on here if you want, but it's a huge, unedited, stream-of-conscious mess.

To be short, there's a lot of things that stood out in this game.

Patrick: You are the most experienced player in this game, and you know precisely how this game works, but you complained about PAradoxombie not claiming. You earlier pushed for Jordan to claim. Claiming is, as I thought you knew, useless to power roles in this game because mafia have the ability to stop both roles from being able to be used. Paradoxombie would have been a 'partially cleared' cop day two with no result if he had claimed, and the doctor would still have died. Or vice versa.

Ripley and Patrick and Aimee re: simenon - Patrick rescinded his vote close to deadline. He didn't vote for either IH or Paradox. But he then was suspicious of Simenon - at least at the beginning of the day - for switching quickly to paradox (someone he said eh thought was town). However, Patrick chose not to vote, instead filling his posts about how he would be around for the hammer, he was going to be there for the hammer, he would try to be there for deadline, etc. He wasn't - and that was very convenient. Ripley's first vote of the game was a hammering vote.
His FIRST post of day two was all sweet alligator tears. "Well, I didn't WANT to vote him, I thought he was Town, and I didn't think it would be at all helpful to lynch him, but any lynch is better than no lynch... oh... and why did Simenon vote him, anyways? That's suspicious! Didn't he say he thought Paradox was town, earlier?" And this followed by Aimee. "Simenon is very suspicious, yes, I think he's suspicious for the same reasons as the two above me. >.> <.<"
That is a dramatization but you get the point. Patrick asked a question about Simenon and Ripley and Aimee jumped on it.

Later on, Ripley mentions a perfectly pleasant game. Whether I replaced Simenon or not, I would completely sympathize with his frenetic posting. He screwed up and he wanted to right it, so he put a lot of quick, not-very-well-harnessed energy into catching scum. Ripley on the other hand is 'sitting pretty' - he is in no rush, has no pressure.

Simenon noticed (as I noticed) that all through day one, Ripley and Patrick kind of trade off for each other. Patrick notices something, Ripley pushes it. Someone accuses Ripley, Patrick questions them. Patrick and Ripley did not ONCE question each other day one; all suspicious talk was directed at the other five players. After simenon points out this peculiar relationship (and I noticed it in Pie 2 so I don't want to say it's a full-out meta tell) Simenon makes a very slight comment about how Patrick *could* be manipulating his suspicions to make him suspicious of Patrick.

Patrick did notice this - questioned it - Ripley ignored it - and Patrick brought it to his attention again.but Ripley's response doesn't make ANY sense. Patrick seems to buy it though, and I wonder if this was some slight British distancing or something.

IH's post where he 'noticed' what Simenon is saying makes me happier. Simenon did vote Ripley, and Ripley's response seemed to be more convincing simenon that he could be easily quick lynched than it was of Simenon being scum quick hammering. but Ripley has been rather suspicious of Simenon the entire day - which is contradictory.

If someone I thought was scum put a vote on me, and I was town, I would either A) freak out and try to tell everyone he was scum don't let me get hammered oh god, or B) Show him that I'm not afraid because as long as townie doesn't vote, you're okay, while meanwhile building a case against him.

Ripley chose C - act afraid of being quick lynched (by two scum, presumably) while building a case against the person on you. Anyways, that is a weak argument that only makes sense to me, I guess.

This is turning into another stream-of-consciousness post, so, I am going to submit it now, like this, and if you want I can edit and post the other one, too, in the morning.

working outside takes the crap out of me.


things I would really like to know:
Aimee - you are suspicious of Simenon today but I don't remember you really pushing for him the day before, not in your player post or anything else. Why the change, and are you basing it on the same reasoning you used to think that Paradoxombie was probably scum?

Ripley/Patrick - Is there an out-of-game friendship or something that you two have that keeps tripping me up? Because there's *something* there and is just glaring. I am not saying you two are scum together, but an explanation would be nice.

If I had my druthers I would say it's probably Ripley and Aimee, which, surprisingly, IH also agrees with. This sucks because IH-scum could be buddying up to Simenon town, and I would much prefer that if it comes down to it, IH get lynched over me, but I am pretty good feeling about Ripley definitely being scum and Aimee probably helping out.

[Patrick]

Patrick: You are the most experienced player in this game, and you know precisely how this game works, but you complained about PAradoxombie not claiming. You earlier pushed for Jordan to claim. Claiming is, as I thought you knew, useless to power roles in this game because mafia have the ability to stop both roles from being able to be used. Paradoxombie would have been a 'partially cleared' cop day two with no result if he had claimed, and the doctor would still have died. Or vice versa.

No no no, this is all wrong. Whilst claiming would have made his actual ability useless, it would have got him out of being lynched, and maybe allowed us to lynch scum instead. And having a cleared player around today would be huge in itself. Do not even try to suggest to me that he was correct in staying silent. Because that is as silly as your suggestion in the previous pie c9 that no lynching on day 1 could be acceptable.

Ripley and Patrick and Aimee re: simenon - Patrick rescinded his vote close to deadline. He didn't vote for either IH or Paradox. But he then was suspicious of Simenon - at least at the beginning of the day - for switching quickly to paradox (someone he said eh thought was town). However, Patrick chose not to vote, instead filling his posts about how he would be around for the hammer, he was going to be there for the hammer, he would try to be there for deadline, etc. He wasn't - and that was very convenient.

I wish I had been around at deadline, but several pieces of bad luck prevented it. I couldn't have forseen them. In hindsight I wish I'd asked Paradoxombie to claim and maybe made things interesting by putting a third vote on IH, before leaving the library, but I was certain I'd be back before the deadline. Feel free to check my posts all round the site, there were none at all that evening, because I wasn't around. You may (or may not) recall that I never signed into aim that evening either.

Simenon noticed (as I noticed) that all through day one, Ripley and Patrick kind of trade off for each other. Patrick notices something, Ripley pushes it. Someone accuses Ripley, Patrick questions them.

I'm not sure that this is strictly accurate.

Simenon makes a very slight comment about how Patrick *could* be manipulating his suspicions to make him suspicious of Patrick.

Patrick did notice this - questioned it - Ripley ignored it - and Patrick brought it to his attention again.but Ripley's response doesn't make ANY sense. Patrick seems to buy it though, and I wonder if this was some slight British distancing or something.

What are you referring to here? The part where he sets up the false dilemna about one of myself or Simenon must be scum? Mind explaining how his response did not make *ANY* sense?

Hmm, your next paragraph makes no sense to me at all I'm afraid

Ripley/Patrick - Is there an out-of-game friendship or something that you two have that keeps tripping me up? Because there's *something* there and is just glaring. I am not saying you two are scum together, but an explanation would be nice.

We often think alike in games. We don't know each other in real life but often chat via PM's.

I do think your suggested scum pairing is not unreasonable, but on the whole Aimee bothers me more out of the two.

[Ripley]

Skruffs, it's impossible for me to answer all of your post because you refer to things in vague terms without providing quotes or even a post number.

After simenon points out this peculiar relationship (and I noticed it in Pie 2 so I don't want to say it's a full-out meta tell) Simenon makes a very slight comment about how Patrick *could* be manipulating his suspicions to make him suspicious of Patrick.

Patrick did notice this - questioned it - Ripley ignored it - and Patrick brought it to his attention again.but Ripley's response doesn't make ANY sense. Patrick seems to buy it though, and I wonder if this was some slight British distancing or something.

I have no idea what you're referring to here. Please be specific.

That is a dramatization but you get the point. Patrick asked a question about Simenon and Ripley and Aimee jumped on it.

So - your problem is, when you strip away the prejudicial language, that Patrick made a point that Aimee and I both agreed with?

This is your only reference to Aimee in the main body of your post, which otherwise deals pretty much exclusively with me and Patrick - and yet you think Aimee is scum? This doesn't ring true. You harp on and on, not only in this post but in your previous ones too, about me and Patrick, then despite all the harping you pick one of us as scum with somebody you've barely mentioned.

If someone I thought was scum put a vote on me, and I was town, I would either A) freak out and try to tell everyone he was scum don't let me get hammered oh god, or B) Show him that I'm not afraid because as long as townie doesn't vote, you're okay, while meanwhile building a case against him.

Ripley chose C - act afraid of being quick lynched (by two scum, presumably) while building a case against the person on you. Anyways, that is a weak argument that only makes sense to me, I guess.

I don't get this at all. It's not really relevant how you, personally, would act in a given situation unless maybe you have previous evidence of how I thought and acted like you when I was protown. My own experience is that we don't play anything like each other. I

think

your other argument here is that if I thought Simenon was scum I wouldn't have needed to worry about this vote, whereas if I didn't think he was scum I should have been freaking out. The obvious, and true, reply is that, as stated several times today, I don't know who the scum are. It seems perfectly reasonable to say, as I did: for heaven's sake Simenon, if you're protown, remove your vote. As for freaking out: this is not what I do. It's not helpful. Emotional players, like emotional people IRL, have a habit of thinking they are somehow more real, and their opinions more valid, because of the emotion that accompanies them. I simply disagree with this and find these reactions tiresome.

And that leads to something odd: Skruffs attacks me for

not

freaking out in post 332, while he earlier used that precise term, "freaking out", to describe my post 385, which is in fact entirely calm and rational:

Stop freaking out, Ripley, even if I figure out that you and Patrick are scum, you'll be able to get a mislynch on me. It's cool.

As for your constant linkage of me and Patrick, I feel you approached this game with a preconceived idea about us and, as people often do, looked to find what you expected to see. I disagree that there's anything unusual in our treatment of each other. Patrick generally makes sense; that's the only reason I generally agree with him. As a recent example, you've talked complete nonsense about power roles and claims in this game, to which Patrick has just posted a completely sensible reply. The more nonsense talked by other players, well, yes, the more I'm likely to be speaking out in support of Patrick. Obviously Paradoxombie should have claimed, simply to avoid being lynched. We would have lynched somebody else, who might have been scum. If they'd been the roleblocker, we'd also have got in a cop investigation.

Aimee - you are suspicious of Simenon today but I don't remember you really pushing for him the day before, not in your player post or anything else. Why the change, and are you basing it on the same reasoning you used to think that Paradoxombie was probably scum?

With IH, it's the converse situation. He is treating Simenon/Skruffs practically as cleared today, claiming this is on the basis of his posts yesterday, though, as pointed out by Aimee, he didn't appear to think so at the time:

I checked Day 1 posts, and IH made no reference to finding him so pro-town, something he has stated so vehemently today. If anything, you found him scummy - you FoSed him and called him "slightly suspicious" (although it was in the context of something much greater for Jordan).

IH still hasn't replied to this, and I'm starting to think we'll need to get him replaced if we're to finish this game in our lifetimes. However: Skruffs finds nothing at all to comment on in IH's play, or that of Teffc, nor can he find a single question to ask him in his "things I would really like to know:" section at the end of his post.

Skruffs, you still haven't replied to questions about statements you repeated without offering evidence for them in your earlier posts. There are 3 questions addressed to you in Post 390, all of which you have repeatedly ignored. Please reply.

This is turning into another stream-of-consciousness post, so, I am going to submit it now, like this, and if you want I can edit and post the other one, too, in the morning.

I don't think that would be helpful unless you back up your stream-of-consciousness thoughts with quotes and actual references. I'd much prefer you to put your energies into answering the existing outstanding questions at this stage.

One final point, going back to IH. I found Patrick's post about IH (Post 393, paragraph 1) interesting, and I've thought about it quite a bit. Does anybody else have anything to say about this? I'll repeat it here, for convenience:

One reservation I have about a Skruffs/IH pairing is that IH's first significant post today would be very bold in that case. He states that he pretty strongly feels Simenon is protown, and that's after every other player has expressed suspicion of Simenon, albeit varying levels. It creates a link to Simenon that would be difficult for him to deny later if Simenon was ever lynched as scum. I suppose I could take the opposite direction and wonder why IH didn't jump onto the convenient Simenon "bandwagon" if IH is scum and Simenon/Skruffs town. But maybe that would look too obvious and I'm getting close to the realms of wifom with this.

[Skruffs]

Okay. I don't have time to look at everything all at once, and this may be considered gross WIFOM, but Ripley, Patrick, and Aimee all agreed that I was the most scummy when this day started. Patrick later shifted his opinion (I'd like to say, but he's so subtle!) and IH outright seemed to state I am town. I personally know I am town (which is a useless statement), so I am going to look at people who jump onto early suspicions of me - which is, namely, Ripley and Aimee. Aimee, especially, but Ripley also to a degree.

Anyways, I'm sorry that my post was huge and vague, I shaved off all hte actual quotes and such because I thought it would be too huge, so I just wrote a summary of it. (Please keep in mind this was at 3 in the morning when I am usually asleep by 12... I actually stayed up way past my bedtime to write the summary post I"ve been promising you guys. Because I <3 u, of course).


I noticed while I was writing this, Ripley's statement about Patrick. I think Patrick suggested a nice thing to mull over - more importantly, what is Your opinion of it, Ripley - and why do you think Patrick suggested it? I'm getting the impression you want to see if this is a possible way to link patrick and IH together. But that's all subliminally based.

[Ripley]

I noticed while I was writing this, Ripley's statement about Patrick. I think Patrick suggested a nice thing to mull over - more importantly, what is Your opinion of it, Ripley - and why do you think Patrick suggested it? I'm getting the impression you want to see if this is a possible way to link patrick and IH together. But that's all subliminally based.

You mean the quote at the end of my post? Well, I thought it was interesting because there's a basic argument there, even allowing for all the WIFOM stuff, that IH would be unlikely to have taken the stance he did if he were scum with Simenon, and that he'd also have been unlikely to have taken it if he were scum and Simenon town, and that therefore IH is unlikely to be scum.

It's the second of these cases, where IH is scum and Simenon town, that I was thinking about in particular.

The situation was that 3 players (me, Patrick, Aimee) had all indicated we were suspicious of Simenon. All IH has to do is go with the flow. Why would he not do that? It's not as if IH has anything to gain by being seen to defend the (innocent, in this scenario) Simenon, because we wouldn't know he was innocent till we lynched him, and if we did that the game would be over. The only way he could ever get any credit for it would be if we lynched his scum partner instead. OK, if IH talked us out of lynching Simenon and into lynching his scum partner, he'd probably win the game, but to me that just seems like forgoing a quick and easy win for a protracted and difficult one. Why bother? Also, the person he was trying to put in the frame was me, another protown player (you don't know this, obviously, but I do). He could have expected support from Simenon, but I don't think there was any indication he'd have expected support from the other two. So, why would IH bother to try and switch suspicion from one protown player to another? What would be the point? For his own amusement? He just doesn't seem sufficiently involved to be doing stuff like that.

Or to make himself look good, because somebody would be bound to point out how IH-as-scum would never defend Simenon in that position, and if not he could always point it out himself? Would it be worth rocking the boat to make himself look good, when he wasn't the one under suspicion? Well, maybe. But again, I'm not just convinced that he was sufficiently engaged with this game to bother. And maybe that's the point - I'm thinking about this a lot, whereas he hardly thought about it all, and it's a mistake to assume he had any coherent or rational plan.

But if there is some validity in the theory, then from my POV the Aimee/IH and Patrick/IH combos would move down the list a bit. Though I wasn't keen on Aimee/IH anyway, and the very fact of Patrick raising the point in the first place seems to an extent to cancel out any change in the Patrick/IH likelihood (though I'm not sure that's strictly logical).

I'm less convinced of the other argument, that IH wouldn't have risked jumping in to defend Simenon like that if they were both scum. In the first place, he might manage to switch suspicion and get someone else lynched (which would be game over). Failing that, if we lynched Simenon he has the WIFOM argument to fall back on.

Anyway, I'm not putting too much weight on this theory, but I thought it was worth discussing.

Are you going to answer my questions now?

[Aimee]

Just in case people wonder where I am, I may have a bit of limited access coming up.

Will be gone from August 4th to September 1st in the French Riviera.

I'll be studying in a college there so I should have access for several
afternoons each week, yet probably not everyday.

I should probably be gone from Saturday to Tuesday/Wednesday. CTD/Guardian, I would request that I don't get replaced.

Also, I'll get some content up before I go, guys. Promise.

[Patrick]

Ripley, I think it is possible IHscum would defend Simenon as town. I do think it may get too wifom to carry much weight, especially because as you've pointed out he might not have any particularly coherent or rational plan. Certainly he hasn't put alot into this game.

The situation was that 3 players (me, Patrick, Aimee) had all indicated we were suspicious of Simenon. All IH has to do is go with the flow. Why would he not do that? It's not as if IH has anything to gain by being seen to defend the (innocent, in this scenario) Simenon, because we wouldn't know he was innocent till we lynched him, and if we did that the game would be over. The only way he could ever get any credit for it would be if we lynched his scum partner instead.

The benefit you haven't mentioned here is the fact that he could buddy up to a townie (Simenon in this scenario) and gain their trust. In this scenario, that would make it harder to lynch IH if scum, and if that did happen, he may well have managed to create a connection to Simenon that would cause a mislynch the following day. I also think it's a bit simplistic to assume that merely going with the flow at that point would net IH the win. I for one am naturally wary when everyone seems to agree so readily on one target, especially in lylo. With no poweroles left, all we have is discussion, so any decent town is going to grill everyone hard and not just jump on the first target and lynch them.

So, I still think the better observation in my own post there was the reservation about IH and Simenon being scum together. I'm slightly curious that you yourself said that yesterday scum wouldn't have aligned themselves with each other (as in, scum were unlikely to both jump on Paradoxombie, or both be on Jordan) but today you haven't said the same for IH and Simenon aligning themselves pretty majorly by defending each other, and both attacking the same target (you).

[Ripley]

These seem like reasonable arguments. Tell me, did your suspicion level of IH decrease at all as a result of your discussion about him in Post 393, or did you decide there was so much WIFOM involved that the argument was fundamentally meaningless? Or has your suspicion of the IH as a scum partner for Simenon decreased, but not otherwise? Who is your current top suspect?

I'm slightly curious that you yourself said that yesterday scum wouldn't have aligned themselves with each other (as in, scum were unlikely to both jump on Paradoxombie, or both be on Jordan) but today you haven't said the same for IH and Simenon aligning themselves pretty majorly by defending each other, and both attacking the same target (you).

It's a bit different on Day 1, when they know there will be consequences. Here in lylo on Day 2, all they have to do is get a townie lynched and their behavior on Day 2 will never come under scrutiny. But I accept your argument to a point. Actually, it made me think of the possibility that IH himself could have thought "Ripley doesn't think scum would join the same bandwagon, so if I support Simenon's stance Ripley will argue that we're not likely to be a scum pair". Though yet again I suspect I'm overthinking, and that IH wasn't approaching the game in such a complex way.

Incidentally, two weeks now since IH posted any content.

[Patrick]

Tell me, did your suspicion level of IH decrease at all as a result of your discussion about him in Post 393, or did you decide there was so much WIFOM involved that the argument was fundamentally meaningless? Or has your suspicion of the IH as a scum partner for Simenon decreased, but not otherwise?

The last part of that post was more just an afterthought; it hasn't especially swayed me to be honest. I think that part is too wifom to get much out of. But yes, my suspicion of an IH/Skruffs pairing went down a notch when I made that observation.

Who is your current top suspect?

Now this... is a difficult one. Last time I answered this question it was IH. I'm not sure I can give a straight answer anymore, but I'm starting to move towards Aimee as a higher suspicion. This comes with the lower chance of a Skruffs/IH pairing mentioned above, and I think her attacks today on Simenon and Skruffs seem a tad oppotunistic. Who is your top suspect?

It may be that IH will need replacement. I'm starting to think his lurking may not be of a massively scummy variety, and more just general apathy around the site, but him (or more specifically that character) owes us more to work with.

[Guardian]

Yeah, so in order to fulfill my plans you need 8 more pages by Saturday. With three days and 200 posts to go, that means 40 posts for each of you,

if

you spread the work around equally.

Don't make Wayne Brady choke his players....

[Aimee]

Aimee - you are suspicious of Simenon today but I don't remember you really pushing for him the day before, not in your player post or anything else. Why the change, and are you basing it on the same reasoning you used to think that Paradoxombie was probably scum?

Well, my reasons for voting Paradoxombie were these:

Overall, I find that Paradoxombie is acting very suspiciously. He has attacked with weak reasoning, been hypocritical, contradictory, and slowed discussion with his full scale attack against Simenon earlier. I stand by what I said earlier to justify my vote:

...

It just doesn't make sense. Wild accusations, the OMGUS style FoSes against Patrick and Ripley, the extreme offensive against Simenon... it's all far too strong and intense for my liking. The actions don't make any sense.

As for Simenon, his vote for Paradoxombie late in Day 1 made me very edgy, especially since it seemed to me like he was definitely going with the flow without really saying that much - it seemed very opportunistic. Furthermore, his rather extreme case against Ripley, which led to a vote early on Day 2 strikes me as scummy, since Ripley hasn't done anything majorly scummy.

Skruffs, can I clarify - are you anti-Patrick asking Jordan to claim?

IH, I'd still like an explanation on the previous point I made:

I checked Day 1 posts, and IH made no reference to finding him so pro-town, something he has stated so vehemently today. If anything, you found him scummy - you FoSed him and called him "slightly suspicious" (although it was in the context of something much greater for Jordan).

since it has gone unanswered.

I find this point by Ripley rather interesting because I agree with it:

However: Skruffs finds nothing at all to comment on in IH's play, or that of Teffc, nor can he find a single question to ask him in his "things I would really like to know:" section at the end of his post.

I'm getting slightly concerned about the way Skruffs and IH seem to be acting around each other. With IH, it's been a chorus of "Simenon/Skruffs is THE most pro-town person in the game" rather obviously. With Skruffs it has been more subtle - as far as I can see, the only reference he made to IH in his post 403 is saying he was "happy" with a post where IH noticed Simenon, and says that he would rather IH would be lynched than himself.

One point that Skruffs didn't really expand upon is his end point. He says IH-scum could be buddying up to Simenon due to the way he so obviously agrees with Simenon/Skruffs and calls him outright pro-town.

As for the final point in Ripley's 405, about Patrick:

One reservation I have about a Skruffs/IH pairing is that IH's first significant post today would be very bold in that case. He states that he pretty strongly feels Simenon is protown, and that's after every other player has expressed suspicion of Simenon, albeit varying levels. It creates a link to Simenon that would be difficult for him to deny later if Simenon was ever lynched as scum. I suppose I could take the opposite direction and wonder why IH didn't jump onto the convenient Simenon "bandwagon" if IH is scum and Simenon/Skruffs town. But maybe that would look too obvious and I'm getting close to the realms of wifom with this.

I'm not really sure about whether or not we can 'backwards predict' what he would have done as scum and as town. I think it would have been quite distinct and obvious had he jumped over the Simenon wagon on Day 2. However, I'm becoming increasingly worried than IH's reaction and posts concerning Skruffs/Simenon is merely a way of buddying up to a townie, to make himself appear more town.

Ripley's already made his opinions quite clear about this, but let me ask this - do you think you would have suspected IH more or less than you do now if he had said he found Simenon to be suspicious.

I'm not sure I can give a straight answer anymore, but I'm starting to move towards Aimee as a higher suspicion. This comes with the lower chance of a Skruffs/IH pairing mentioned above, and I think her attacks today on Simenon and Skruffs seem a tad oppotunistic.

I don't really agree with this, mainly because I don't see my "attacks" on Skruffs/Simenon as being that much like attacks - I don't think at all that I am "attacking" Simenon and Skruffs as much as you seem to think I am.

That said, I do think that my posts have recently focused more on IH and Skruffs rather than Ripley and yourself, Patrick. I'm definitely going to go back and make a post about things I find notable about you.

[Patrick]

I'm not really sure about whether or not we can 'backwards predict' what he would have done as scum and as town. I think it would have been quite distinct and obvious had he jumped over the Simenon wagon on Day 2. However, I'm becoming increasingly worried than IH's reaction and posts concerning Skruffs/Simenon is merely a way of buddying up to a townie, to make himself appear more town.

What do you mean by, "backwards predict what he would have done as scum or as town"? I'm trying to make guesses as to how I think scum might act in various situations, which is what mafia is all about.

I'm not really sure about whether or not we can 'backwards predict' what he would have done as scum and as town. I think it would have been quite distinct and obvious had he jumped over the Simenon wagon on Day 2. However, I'm becoming increasingly worried than IH's reaction and posts concerning Skruffs/Simenon is merely a way of buddying up to a townie, to make himself appear more town.

Difficult to answer this one without further information really. It would depend on whether or not he made a case against Simenon, whether I liked it, how original the case was etc. If he'd just checked it and said basically, "Yeah Simenon is acting weird and I suspect him" then I would have been suspicious of that.

I don't really agree with this, mainly because I don't see my "attacks" on Skruffs/Simenon as being that much like attacks - I don't think at all that I am "attacking" Simenon and Skruffs as much as you seem to think I am.

This is just odd. I'm curious though, as to what you'd call you're attitude towards Simenon/Skruffs if it's not attacking? Looking at your isolated posts that seem relevant to this issue:

Post 24 I don't like much for the reason already given by IH. It just checks in to push forward the Simenon is acting weird thing.

Your post 26 contains what I see as an attack on Simenon. The first paragraph is attacking him, and at the end of your post you say that Simenon is your top suspect. Tell me if you disagree.

Post 27, you re assert that you're anti Simenon at the end of this post.
Post 28, you don't get why IH is so pro Simenon today.
Poat 30, you're pushing (slightly too hard IMO) the Skruffs/IH connection. I'd call it an attack on both.

So yeah, I have a hard time seeing how you're not attacking Simenon/Skruffs today.

[Ripley]

Who is your top suspect?

I find this difficult too, but at the moment it's Simenon/Skruffs. I've explained my suspicion of Simenon before. Skruffs is making me increasingly uneasy with his persistent ignoring of questions. He's been asked three or four times to explain his comments about how Jordan bandwagon, and Patrick's contribution to it, somehow changed their nature from initially OK to not OK, and also his repeated statement that I was helping it along in a hidden way. He really can't have missed these questions. And further, he now has ignored a request from two different players to explain what he's referring to here:

Simenon makes a very slight comment about how Patrick *could* be manipulating his suspicions to make him suspicious of Patrick.

Patrick did notice this - questioned it - Ripley ignored it - and Patrick brought it to his attention again.but Ripley's response doesn't make ANY sense. Patrick seems to buy it though, and I wonder if this was some slight British distancing or something.

Skruffs has consistently refused to provide backing or evidence for his remarks, or even to explain what response of mine he is referring to here; he's therefore slung a fair amount of mud around, and especially at me, in such a way that I can't reply. And I do find this scummy. While replacement players should obviously be granted a period of grace, I think that period is finite and when it expires they should be held to the same standards as an original player. And I think we've reached that stage with Skruffs now.

I'm actually surprised by Patrick's not even mentioning Skruffs when I asked him his top suspect, given all the above, and given also how Skruffs made attacks on Patrick for suggesting Paradoxombie should have claimed, and for acting suspiciously around deadline. Patrick seems to show no reaction - he repeats or drops the questions, and is willing to absorb the attacks, however unreasonable, responding only with polite explanations.

And Skruff's treatment of Patrick doesn't feel quite right either: despite all the stuff he had to say about Patrick, including - as well as everything I've mentioned in this post already - a whole lot of suspicion about a perceived connection with me, when it comes to picking scum Skruffs prefers the Ripley/Aimee pairing, although he has had practically nothing to say about Aimee. My suspicion of Patrick/Skruffs has definitely gone up a notch as a result of these recent posts.

Mod

: what's the situation with IH? This is his second extended absence. He appears to have lost interest in the game.

[Patrick]

I'm actually surprised by Patrick's not even mentioning Skruffs when I asked him his top suspect, given all the above, and given also how Skruffs made attacks on Patrick for suggesting Paradoxombie should have claimed, and for acting suspiciously around deadline. Patrick seems to show no reaction - he repeats or drops the questions, and is willing to absorb the attacks, however unreasonable, responding only with polite explanations.

(Shrug) you asked me for my top suspect, and Skruffs isn't it. So I didn't talk about him there. I believe that Skruffs, if possible, is making even less sense than his predecessor, and I agree that his period of grace is over now. I feel like he's been posting in other places and not here at times. But.. I can't exactly forget the last (and only) time I played with him either. You were there of course. He managed to make very little sense at all, and had me thinking he was scum with the fake doctor, but he was in fact town. So when I see alot of confused posting and backwards logic from him, I'm not as quick to jump on it as you.

I don't care that he posted relatively little about Aimee and found her suspicious. Most people have relatively little to say about Aimee, because she's been keeping a low profile.

What do you mean when you say that I'm willing to absorb all his attacks? I've responded to everything he's said to my knowledge, and pretty much shot it all down. I haven't just rolled over and done nothing. Apologies if you thought I was too polite in my responses. Do you actually expect that I should punch him back? As for repeating questions, it seems that's all that can be done. I'm pretty sure I've asked him more than once to explain what the hell he's talking about, and I've poked at IH more than once and asked for possible replacement. I suppose I haven't yet felt the need to say it in every post I make. But I don't intend to vote anyone or lynch anyone until I'm satisfied with the level of contribution from Skruffs and IH.

Is the man scum? Quite possible. But not my top suspect at the moment, despite what is an ok case on paper against him. If that changes, I'll let you know.

[Ripley]

What do you mean when you say that I'm willing to absorb all his attacks? I've responded to everything he's said to my knowledge, and pretty much shot it all down. I haven't just rolled over and done nothing. Apologies if you thought I was too polite in my responses. Do you actually expect that I should punch him back?

Not exactly. Incidentally, that whole paragraph in my post was actually something that only came to my consciousness while I was writing the preceding paragraphs, though it had probably been simmering at a lower level beforehand. So it's not something I'd previously considered in any detail.

It sounds as if you think I was complaining you weren't more aggressive, which wasn't what I meant at all. By absorbing, what I meant was that you seem more inclined to accept unreasonable, unjustified or unsubstantiated attacks, without yourself seeming to complain much about these things, or to find them suspicious, than I would have expected.

It's not just that you weren't considering him as a candidate for your top suspect, and perhaps it was misleading of me to mention that, but as I said I was pretty much thinking this out as I went along.

I can best describe it as being mildly - no more than mildly - surprised at your general level of acceptance of Skruffs' play over quite a sustained period. I really can't put it any better than that. You know that in Mafia it's usually right to mention things that feel even a small bit off.

[Patrick]

I remember vaguely feeling that way about you in the previous pie c9, where you had figured out he was town, whereas I thought his attacks on various people and attempts to connect the two of us together were very scummy. I suppose I'm wiser for the experience, so the messed up logic doesn't quite set off my scumdar like it did then. I wish I had more experience playing with him to draw on, but I've certainly heard similar things from other people who have.

You know that in Mafia it's usually right to mention things that feel even a small bit off.

Of course.

[Ripley]

My own memories of Skruffs from that game, where he was town, are that he was very active and busy, and posted microanalyses of every possible outcome to the point where I was begging him to stop because I was convinced he was actually helping the scum more than he was helping us. LOL - maybe my memory's being somewhat selective here, but it's quite possible for there to be a lot of truth in both our memories. I'm certainly finding him very different in this game, though I do realise that people's initial levels of enthusiasm and activity almost invariably start to dwindle as they accustom themselves to the - erm - let's call it the leisurely pace at which things happen here (though I've heard less kind terms used).

As for the attempts to link us together, I've actually been much more aware of that in this game than the previous one. In that game there might, actually, have been some linkage there to observe, since for the whole of Day 2, when everything actually happened, I had a successful protect on you. Whereas in this game I know there's no possible linkage, and I actually think I've disagreed with you far more in this game than in the other one. As I said earlier, it just seemed to me he arrived with a preconceived idea that he hasn't really been willing to let go.

I've played 1 more game with him, but he was a replacement as usual and I got NK'ed night 1 so we didn't overlap by much. I'll dig it out and take a look though.

[IH]

Alright, I know this looks like another empty promise, but my plan (emphasis on the word plan) is to RECATCH up with all of this stuff.

I would do it now, but company and such.

[Patrick]

As I said earlier, it just seemed to me he arrived with a preconceived idea that he hasn't really been willing to let go.

Would you class it as letting go when he says that he thinks the scumgroup is Ripley/Aimee?

Nice to see you again IH. When will you post?

[Ripley]

As I said earlier, it just seemed to me he arrived with a preconceived idea that he hasn't really been willing to let go.

Would you class it as letting go when he says that he thinks the scumgroup is Ripley/Aimee?

I'll believe he's let it go if he accepts your explanation and doesn't bring it up again after that.

I had a look at that game I mentioned and found I'd actually spent the end of Day 1 arguing vehemently with Skruffs, who'd replaced in a deadline situation and was posting a lot of excuses and generally finding reasons not to actually read the game, although he found the time to make lengthy posts about how he didn't have time to read the game, and for this and other reasons I thought he was scummy as hell. Skruffs would probably dispute this account of his behavior, but actually it does show that like you, I've previously found Skruffs to be very scummy when he was actually town (although not for the same reasons as in this game).

IH, your post doesn't exactly inspire me with confidence that you're going to properly rejoin the game any time soon. You've posted no content since July 18th. Are you willing to make any sort of commitment as to when you'll start playing again?

[Patrick]

Which game was this, out of interest?

I agree that IH should actually say he'll play in the game and post normally or just give up and let someone else take his place. There's no particularly great shame in being replaced, but keeping people hanging for weeks on end is inconsiderate. Time has come to choose. Stay or leave. Stay/leave. One or the other.

[Ripley]

Which game was this, out of interest?

Open 18.