Mini 1830 - Game Over

[Manuel87]

VOTE: Grendel

Sounds awful

VOTE: The_Jester

I like the idea

[Manuel87]

And what exactly do you like about it?

Well its similar to something i do when i play RT-Mafia with friends. I generally look for someone i know talks a lot and discuss ideas and speculations with that person while others can listen to it and argue if they disagree on something or agree with me/us. Its basically a way to keep the game going when you play with people that like to listen more then arguing.

[Manuel87]

And what exactly do you like about it?

Well its similar to something i do when i play RT-Mafia with friends. I generally look for someone i know talks a lot and discuss ideas and speculations with that person while others can listen to it and argue if they disagree on something or agree with me/us. Its basically a way to keep the game going when you play with people that like to listen more then arguing.

Yeah but the game hasn't even started rolling yet. I could see that strat used when people run out of ideas/motivation and the game goes silent but it doesn't seem like a valid opening.

Hmm i think you got a point. If you choose a random person at the start you might end up with someone that isnt really active and the idea is ruined.
On the other hand it might motivate the chosen player to be more active dont you think so?

[Manuel87]

is your avi log horizon? it's my fav anime lol

Yes it is.

For setup speculation my guess would be 3 maf and 3 town PRs.
2 maf would probably mean a 3rd party or our PRs are weak/limited to one-shot.
3 maf and 3rd party seems unlikely.

[Manuel87]

My vote on eagerSnake is now a serious vote.

This, however, can only be a few things:
A lazy town
A scum
A town with an ulterior motive

Can you explain why you think this can be scum?

[Manuel87]

Why are you more concerned with me explaining why I think that could possibly be from coming scum, than him explaining why his vote on me is now serious?

why is it a serious vote now? can you explain at least?

I dont think there is a need to ask the same things twice.

[Manuel87]

Now my vote on Manuel is serious. He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum. There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

Can you show me where i pushed on eagerSnake?
Also why do you consider him low hanging fruit?

RVS should be over now so
UNVOTE:

[Manuel87]

UNVOTE:

Manuel, who looks the most suspicious, in your opinion?

I would say CCC.
I didnt like the statement about math. He is already making excuses for pushing on town day 1.
Later he misreps and votes you for dodging a lot of questions. There was one question you didnt answer but gave an explanation why you wouldnt do.
It just doesnt fit into him saying he takes a mathematik aproach of the game.

[Manuel87]

@The_Jester: What are your thoughts on Grendel so far?
@Grendel: When you made your read on eagerSnake in 102 was that considering him being your buddy or was that a serious read on his play?

[Manuel87]

Do you like/dislike anything else in 102?

I generally dont like when ppl say "there are 1-2 scum in this group of people" when the group they are talking about is exactly 50% of the players (self not included)
Which in return means he also thinks there are 1-2 scum in the other group.

@RhazhBashu: would you mind answering my question in 92

[Manuel87]

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

@Square: Why do you think Gerry is scum?

[Manuel87]

While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game,

I post my analysis of the player before the summary of their posts. This is obvious if you are reading the post. Some people do it different, where they link the post number and then put their thoughts on that post next to the number. I could do that, but that's not the way I did it that time.

Yes but why bother to summarise what he posted when you dont tell us your thoughts on those posts but only your over all read on him?
Also your post summary on Victor has only on short comment on you liking him not pushing his scumread on Rhazh.
But in all 3 i see no real read from you. I could assume that you think Gerry is Null and Rhazh is slight scumlean but you never said that.

Why do you like that he isnt pushing his read on Rhazh?

[Manuel87]

I think you misunderstood my post. I actually didn't like the fact he wasn't pushing his RhazhBash!scum read. I wasn't the one analyzing him, Grendel was, I was agreeing with a point that Grendel had made, and gave the PbP as supporting evidence of that fact.

Ok i reread it and see that i took it the wrong way but i still think there was no need to post that summary without commenting on it.

@Manuel

So what do you think of Gerry currently?
Do you think he is town?

Gerry is Null but i have a slight townlean on him.
He didnt do much this game but nothing he said so far feels scummy.

For your comment on my activity. It was weekend and i write most of my posts at work when i have some time to do so.

[Manuel87]

VOTE: The_Jester

Square's town ftm, as is Grendel.

Can you explain your townread on Square?

Not a big fan of snake and CCC, mostly due to their playstyle.

So you read them scum for not liking their playstyle?

And I'm pretty sure there's scum between gerry, Manuel and Rhazh but they're all pretty lynchbaity.

This is the reason i am voting you.
All three players you mentioned here got scumread/scumleaned by some ppl in the last 3 pages.
You say there is scum among us three and already make an excuse for misslynching one of us by saying we are lynchbait.
Probably followed by a push on one of the other 2 the next day.
What makes you think we are lynchbait?

[Manuel87]

Can you explain your townread on Square?

He's uncompromising, not afraid to form strong observations which are logical at the same time, he doesn't seem to care about his appearance and I agree with his reads.

So you read them scum for not liking their playstyle?

No, I'm saying their playstyle doesn't help with reading them as town.
Snake's readlists are useless cause- as Square's noticed- they don't lead to any conclusions. It's pure IIoA and I could easily see scum do it to fake being helpful.

So what exactly are you scumreading me for? Because thats exactly what i said in my last posts just with the addition of mentioning that square didnt comment on eagers other reads that were exactly the same but only on the one on rhazh.
Also how can you agree with his reads and read Rhazh as scum?

CCC's coasting hard, doesn't have a strong opinion on anyone (just like you) and I don't agree with his reads.

I have opinions but i wanted to wait for your answer to my question before giving a readlist.

What makes you think we are lynchbait?

Exactly this:

All three players you mentioned here got scumread/scumleaned by some ppl in the last 3 pages.

Easy targets.

I think we have a pretty different view on lynchbait if you are serious here.

You say there is scum among us three and already make an excuse for misslynching one of us by saying we are lynchbait.

What mislynch? Nobody's got more than 2 votes on them and it takes 6 to lynch. Besides, I haven't even voted yet.

Dont feel like explaining that further since i think you know and understand what i mean.

On a scale of 1-10, how much are you scared of getting lynched?
What are your scumreads and why?

2-3
The_Jester: i already mentioned why.
Eager: His vote on square was very bad with an even worse argument about his meta were he didnt mention that square always playes that way.
After that it felt like he was scared of backing down and pushed it further with silly reasoning like in 279 where he mentions square using his meta as a defense when eager himself was the one bringing up his meta.
slight scumread on Rhazh: When i asked him why he considers Eager low hanging fruit he didnt answer. After that he started to focus a lot on eager and reads him as town without questioning any of his posts.

I will probably post my other reads tomorrow.

[Manuel87]

Good. Now take what you said there and reread Rhahz's reason for voting. Here I'll quote it for you.

Now my vote on Manuel is serious.

He looks more like he's pushing on low hanging fruit than hunting scum.

There's a lot indicative of the type of player Snake is in the thread, but not his alignment IMO.

I even added some helpful bold on the sentence that made me vote him.

Well, I'm not sure about the low hanging fruit part, but Manuel really

wasn't

doing much scumhunting before that post.

From my point of view i did more scumhunting then at least 6 other players in the game at that point.
I think i already mentioned that i never post much but when i post it wont be useless prodges or unexplained "reads".
I could easily increase my postcount by spamming multiposts like other players do but thats not my style.

@Grendel: That may be true for others like Victor he also scumreads me for said post without any explanation on why he does.
Your post felt different from the others and had a statment pointing that you would eventually explain what you didnt like and a reasoning what you scumread me for even though i think low activity on a weekend is a silly reason to scumread someone but its at least something i can understand.
On the other hand saying xy post is scummy is something i dont understand especially since i still think what i said is correct.

[Manuel87]

Sorry, meant to have two parts to that post.

I dont like how Square world playes but its not a reason to lynch him.
What i dont like about him right now is that he mentioned how eagers analysis on RhazhBash sucks.
While i think he has a valid point that its not really an analysis but rather a summary of what said player posted that game, i dont understand why he only refers to the RhazhBash analysis and not to the ones on Victor and Gerry.

I'm putting Manuel back into my "would lynch today" pile for this post.

Why is that?

I didn't like how he said he didn't like square's but wouldn't lynch for it, but then his reasons sounded more like valid reasons to lynch. To put it another way, I didn't see him thinking the second two lines but then coming to the conclusion in the first line.

I dont like his

playstyle

but i dont think thats a reason to lynch someone.
In my first game on this side i played with Not_Mafia who played similar to him. I said the same thing about NM and read him Null-Town the whole game because i could see some meaning in the stuff he did.
If in that game we would have done what Eager was pushing for this game we would have killed NM and probably lost the game.
The other 2 lines were simply what i thought was off about squares read on Eager. He didnt care about the 2 summaries of Victor and Gerry but reacted to the 3rd one on Rhazh.
While i think his argument is true it also applies to the other 2 "reads" from Eager.

@House: you have pointed your finger at me 4 times now but shifted your vote to someone als and never explained your scumread on me. Care to enlighten me?

[Manuel87]

One thing I'd like to know, though... why did you feel it was necessary to unvote simply because rvs was over?

It wasnt only because RVS was over. I was leaning town on Jester at that time.

Finally caught up ill give a readlist and explain later what i think about House vs. CCC

Town:
Grendel: His posts feel honest and he is actively scumhunting. He is pushing his scumread and trys to convince others while not making up things.
House: He explained his scumread on CCC very well and started pushing him. He wasnt scared of changing his read on me when confronted. Also liked how he questioned Gamma.
Victor: Leaning town on him. I liked his reaction to Squares posts. I think he misunderstood my post about Square. I dont remember seeing something that felt scummy from him.
Huntress: Also townleaning. She replaced and didnt have much content since then but i liked her questions and reads.

Null:
Gerry: Still have no real read on Gerry but i am leaning more town then scum. I would like to see more from him a readlsit would be nice.
Square: As i said i dont like his playstyle mainly because its easy to play the same way as scum. His argument against Eager was good but as i said before it was awkward that he only referred to the Rhazh analysis.
Gamma: Didnt like his early game but he was pushed and probably got very defensive because of that. His read on Square is bad but i can understand why he feels that way. The situation with Huntress and House could have been him trying to buddy Huntress. Not reading him town but i wouldnt lynch him today.

Scum:
CCC: Leaning slight Scum here. Most of Houses arguments were true but looking at each of them individually they seem rather minor and most of them can be explained with a lot of self doubt which he showed right from the start. Also his discussion with House felt better towards the end.
Jester: His only real content was the explanation why he doesnt like Grendels play. He said all his scumreads are lynchbait but couldnt explain why when asked. On top of that he only scumread players that were talked about being scummy. For me this is scum trying to get on a lynchtrain from someone else while not confronting anyone himself. His townread on Square feels fake.
Eager: His vote on square was very bad with an even worse argument about his meta were he didnt mention that square always playes that way.
After that it felt like he was scared of backing down and pushed it further with silly reasoning like in 279 where he mentions Square using his meta as a defense when eager himself was the one bringing up his meta.

House vs. CCC:
I dont want to talk to much about this because its already a lot to read for everyone.
House has good points some i noticed but and some i missed like the argument about the readslist. I only disagree with the one about conflicts beeing good.
As long as both sides still consider the other one might be town and listen to their arguments open minded even a TvT conflict can help town.

For now i am happy with my vote where it is.
@House what are your thoughts on The_Jester? and would you consider lynching Eager or him today instead of CCC?

[Manuel87]

How is voting someone who hasn't posted scummy? I wanted to kill them because they were lurking. Is that so bad? Usually it helps get some info out of them. Which it did.

If he doesnt post how do you come to the conclusion he is scum?
If we lynch Square World and he flips town what information do we get?
Yes i think it is that bad.
So why did you feel the need to inform us about his scummy meta in 266?

[Manuel87]

If he doesnt post how do you come to the conclusion he is scum?

I already came to the conclusion he was scum before he posted. Are you even reading the thread?

How did you come to that conclusion?

So why did you feel the need to inform us about his scummy meta in 266?

That's not even what 266 was about..

Yeah sry you are right 266 was about you saying his townmeta is different and ignored the fact that he didnt explain his reads either
You also called his argument on your Rhazh read bullshit without explaining why you think its incorrect.

[Manuel87]

I agree that he is doing that. Especially lines like "As I mentioned previously, I'm trying to signal that I'd be willing to follow along with anyone that can present a halfway decent case on someone." are feeling that way.
I dont know about your previous game together can you link me to it? If i find the time i will try to read a little bit into it.
CCC mentioned you jumped off the wagon in your previous game, what made you change your mind about him that you dont see this time?

Also Offtopic: i tried to kilck the "Get to know House." link but it said i am not authorised to read this Forum

[Manuel87]

So to finish up I'd like to hear your hypothetical scum team.

Manuel is throwing suspicion on Square, but not voting or FOS'ing. That makes me suspect a Manuel/Square scum team is a possibility.
VOTE: Square World

I explained that it felt awkward that he only mentioned your summary on Rhazh but that doesnt mean i have to scumread him for that.
Also why would i throw suspicion on him if he was my scumbuddy?

[Manuel87]

Distancing/Buddying

no if i wanted to distance myself from him i would voted him what good does pointing out one minor detail do in form of distancing?
I dont see how this would help me buddy someone can you explain why you would think like that?

[Manuel87]

Why wouldn't it be scum casting shade on town?

I suppose it could be, but I feel like he wouldn't have chainsaw-defended him and would have more than just a 'null' read on the slot if that was the case.

Also why would i throw suspicion on him if he was my scumbuddy?

And this is a classic WIFOM defense.

And this is a classic "i dont know an answer"

[Manuel87]

And this is a classic "i dont know an answer"

There are plenty of reasons for why scum would throw suspicion on their buddy, and it's almost impossible to know which reason it is. I think you know that already. So why even ask that question? And then why doubtcast me just because I didn't drink your wine?

Where did i doubtcast you? I simply asked you a question about your read that you still refuse to answer.
Even if there are plenty (i disagree with that statement btw) you should have had one in mind when you used the argument which on is it?
Also let me rephrase it a little. Why would i throw shade on my buddy in that situation?

[Manuel87]

At best it would be suspicious if i voted for him when he is getting lynched for sure after that.
Do you say my argument is wrong that its awkward to only mention your read on Rhazh?
Other then you i will not lynch someone for his playstyle. Your argument about everyone starting as scummy is just an easy way of excusing a push on more passive players.
How is that buddying? Also keeping myself open for lynching him later is bullshit since that would be suspicious af.
I am still confident in my Jester vote but i think Eager is the best lynch for today.
UNVOTE: The_Jester
VOTE: EagerSnake

[Manuel87]

Then, when called out on it, you take immediately to the WIFOM, almost as if you had already pre-planned to say "why would I do it as scum?"

Fact is your interaction with Square makes absolutely no sense, and leaves yourself open to change stances, and I would be very surprised if that's coming from town.

Actually if i changed stance on him right now that would be suspicious as i mentioned 2 times already so that argument is pretty bad at best.
I also mentioned that i had a similar read on on a player that wasnt to different from square in my first game here so tell me more about how it doesnt make sense.

So what is your reason for reading me scum?
Is your reason for reading Square scum still the same?

[Manuel87]

Other then you i will not lynch someone for his playstyle. Your argument about everyone starting as scummy is just an easy way of excusing a push on more passive players.

So for you, everyone starts with no suspicion, and they accumulate it as they post? That line of thought will lead to scum lurking their way to a win.

Partly correct but they also accumulate trust.
You are wrong they will have to make votes and from those votes you can read them later.

My reasons for you being scum are clear, and Square also.

I dont see any reason other then both of us presenting good arguments against you so please enlighten me.
Since you like acronyms i know one that fits you but i dont like it since i think its insulting so i wont use it.

[Manuel87]

I dont see any reason other then both of us presenting good arguments against you so please enlighten me.

"Good arguments?" I haven't seen any from you.. or him.. your sole argument for scumreading me throughout this game has been that my vote on Square was "very bad," which is basically calling me scum for scumhunting. Why not use the same logic for the other people who voted Square?

Eager: His vote on square was very bad with an even worse argument about his meta were he didnt mention that square always playes that way.
After that it felt like he was scared of backing down and pushed it further with silly reasoning like in 279 where he mentions square using his meta as a defense when eager himself was the one bringing up his meta.

CCC also voted Square, why aren't you scumreading him for it?
Gamma Emerald also voted Square, same question.

CCC voted him way earlier and explained it was to get him to talk so its very different from what you did.
Gamma voted him because he didnt like his posts not for his playstyle so how does that compare to your case on him?

You presented a metaread on him that was just bad because you only mentioned stuff that was convenient for you.
When that was pointed out you brushed of the argument with not allowing meta defenses when you were the one to bring up his meta first.

Also, I notice that Manuel seems to re-actively post only when someone mentions him, instead of pro-actively posting. Nearly 1/3 of his posts in this game are on this page, after I pointed out his association with Square. I'd say at least 2/3 of his posts if not more are similarly reactive.

I am having a discussion with one of my scumreads. So why wouldnt i reply to you if i got time?

[Manuel87]

How is my reasoning not the same as CCC's?

So here is how it went:

Spoiler:

- Square posts his vote
- You question him
- he refuses to answer and presents an argument against you
- you vote him for not explaining his vote and call his argument doubtcasting (you do that a lot instead of arguing about what was said)
- he explaines his argument
- you call it a missrep
- he explaines again
- he says he doesnt get a scumread on everyone in 2 days
- you push others a little to scumread Square
- he votes you
- you explain that you want to kill lurkers
- you present a case thats summarised to: He didnt explain his reads, his argument against me is BS (it is not) and your metaread that in other games he had reads on everyone in 2 days (he stated that he was busy with real life)
- Gamma reads your case and votes him
- Square explains that you didnt mention how his playstyle is always like that (so far it seemed that was the reason you and Gamma voted him not the readlistargument)
- you dont accept his defense and still want to lynch him while not caring about his alignement
- you ask a silly question to try to get out of the situation. The answer is simple a policy lynch is more scummy
- again you argue about him playing scummy ("People who deliberately play in a way that is scummy hurts the town should be lynched for it, repeatedly, until they stop.")

Yes Gamma voted him for the same reason of not liking his posts but he didnt push on Square with the argument it doesnt matter if he is scum or town we need to lynch him.
After arguing he reconsidered his read on Square and put him in Null while you still want to read him scum for him playing the way he always plays.

Also, you are so quick to reply when mentioned that it seems that you are actively watching the game without posting unless it benefits you to post. That's called active lurking.

If you like meta reads so much check mine and you will see i always play passively and when i have an argument with someone i post more.
So much for your brilliant case on me do you have more?

Can you explain to me again why my vote on Square was so bad that it makes me scum? He literally refused to explain his reads, so I voted him.

You are missing the main problem that is you still pushing on him after you found out he plays the way he always does and dont care about his alignment.

...okay, having had a look at Manuel and eagerSnake's interactions over the last page or so, I think that eagerSnake's case against Manuel is better than the case I had against Gamma. Therefore:

VOTE: Manuel87

And what case would that be exactly?

[Manuel87]

Now you're misrepping me. When did I say I don't care about his alignment?

People who deliberately play in a way that is scummy hurts the town should be lynched for it, repeatedly, until they stop.

[Manuel87]

In summary: Your interaction with Square World looks a little scummy. Your eagerness to leap to your own defense, compared with your low scumhunting activity throughout the game, suggest that you're not really all that interested in doing any actual scumhunting yourself, beyon the minimum to look Townish.

It's not by any means definitive, but it's the best case I've yet seen this game.

I have answered all of those you should read the last few pages again i think.

So i should have accepted his false accusations? Cant do.

If the word fits, use it. There's a reason these words have become collectively known and used. There's a reason we use acronyms like "WIFOM" "AtE." There's a reason we use words like "distancing" "buddying" "shadecasting" "doubtcasting" "lurking." Because they've been proven to come from scum more often than town.
Now, if you can explain why the words don't fit the accusations, I'd like to hear that. If not, then you can stop doubtcasting my case by randomly throwing out the "buzzword" buzzword.

So you think throwing them around like candy makes your case look better without presenting any valid arguments right?
All your points were countered while instead of answering the arguments against yourself you used acronyms like WIFOM.

@Gerry:

I find it surprising that Gamma is so high in your list, and that Huntress is so low. Could I ask you to explain your reads on them a little further?

I would also like to hear your read on Huntress also add Victor to that.
You would lynch them yet you didnt say why you scumread them.

[Manuel87]

1.

He absolutely was

using a WIFOM defense.
"Also why would i throw suspicion on him if he was my scumbuddy?" "no if i wanted to distance myself from him i would voted him" "Why would i throw shade on my buddy in that situation?"

3 questions i asked you that are perfectly reasonable as your accusastions dont make sens but instead of answering those questions because you cant you call them wifom so it looks like you responded to them while in reality you dodged them while reading me scum for them.

2.

He absolutely was

shadecasting Square.
"As i said i dont like his playstyle mainly because its easy to play the same way as scum."

Thats not shadecasting its a fact. Unlike you i wouldnt lynch someone for their playstyle so what "shade" did i cast on square?

3.

He absolutely was

doubtcasting me.
"And this is a classic "i dont know an answer"" (because I didn't answer the WIFOM question)

If you know an answer why not present it? Any question you cant answer is wifom because you know the answer you would give will only disprove your silly accusations.

And this is a classic "i dont know an answer"

There are plenty of reasons for why scum would throw suspicion on their buddy, and it's almost impossible to know which reason it is. I think you know that already. So why even ask that question? And then why doubtcast me just because I didn't drink your wine?

Where did i doubtcast you? I simply asked you a question about your read that you still refuse to answer.
Even if there are plenty (i disagree with that statement btw) you should have had one in mind when you used the argument which on is it?
Also let me rephrase it a little. Why would i throw shade on my buddy in that situation?

Why would i throw shade on my buddy in that situation?

So you could say exactly this?

So this finnaly is his brilliant reason i did "cast shade" on my supposed scumbuddy. That probably can be said about every argument ever made by somebody.

4.

He absolutely was

fence-sitting Square.
"Null: Square: As i said i dont like his playstyle mainly because its easy to play the same way as scum. His argument against Eager was good but as i said before it was awkward that he only referred to the Rhazh analysis." "I dont like his playstyle but i dont think thats a reason to lynch someone."

And yes, it could also be buddying. If you're scum and square's town, then it makes sense for you to keep yourself open to lynching him later (via shade-cast and fence-sitting), while at the same time chainsaw-defending him (buddying).

At best it would be suspicious if i voted for him when he is getting lynched for sure after that.
Do you say my argument is wrong that its awkward to only mention your read on Rhazh?
Other then you i will not lynch someone for his playstyle. Your argument about everyone starting as scummy is just an easy way of excusing a push on more passive players.
How is that buddying? Also keeping myself open for lynching him later is bullshit since that would be suspicious af.

If Square's town: You would cast-shade on Square if he's town because that leaves yourself open to lynching him if you have to. You would chainsaw-defend him to buddy him because if you don't have to be a part of lynching him you could say "I was defending him."
If Square's scum: You would also cast-shade on Square if he's your buddy because that leaves yourself open to lynching him if you have to for town-credit. You would chainsaw-defend him to keep him from being lynched.

Instead of arguing about what i said or answering my question he just repeted the exact same thing he said before that i already had proven wrong.
And now he again he brings up an argument that has already been proven wrong.

Now if you can argue that he wasn't doing those things, I'd like to hear it.

But you can't. Instead, you're trying to throw out evidence simply because it involves commonly used mafia terms. Terms that have been proven to describe mafia behaviors. What's worse, you're trying to take the fact I was calling out his behaviors, and turn it against me, with only the reason of "buzzwording," rather than actually looking at his behavior and deciding if he's guilty of what he's accused of, which he is.

You call it Wifom because you cant answer those questions. Your accusations were all wrong and you couldnt explain any of them thats why you call the questions on your reasoning wifom.
You use buzzwords to not answer questions while it looks like you did. Later you just repeat the same thing over and over.

Now i would like to hear why people are voting me because as of now the reasons i see are as follows.
Eager: Ok if i cant kill Square ill kill Manuel he has some votes again.
CCC: Finnaly some pressure off me yeah we should totaly lynch Manuel
Gamma: Eager is right i dont know why but yeah all of my 3 scumreads are voting him it has to be a good lynch
Grendel: We dont have time lets lynch him
Square: I townread him on the last 20 pages he has to be lynched

And dont come with that shitty argument that i am defending myself ofc i do.

[Manuel87]

manuel you should claim now

I will not claim before intent or i see a decent reason why i should be lynched.

[Manuel87]

i would vote CCC or Eager
Could also vote Gamma but i think he is just an idiot.

[Manuel87]

I wont vote in my townreads.
Ill check the Iso on Gamma+Eager
@House: how can i combine the two isos?

[Manuel87]

@House: how can i combine the two isos?

Bottom of the page, below quick reply.

Choose a name, click +, rinse and repeat until bursting with joy.

Thanks

[Manuel87]

Okay looking at the 2 isos together its seems like Gamma is always following Eagers vote while scumreading him and having him in his would lynch list. But never gives a reason why he does.
Finally when the Square lynch wasnt happening he moved his vote again to me instead of Eager when he had me in his townlist and Eager in his scumlist.
Would lynch Gamma, Eager or CCC

[Manuel87]

manuel would you consider voting square today?

I would consider it but i still think we should lynch in Eager or Gamma today.

House brought up a good argument

Do you really think scum will be likely to have three members on the d1 lynch, which they are trying to do to Manuel?
That's why I think Victor is the scum off the wagon.

But i think The_Jester could be the one scum off the Wagon.

[Manuel87]

But i think The_Jester could be the one scum off the Wagon.

Would you be willing to lynch The_Jester today?

Not with you thats for sure.
It will also depend on his reasoning when he shows up.

[Manuel87]

@Eager: what happened to your Square case?
He finally shows up with contradictions in his reads but you are actually fine with it because his vote is where you want it?

[Manuel87]

Wow, it took me openly second guessing myself for people to admit that Gamma isn't widely town read. You guys had me feeling like I was seeing things that weren't there.
Is there enough support for a Gamma lynch to push it through today?
UNVOTE:

probably depends on Victor and Gerry.
@Gerry, Victor: would you lynch Gamma instead of Square today?

[Manuel87]

He isn't in my preferred lynch pile. If you want me to help lynch him, I want a persuasive case.

After doing the Iso on him plus Eager i realized he was following Eagers vote almost every time while scumreading him without giving any convincing reason.
He never asked him questions related to scumhunting in fact his only interaction until the Eager vs. me part was in 485 the interaction seems to be rather odd it feels like he already explaines why Eager survives the night in case CCC flips town.
He has read Eager Scum and me town in two readlists yet if you look at their voteprogression Gamma and Eager vote the same person except for the vote on CCC.
Until he finally arrived at the point where he had to decide between me who he had a townread on for the entire game and is voted by all of his scumreads (to be fair Square voted after him)
Or Eager who he had scumread for a long time and even said:

Thanks Snake. You're on my would lynch list, but that explanation helped you quite a bit.

After that he disagrees on arguments from Eager
And we finally arive at his vote on me

Well I'm feeling better about Square now, so:
VOTE: Manuel87

How does he come to the conclusion to vote me instead of Eager because he likes Square for contradicting himself? (Square read me town in his analysis yet he would lynch me)
Eager should still be his scumread and i should still be his townread yet he votes me over Eager.

Manuel87

wanna lynch huntress with me?

No i dont i already said that i will not lynch in my townreads.

[Manuel87]

So are you saying my reads can never change then?

No i am saying your reads changed for no reason.

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

[Manuel87]

So are you saying my reads can never change then?

No i am saying your reads changed for no reason.

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

Stop.

Gamma isn't happening today.

Look at the vote count.

Lynch his buddy eager and we'll get Gamma tomorrow.

VOTE: EagerSnake
Ill check in tomorrow morning to see the votecount i am fine with either of them you can count my vote on both ill change according to who you guys decide on tonight.

[Manuel87]

Oh good that you told me keep my vote on Eager.
@House: you should still consider Gamma tomorrow. If they had gotten the lynch on me today there is no way you dont lynch Gamma or Eager tomorrow. Once one of them flips scum you lynch the other.
Although we should probably look into the people that refused to vote Eager.
Still think Huntress is town if she didnt join the Eagerwagon there is no way we manage to push it through.

[Manuel87]

As i said yesterday i dont give Gamma towncredit for jumping on the Eager wagon.
Also his case on House is just retarded.
And House himself pointed out the only reasonable szenario him being scum would make sense.

I would vote Gamma right now but he is at L-2 and i dont want to end the day before The_Jester is replaced or finally starts posting.
I would also consider CCC
Maybe Gerry and The_Jester as well but i see no way we dont lynch in Gamma or CCC today.

Pretty confident in House, Huntress and Victor being town.
Grendel is still a townlean but not as strong as the other 3.

[Manuel87]

And House himself pointed out the only reasonable szenario him being scum would make sense.

What scenario makes sense with me as scum?
The one where eager is bussing you and I bus him to save you instead?
What kind of fucked up scumteam would that even be???
Somebody so unstable as to go balls out on their own buddy on d1 will most likely go into nuclear meltdown mode if their other buddy throws then under the bus in return.
My entire point was that there IS NO scenario that makes sense with House!Scum.
Gamma got called out on his scum theater, so he voted eager to create distance. When eager fakeclaimed that bullshit, he used that excuse to hop off until Square forced him back on the wagon with his counter claim.
Gamma is caught scum and there's no way around that simple fact.

Well i am not saying it makes sense. But its probably the only szenario that could benefit scum in the end.
@Gerry: What exactly is your scumread on Victor and why are you voting him over Gamma or CCC?

[Manuel87]

Spoiler:

(by the way, 1290 was a reaction test. I expected you to double down on your suspicions of me if you were town and accuse me of forcing a false dichotomy... You fail the test.
But by all means, continue your assault!)

I thought the same thing. That if he was town he'd actually scumread you more for that. But, he kinda looked like he was trying to worm himself out of a lynch and then vote the opposite person rather than himself.

So that makes three of us.
Gamma do you think House is scum or town now? i cant follow anymore.
VOTE: Gamma Emerald
for now i still think we lynch Gamma.

But even though i think you are scum you have one valid point in your case against Victor with the unvote on Eager.
@Victor: Why did you scumread House and Eager yesterday? Did you think there was a possibility that both of them are scum?

[Manuel87]

Also Victor's watcher claim has to be bullshit, I refuse to believe that watcher wouldn't be on claimed PR.

I actually thought the same.
Still would have lynched Gamma over Victor.
The hammer was really bad. With the Watcher claim we should have focused on finding the other scum.
We had enough time to find another lynch.
If he doesnt die in the night we lynch him. Dont think scum would risk it and let watcher survive the night.

[Manuel87]

House
Huntress

Gerry
CCC

Gamma
The_Jester

House is town without him i would have been lynched D1 instead of Eager. No way he would have done that as scum.
Huntress for a similar reason she wasnt as presistent on Eager as House was but without her the push on Eager wouldnt have happened.

Gerry didnt vote on Eager and voted on Victor. He hasnt done anything that was very townish this game.
CCC was following Eager on my wagon without a real reason to do so. Also Eagers push on me took some pressure off of him. But he didnt vote on Victore yesterday so i am more willing to vote in Gamma and Jester today.

Gamma voted me while reading Eager scum because his read on Square changed. That didnt make any sense. Yesterday he wanted towncredit for doing something scum would never do and today Grendel dies something he wouldnt do because it makes him look scummy? Gamma was and is one of the most suspicious so there was no reason to kill Grendel if it was just to make him look more scummy. But he felt the need to mention it immediately.
The_Jester didnt do much day 1 and 2 and suddenly comes in with a lolhammer on a claimed watcher. I already explained why we shouldnt have lynched Victor no matter if we believe the claim or not as long as we dont have a CC.

I dont play in the mindset "oh scum wouldnt do something that scummy" because as long as scum benefits from something they will eventually do it. Also why would town do something so scummy?

@House why do you scumread Huntress and why do you lean town on Gerry?

Though the fact that they are voting each other right now instead of CCC makes me believe one of them could be town and i think The_Jester is more likely town then Gamma.

VOTE: Gamma Emerald

[Manuel87]

That puts Gamma at L-1 i think.

[Manuel87]

UNVOTE:

[Manuel87]

That is why we have no business cutting this Day short!

Thats what i said yesterday and then the lolhammer came on Friday night without Victor having a chance to explain.

I would consider The_Jester over Gamma but you need to explain why you think Gamma is town.

[Manuel87]

Gamma has made some stupid mistakes.
Hey, he's new. Shit happens.
But I don't see scum intent in his posts.

You see the main reason i think he is scum is his vote on me when he had a scumread on eager and a townread on me. I think he never really explained how he came to the conclusion that i am scum.

d1, he was screwing around with, what looks in retrospect, a person he knew from another mafia site. That just happened to be scum.
Victim of circumstance that I mistook for damning association.

Ok fair point but that still doesnt really explain his vote on me.

I'm the one that pushed him onto selling a Victor lynch, because I had decided d1 that Victor was playing way too conservatively for his town game. That's me.
Gamma actually made a very good point about Victor in his case, one that I really could not see as something that town would say when jumping off a scum wagon.
He voted Victor. So what? So did the majority of the player list. He wanted CCC that day, but I basically gladiated him and Victor. Blame me for that. Not him.

I dont really blame him for the Victor lynch i think his case wasnt bad and Victor not watching claimed PR made his watcherclaim look fake so i understand the votes.
The hammer is an entirely different thing though.

This is what I can't get past though... I can't see scum!Gamma leaving ME alive over Grendel.
I've already proven I could ram through lynches. If already proven time and again I wanted Gamma dead... ISO ME!
Last night's kill was an attempt to get me to ram through my pet Gamma lynch that I'd been nursing all game long.

I dont know about that one to be honest. Grendel would have voted Gamma for sure.
You have also proven to drop scumreads so there still was a chance for him if he keeps you alive.

I will wait for Jester to convince me why we shouldnt lynch him over Gamma.

@Gerry: Like i said her vote on eager was one of the reasons why the lynch on him was even possible. No way she would have voted him if she was his scumbuddy. She could have voted Square or stayed on CCC instead.

[Manuel87]

I was seduced by Eager's rational case.

Eagers case wasnt rational he had no valid argument against me.

You have also proven to drop scumreads

Really?
What scumreads have I dropped before today.
Name one.

You droped your push on CCC and are townreading him now.

The hammer is an entirely different thing though.

Gamma didn't hammer Victor...

Yes this wasnt against Gamma. Just that i dont excuse Jesters hammer based an Victors play. Sadly with the quick lolhammer the other votes on Victor dont give much information because he didnt have the chance to explain himself.

[Manuel87]

You droped your push on CCC and are townreading him now.

Where did I show a townread on CCC before today?

Well you didnt townread him yesterday but you had him Null and i think you said that you dont care about him anymore or something like that.

[Manuel87]

You droped your push on CCC and are townreading him now.

Where did I show a townread on CCC before today?

Well you didnt townread him yesterday but you had him Null and i think you said that you dont care about him anymore or something like that.

Let's make sure I have this straight.
You are saying that Gamma!scum would leave the guy that wagoned began scumreading him d1 and harassed the shit out of him d2, that has every desire AND THE POWER to lynch him, alive... instead of a player that has a scumread on him but admits himself that he is unable to lead lynches?
This is what you want me to believe? That I'm less of a threat to Gamma than GRENDEL because one read changed?
THAT is your theory?

Yeah that sounds about right but i wouldnt say you are less of a threat but your read can change. Grendel was on Gamma since early day one and never dropped his read.
I say with you dead today Gamma would have been lynched for sure.

Ill do a metacheck on Gamma when i have some time.

also a quick reminder cause i think you missed those.
@House why do you scumread Huntress and why do you lean town on Gerry?

[Manuel87]

She's done a whole lot of nothing.
It's quite possible her vote on eager was bad distancing that she got caught up in and couldn't justifiably leave the wagon after I started pushing him.

Thats possible. The question is do i think she is a player that would make that mistake. It would have been easy for her to stay on her CCC read instead.
Her read on you is still unreasonable and i see only one reason why she would have a read like that in our current situation but she mentioned she will exlain so i will wait for that.

This when Jester is being fairly widely scumread.
Of the three people mentioned by Huntress here, one (myself) I know for certain sure is Town. One is very probably Town; that is House. And then there's Gamma. There are good reasons to scumread Gamma, but House has recently made a very good case for the idea that Gamma is Town.
Consider the possibility that Gamma is Town. If this is true, then Huntress just proposed a scumlist of three (out of seven) players who would all be Town. The odds of three

random

players including

zero

scum (assuming two remaining scum) are (5/7)*(4/6)*(3/5) = 2/7.
Yet a scum player has a strong incentive to suggest a scumlist that consists only of Town players. Let's say that a scum player has an 80% chance of producing an entirely-Town list of reads.
The prior probability of Huntress being scum (still assuming two remaining scum) is 2/6. Then the odds of Huntress being scum from this single piece of evidence (assuming that Gamma is Town) increase to over 50%.

I am more suspicious of CCC right now.
Yesterday Gamma was his scumread and today he considers him town in his calculation but still has him as a scumlean.
Yesterday Huntress was his 3rd highest townread and today after she got some scumreads on her she dropped into one of his mainscumreads for twisted math reasoning.
You can easily twist math the way you want it to be and thats what he is doing here.

I have read into Gammas first game a little and VI could make sense for him but i still need to read the other games to see how he developed his playstyle.

[Manuel87]

No time to play so

I gotta replace out, sorry Mod

. My RL situation was different when I signed up for the game.

@Eggman: You didnt mention looking for a replacement in your last post so i´ll quote it in case you missed it.

Gamma is at L-1

Noone hammers until we have a replacement for Jester.

please explain why i'm mafia. because i tr eagersnake? like a few other people? Yes, because as mafia i'd hard buddy my GOON. especially when he was getting lynched.

Okay, I believe this is a slip. He seems to

know

there is a role other than goon on the mafia team.
VOTE: gerryoat

How is this a slip? Most mafia setups have more than just a goon. My first game on this site i was mafia. The setup that I was in that had 2 maf goons and a traitor encryptor. and I was mafia goon, and I actually thought it was unbalanced. So I'm guessing the fact there is a JOAT (with RB capabilities. not to mention the watcher and the BG). There has to be a stronger role than just goon. What would be the point of the RB there with possibly 3 mafia goons?

No House has a good point here. Why did you feel the need to point out that Eager was a goon, are you saying you would hard buddy a scum PR to safe him?

Well I have less time than I'd like to play right now. I don't want to have to make mega-posts if I don't have to.

But why follow House if you didnt have time to read his case carefully?

[Manuel87]

I still dont see why Huntress is scum. Her case on House is bad but that doesnt mean she is scum.
I also thought about the possibility of House being scum but it would never make sense for him to save town and get his buddy lynched.

CCCs case is bad there is nothing about why Huntress is scum only why others could possibly maybe not be scum.
Like i said Grendel dying last night over House doesnt clear Gamma as Grendel was most likely vote Gamma today.

malpascp not hammering Huntress right now doesnt clear him for me if she flips green because a second lolhammer is like admitting to be scum.
But so far i start to like his slot more i would appreciate a readlist with some thoughts about everybody from him tomorrow.

I would like to hear the reasosns why people are voting Huntress right now.

[Manuel87]

Gerry's crowing about waiting for a claim is a strawman.

JoaT and Watcher have flipped. I'm bodyguard. How many PR's does he propose there are??

Thats actually what i though would be her reason to be suspicious of you.
If she was a PR it would make sense that she doesnt believe your claim.
But even then it could just mean we have 3 scum and it would be kinda balanced.

House bussing Eager Day1 doesnt make sense.
I will have to reiso Huntress tomorrow.
I also want to hear more from malpascp.

[Manuel87]

Thats actually what i though would be her reason to be suspicious of you.
If she was a PR it would make sense that she doesnt believe your claim.

Where was that suspicion when I claimed, dude?

Pull your head out of your ass and hammer scum!

Well we didnt know how Victor would flip back then.
ill reiso Huntress tomorrow and i still think we wait for her claim.

[Manuel87]

Ill say it again there is no way House is scum.
There was no reason for him to get people off me and push the lynch on Eager. It would have been easy to push anyone (besides from Grendel maybe) that voted for me the next day because noone actually had a good reason to vote for me.

@malpascp: why do you call intent after that claim? Because Bullet-proof actually makes a lot of sense if you ask me.

[Manuel87]

Ill say it again there is no way House is scum.
There was no reason for him to get people off me and push the lynch on Eager. It would have been easy to push anyone (besides from Grendel maybe) that voted for me the next day because noone actually had a good reason to vote for me.

@malpascp: why do you call intent after that claim? Because Bullet-proof actually makes a lot of sense if you ask me.

If I'm not scum, you pretty much have to believe Huntress is.

Do you think Bullet-proof would be that unreasonable?

[Manuel87]

Square was a JoaT, which makes bulletproof even MORE unreasonable due to the utility JoaT provides.

You might have a point but i still dont think 4 PRs are that unreasonable although i havent played many games yet and its also her reason to vote you.
I was actually thinking about voting her if she claims a PR after holding it back for so long but the BP seems to fit thats why i want to know why malpascp calls intent on that claim.

If its you or her i would vote her but i think we should still consider other options since we still have time.

[Manuel87]

Talk to me, who else can possibly be scum aside from Huntress and gerry?

One is still Gamma because he is sheeping you hard right now without thinking about the case you present or asking you any questions about it.
He is just following you blindly and that he wanted to vote Huntress over Gerry is also one of the reasons why i dont want to lynch her today.

Other one is malpascp i liked his early posts but after that 2 things caught my attention.

Can't think straight right now.
Should Huntress be claiming right now?
And who thinks we should go for a House lynch if Huntress flips town?
Pedit: doesn't really matter at this point, scum would do it for survival anyways

I dont like the silly guy play asking what Huntress should do. For me it doesnt fit his play.
Why would he ask about you now before the flip and before the Nightkill? My guess is Huntress is town and he wants to know if he can set up a lynch on you tomorrow if he keeps you alive tonight.

Bulletproof townie is a joke of a claim.

Intent to hammer

Not hammering so we can discuss more before night comes.
House, you planning on using your ability?

He is dead set on hammering her because she claimed Bullet-proof? Doesnt make sense to me.
He was sure there have to be 3 scum because 2 scum would be unbalanced until House explained 3 scum would mean 2 misslynches.
Bulletproof balances out 3 scum quite well thats why i want to know why her claim is so that he wants to hammer her right after that post.

Jesus Christ you're so dead if Huntress flips town.

He also played dumb about the lolhammer his slot did when i mentioned it.
VOTE: malpascp

I dont see why you are so fixed on Gamma being town but after looking back at malpascp and also considering the lolhammer he is my top scumread now over Gamma.

I also think there is still 2 scum remaining since i believe that both you and Huntress are town and 3 scum vs 4 PRs seems balanced.
If he flips red his partner is probably Gerry or CCC.

[Manuel87]

He also played dumb about the lolhammer his slot did when i mentioned it.

He's blaming mal for not knowing the motives behind the previous owner of the slot's actions.
LOOK AT IT!

I am not blaming him for not knowing the motive but he tries to brush it off as if it has nothing to do with him and i will not accept that.
Just because the slot is replaced doesnt mean my read on him is reset.

You are basically saying anyone that doesnt follow your reads is scum or retarded.
Sorry but i will not ignore my own reads and do what ever you ask me to do.
You want me to vote my 2nd highest townread because she is scumreading you for the same reason you are scumreading her.
You ignore my case on my top scumread and call me scum instead because i am not doing what you want me to do.

You need to accept that others have different reads and maybe try to look at their cases.

@malpascp: I still want your readslist

[Manuel87]

I am not blaming him for not knowing the motive but he tries to brush it off as if it has nothing to do with him and i will not accept that.

What option does he have? He can't answer for somebody else. This is common sense shit here.

There was nothing for him to answer regarding the hammer but he still tried to brush it off as if it never happened and he should be well aware that it did happen.

Manuel are you willing to lynch gamma today? Huntress you too?

I would consider it but i first want to get some response from malpascp.

[Manuel87]

Reads Summary

CCC: For initial scumread see 577 and 597. Nothing he's written stands out as townish. See my more recent posts for comments on his Day three play.
Gamma: There's a lack of guile about his posting which makes me think he's town, but with a few reservations that make me think he could possibly be scum. See 1993.
Gerryoat: His posts feel like town. He's been questioning stuff and I haven't seen anything that made me think scum.
Manuel: Town. He's actively trying to solve the game.
House: Scum. See 1817 and later posts.
Malpascp: Possible scum. I was reading Jester as town but his first hammer was bad. Mal's posting toDay hasn't been so good and 2137/2139 look like covering himself. And I see he's the third person to misrep my vote on House. But they can't all be scum.

Huntress why do you think that we cant have 4 PRs?
As i said before i think 4 PRs vs 3 scum with at least 1 scum PR seems to be balanced for me.
Also House bussing Eager day 1 is to unreasonable. House may be stubborn but there is still no way he would risk something like that.

My main scumread is still Malpascp he still didnt explain why he didnt like the BP claim and also ignored me asking for his reads.
2032
He completly ignores my case and hammers Huntress.

[Manuel87]

It doesnt matter how many years you didnt play, Huntress had to claim at that point. She probably didnt claim earlier because it helps scum.

Your question wasnt directed at House so what is this answer about?

No you didnt explain you just repeated that BP claim is absurd but you never explained why you think so.

You ignored the next point because you cant answer it?

I already mentioned that you dont need to explain anything about the lolhammer but fact is your slot did it and i will not ignore this fact or let you brush it off as if it has nothing to do with you.

The quote is part of the argument you ignored.
You were suspicious of House until Huntress claimed even to the point were you said what i quoted.
So explain why her claim changed your reads because you still didnt do that.

[Manuel87]

Four PRs in an eleven player game would mean half the town being PRs. And there were too many ways to either block or divert the nk. It's possible if Square's actions were not very strong but from what I understand it's unusual nowadays. A few years ago it was different.

Ok i understand that its unusual but if you ignore that wouldnt you say the Setup looks pretty balanced with 3 scum that have 1-2 PRs?

But my main reason for doubting House was that his actions didn't fit with his role. Particularly in regard to Victor.

To be honest i can understand why people voted Victor. Not watching claimed and pretty much confirmed PR doesnt make sense.

Also House bussing Eager day 1 is to unreasonable.

Yet he had no problem with accusing me of doing exactly that.

Yes but that doesnt mean that he is scum.

[Manuel87]

I don't play dumb/silly/whatever. If you think me asking if Huntress should claim at L-1 is scummy, so be it.

The way you asked it was weired your earlier posts felt like you are full of confidence and i was like "why did he ask that?"

What I find weird is that it seems nothing changed for you since Huntress flipped.

My read on you and House didnt change and i explained why. other then that i didnt mention any reads after the flip. Why wouldnt i still have you as my top scumread after you hammered town without explaining why you scumread her?

My bad, I thought you were complaining about me asking for House's night action (i'm not a morning person ok). To answer your question, I wanted to hear what people have to say about House, who apparently is our Lord and Savior for some.

No your question was what will you think of House once Huntress flips town.

BP claim being absurd and scummy

was already explained

.

The BP claim at this stage is always scummy because it's so scum-convenient. Given the PRs already outed, it's even more. That's independent of the setup.
I shared some thoughts about the setup, like most people already did, and it seems noone's certain if it's 2 or 3 man scum team, so that's pretty much irrelevant. You trying to link that to me not buying Huntress' claim makes zero sense. At most, town having so many PRs will be balanced by scum PRs, not numbers. Not in a setup this small, and without the town's PRs being that powerfull (granted we don't know the JoaT's abilities).

Ok i understand that its a scum-convenient claim but you dont want to claim BP before scum tries to shoot you and the way Huntress played today was already suggesting she has a PR.

I'm suspicious of everyone. House made a good case on Huntress, I was leaning towards voting her, then her claim came, and I decided she was prob!scum at that point.
I can't get a read on House because he makes me paranoid as hell.

Really? It actually looked like you were townreading her and scumreading House until her claim came.

[Manuel87]

I'm not sure whether there's 2 or 3. Gerry, did you look at the review topic for Mini 1832. It had a fourth PR, albeit a one shot. There could still be two.
I suggest we massclaim. I'm vanilla townie.

I´m vanilla townie.
There is no way we have only 2 scum when one already flipped goon and we have 4 PRs including a BP.

For now my highest townread is Gamma. Both Huntress and House read him town. House being killed tonight isnt something i think scum!gamma would do.
CCC jumped off the wagon on Huntress and pushed on Gerry so one of them is probably scum one is town.
Malpascp is scum i am pretty sure. CCC+Gerry is not a thing after that voteswitch yesterday.
Ill Re-Iso Gamma and Malpscap/Jester again but i am pretty sure we have to lynch malpscap today.

Ill ignore the Gamma stalking for now as i think its NAI.

[Manuel87]

Wait.
If CCC is really town, which I am feeling, we're in auto win. Because we would have the same amount of lynches as potential scum.

If anyone has doubts that CCC is town, please bring them up.

I think CCC is more likely town then Gerry.

Also let's be honest here, did anyone here NOT want Huntress lynched yesterday? I'm pretty sure anyone could have been the hammer.

I didnt want her lynched. And i liked CCCs switch on Gerry. Thats actually the main reason why i think he is more likely to be town then Gerry.

[Manuel87]

Actually never thought for a second he would protect someone else.

I agree no way he took a bullet for someone else today.

Hm. CCC and mal are both good options, and with Manuel and Gerry clear, we have auto if we lynch in those 2. Willing to lynch either CCC or mal equally as much.

Why do you think Gerry is clear?

[Manuel87]

Okay i kinda agree but CCC also got off the Huntress wagon when she was about to be hammered
I also still think malpascp is the lynch for today.
Not to sure about Gerry and CCC but still leaning more towards scum!Gerry
No matter how i look at it malpacp it scum
VOTE: malpascp

[Manuel87]

Well there was a point where we couldnt turn back.
I was also pretty sure Gerry was the Traitor day one because he tried to get the lynch on Square.

@Eggman: what powers did Square have as Jaot aand what did he do night 1?

[Manuel87]

I honestly forgot you were my partner and didn't check the PT until you were already at l-1.. that's when I backed off some but it was too late

Haha well it worked out in the end.
Night one was the hardest choice and i wasnt 100% sure about Gerry being the traitor so i decided ill risk it and target the one person i know is town and a PR.
I also checked Victor as rolecop and was like f...
After day 2 i thought House could be the traitor because of his comment about us being scum together so didnt want to kill him.

[Manuel87]

Poor Mafia Den didnt get used at all