Mini #564 - Mafia in Crubtown - Game Over

[Cephrir]

Vote: YvonneSeer

, clearly scum.

[Cephrir]

Let's get this show on the road, then.

Unvote, Vote: thevampireofdusseldorf

[Cephrir]

I can't count, let's try that again.

Unvote, Vote Pink Puppy

[Cephrir]

Nobody's trying to bandwagon anyone or engineer anything this early in the game with ulterior motives. It's Page 2.

[Cephrir]

Don't try to read into people's random votes.

Please

. It doesn't work.

[Cephrir]

Cephrirs comments seem a bit strong and I dont like his last one about reading into random votes. Yes I dont think there is a goldmine you can get out of them but to say there is nothing ("it doesnt work") to be gained form looking at them and "please dont" seems to me like he is trying to quiet things up.

I'm not trying to quiet anything up. It's not that there's nothing at all in random votes, it's just that there's so little that it's not worth putting a lot of effort into reading them. I was, as QuantumFruit said, just trying to get off the topic of random votes and onto the actual discussion track. Random votes sometimes give us a little information, but not much.

A lot of discussion starts form loking into random votes and many people have cast two votes already and imo any vote after the 1st round is questionable even if it is called random or jokey.

It was still sort-of the random voting phase, even if it doesn't seem to be anymore. And while discussion can start from random votes, it's usually not from reading into motives so much as from someone calling out someone else on the "third vote scumtell" which, while it doesn't really hold true, is still a good way to start a game.

At this point, there appear to be two "camps," if I may say so: those dismissing joke votes as joke votes, and those reading into joke votes and saying that they have elements of scum/town. The former could be looked at as trying to cover up their potentially scummy actions and hence trying too hard not to look like scum - because of this, they're scum; the latter could be looked at as trying too hard to appear pro-town because they're going into overkill mode and attacking every minor divergence as scum.

Bit of an overreaction here. It's a bit much to say that those dismissing joke votes as jokes are trying to cover scummy random votes, although from this statement it is obvious which "camp" you'd put yourself in. Besides, you assume that those people made scummy random votes that needed to be covered up, which isn't neccessarily the case. Reading too hard into random votes isn't a tell either, it's just what some people do. The divergent opinions here, I think, are really just a simple disagreement and nothing more.

At this point, I could honestly FOS everyone who's been participating, but I don't think it'd do much good.

That might indicate to you that you're reading too much into things and scumhunting too overzealously at this point in the game.

[Cephrir]

Talk about jumpy/defensive.

Unvote, Vote windkirby

[Cephrir]

It's just an FoS. You basically flipped out and went on or five lines about why you made a random vote. Being that defensive this early on and under so little pressure not only is suspicious, but it makes me at wonder what you'd do under actual pressure.

[Cephrir]

I never said the vote was random: stop twisting my words. There's a huge difference between a random vote and a not serious vote.

A lot of people will take them as the same thing, and they might as well be.

Of COURSE Mogsuggz did not seem scummy (note that my scum-o-meter works on a post-to-post scoring system, not accumulative):

Might want to fix that.

Cephir: How serious an FOS is I guess is debatable, but it was an accusation. It is my policy to address all of my accusations, little or small, and do my best to cleanly defend myself and not leave doubt behind. Therefore, I am usually pretty thorough in my defenses, and it would seem that it comes off as scummily defensive. I guess it's something I need to work on.

The point is, not only is it just an FoS, but it wasn't a huge one. VoD FoS'ed someone else and voted me in that same post, it's not even like you were his main target of suspicion. Massive overreaction sometimes can mean your emotions are forced.

[Cephrir]

Wrong. There's a big difference. I just explained the difference. Random would be a dice roll. Even a joke vote (assuming no dice roll, or random number generator was used) is not random.

As QF said, there is a definite difference between a random vote and a jokevote. A random vote is usually due to a player's name or perhaps because he/she didn't confirm very early (or even because a player is in two of your minis), but a jokevote is a vote that has some sort of small reason behind it presented in a humorous and not-serious manner.

Yes, but they

might as well

be the same thing. Because neither really matters, neither is going to lynch someone, and not a whole lot can be read into either. They might be different words, but come on.

And there goes windkirby with the overdefensiveness again. It seems my vote is in the right place.

[Cephrir]

Sure I can.

[Cephrir]

Alright, as good as that response sounds, I should probably clarify. Your responses are a perfectly legitimate target for additional "criticism", as you call it. Actually, the responses are the whole point, I want to see how you react. And I'm not making excuses to keep my vote where it is, your responses seriously make me think even more that you are scum.

[Cephrir]

How is voting for someone who doesn't have the most votes supposed to speed the game up? Are you trying to speed the game up by drawing attention/suspicion to yourself?

@Puppy: I realize that your question is probably directed at everyone but me, but I'm going to answer you anyways. Being defensive, by itself, isn't a tell. Overreacting to just an FoS and being really overdefensive is worse, but not always a huge tell, more of a newb tell. If an experienced player did it, then it would be different. Since windkirby is being overdefensive now, I think getting a few votes and a little actual pressure on him will generate a reaction, given his playstyle thus far, that might be indicative of alignment, hence my vote.

[Cephrir]

Wrong. You can read into a joke vote, or even more likely the way someone responds to it. That's how games basically always start. That gives us something to go off of. There's really no other basis. While I don't think extended periods of joke voting are productive, some is necessary.

I don't agree, but whatever. It's hard to read into something insubstantial. Not that that phase is unneccessary, it's very important. Just not for that reason. See: below.

Do you have any other propositions for getting a game going? Because you don't seem to be employing them.

I tried to put a third vote on someone and see if anyone jumped on me for it. In my experience, that's one of the best/fastest ways to get a game going. The first time, I was foiled by my inability to count, but I believe I eventually managed to do it and nobody cared.

[Cephrir]

Cephrir, I went through windkirby's posts and I'm not seeing the scummy behavior you are...he seems to be playing more town, at least so far. What scummy actions are you seeing?

Just reposting this for Cephrir's benefit since he hasn't responded to it yet, unless I've missed something. I'm really not seeing the scummy behavior out of windkirby at all.

Since windkirby is being overdefensive now, I think getting a few votes and a little actual pressure on him will generate a reaction, given his playstyle thus far, that might be indicative of alignment, hence my vote.

You support the "scum is third on the bandwagon" meta?

No, I think it's ridiculous, but I know some people believe it.

[Cephrir]

Now what I can deduce from this is that Cephrir was the 1st to call wk defensive and also to mention it the most, others saw this also but were less aggressive.....
As I have already stated that wk gave tells very early in the game of being defensive I see this move of Cephrir as a scum oppertune move; that coupled with the fact that this seems to be

his only real premise to think wk scum as he made no comments on the double standard of wks vote and the contradictory nature of his explanation.

I'm not really all that suspicious of wk anymore:

Overreacting to just an FoS and being really overdefensive is worse, but not always a huge tell, more of a newb tell. If an experienced player did it, then it would be different. Since windkirby is being overdefensive now, I think getting a few votes and a little actual pressure on him will generate a reaction, given his playstyle thus far, that might be indicative of alignment, hence my vote.

That's why I'm still voting for wk. I thought I made that clear enough, but perhaps not.

(I can see this post as defensive but I like the fact that wk can see the reason he attracted suspicion, and I also think that wk has a tendency to overjustify (note post52) as well which can also be interpreted defensive.)

Defending wk pretty strongly, here and throughout the post. My gut tells me for some reason that you might be scum trying to pick up a pet townie, just because scumbuddies probably wouldn't be so blatant, but I've found that my gut is pretty often wrong, so I'll just keep an eye on that. VoD, it kind of seems like you have QF syndrome. You make huge posts, but sometimes they don't say as much as they appear to. I guess that's just because you do a lot of summarizing before you get to the point. It seems to me like you defend a lot of people here (wk, QF, darkdude in 116), but I suppose that could just be playstyle or a tendency to agree with the less ulterior possible motives behind a post.

As said by many others, there was not enough evidence for a serious vote. Voting is not a prerequisite for suspicion.

You still did offer some passive support for it, sort of like someone trying to raise popular support for a wagon while remaining transparent in the voting record. I don't think that's terribly likely though, and not voteworthy.

I sort of want to vote mozsuggs here to pressure him into posting some content, but I also want to get some more reactions out of wk. If nobody decides to help me, I'll switch pretty soon.

[Cephrir]

I disagree. I think it might be likely and, therefore, voteworthy.

Reasonable.

Shall we just kill someone?

I don't really think anyone else cares to pressure wk, so I'll put that objective in the back of my mind for a bit. As such, yes, we can just kill someone.

Vote: mozsuggs

VoD: A jester is extremely unlikely in a normal game. To the point where you should just assume there isn't one.

[Cephrir]

Err,

Unvote, Vote mozsuggs

[Cephrir]

FoSoSoSoS!

Finger of Suspicion of Suspicion of Suspicion of Suspicion or Finger of SOS, oh, SOS? Huh? What kind of subliminal messages are you trying to send here, scum?

On a more serious note- VoD, is 121 a response to me? If not, why did you post it? Explaining why you said something when nobody asked you = kinda weird. It's also a lot of the same of what you said in 114.

[Cephrir]

You didn't have enough evidence, yet you were convinced he seemed like scum from reading that one particular post from windkirby. You thought he's scum but you didn't vote for him, instead choosing to keep your vote on the player who is attacking windkirby of being scum. That is suspicious to me.

First of all your accusation does not hold. I did not ever point a finger at anyone in particular. Rather, I first suspected a statement excusing a joke vote that to me seemed like a bandwagon attempt.

That

is

pointing a finger.

Even if there were enough evidence to suggest a bandwagon, we would still need to figure out who to take out first (bandwagon is a GROUP action). We did not even get to that phase, instead we were caught in debating on the validity of my claim. Then the really defensive post came up, so I diverted by efforts elsewhere.

Your efforts? You haven't posted that much content, you make it sound like you've been putting in a lot of effort. Bandwaggoning may be a group action, but it has to start somewhere, and that's what voting does. Would you suggest that we instead sit around FoSing each other until a majority FoS the same person? o_O

I don't recall saying "THIS GUY IS SCUM". I was giving reasons to why the joke votes seemed suspicious.

Being suspicious indicates... you know... suspicion.

Now please state why we shouldn't lynch YOU for making baseless accusations trying to get ME lynched.

I lol'd. Seriously, Yvonne's (I think, you didn't cite your quote and I don't feel like looking) accusations are not baseless at all. They're clearly based on your posts...

It's frustrating when it seems like there are more than 3 scum in a game that has 3 scum in it.

[Cephrir]

What do you not agree with? Why? Why do you think that the phase is very important?

I don't think you can read much into a joke vote, but the phase is important because it gets us into the game (usually when someone tries to read something into a joke vote). It doesn't really matter though, we can agree to disagree.

Woah, hold on a minute here. How do you know there are specifically 3 scum, Cephrir?

Oops, mixed this game up with Open 62. It doesn't help that you're in both games.

[Cephrir]

viewtopic.php?t=7634

[Cephrir]

Not everyone who accuses you is scum, Captain OMGUS.

[Cephrir]

Not neccessarily. A vote implies that one of the following is true:

A) You want that person lynched
B) You want to see how that person reacts to your vote
C) It is the random vote phase
or D) You find that person to be the most suspicious out of everyone.

In the case of D, it's a matter of playstyle. Some people use votes to express suspicion; others prefer to use their votes conservatively and FoS instead; some do both to indicate varying levels of suspicion.

[Cephrir]

OMGUS = OMG, You Suck. It refers to voting for someone because they voted for you, basically.

She may be directing the attention of the town on you, but it's already been explained why her accusations are not baseless. If you're town, you have to remember that everyone else doesn't know you're town.

That said, that reaction seems pretty indicative of newb town to me.

[Cephrir]

So, you felt like Yvonne was focusing too much on you and not on other players, which is scummy because it's trying to get a specific townie to look like scum and get lynched - yes?

Thing is, there is a reason to play that way, because we then get people to react and respond and arguments grow from that. That would hold if she was still doing it, but I think it was more of a suggestion accompanied by some prodding.

Mm-hm. Focusing on one person at a time and building a case is how a lot of people play this game, as well. Get used to it, DD.

[Cephrir]

Annoyingly, this has prob made me more suspicious, but as I'm innocent i really couldnt give a fck.

WELL START CARING.

Whoah the witch hunt is on now. I'm assuming that most peoples real motive is that they just want a lynch and they are jumping on the Suggs bandwagon-i find it ludicrous that I have done ANYTHING suspicious.

Classic "everyone voting for me must be scum" crap. Really freaking annoying. Not everyone is scum, mozsuggs. And of course you've done anything suspicious, every post of yours in this thread that's not on this page is bandwagon hopping or expressing a desire to get to night.

Right, i'll trawl through this thread and get back to you.

But FoS AKONAS
Fos VIKINGFAN for talking bollocks and not thinking this through.

UNVOTE, VOTE CEPHIR

"FoS: The two people who just voted for me, Vote: The person who's been voting me the longest" is not helpful.

Yes, I wanted to speed things up-how many times do you want me to say it?!
And note-i have voted for only two people-hardly the action of a man desperate to lynch a townie.

Actually it is. Because you're trying to bandwagon, and you're not voting for people because you think they're scum.

You are all reading way too much into this.

No, we're not. If you don't read into things, you'll never catch any scum.

Well, looking over the whole thing Cephir has always been desperate to get a lynch, so he looks Dodge Ball.

Explain how I've been "desperate to get a lynch", because I'm pretty sure I have no idea what you're talking about or how my actions could possibly construed that way. I've made two votes outside of the random phase. First, for windkirby for being defensive, and iirc, he had no votes at the time. but I later decided overdefensiveness wasn't the greatest tell and he was reacting in a fairly protown way. I am now voting for you, and at the time it was for pressure, and you had zero votes on you. Your recent posts have definiely justified my vote, so it's staying there.

If you can explain to me how hunting scum and voting for people who happen to not have any votes is desperate, I'll eat my hat. And I'm so confident you won't be able to that I'm not even wearing a hat.

[Cephrir]

No, we're not. mozsuggs has 4 votes.

[Cephrir]

Obviously there are only two scum!-use your loaf!

Probably three, actually. No more likely an attempt to confirm himself by not knowing how many scum there are (might seem like a good idea to a newbie) than that it's legitimately not knowing.

It struck me Cephir that you have been fairly keen to lynch someone through out-of course that doesn't mean your scum (i wanted a lynch too,, remember) -but you have to go on something.

Could I ask you to do something for me? Go back to my post. See it there? 193? Now,

actually read what I typed.

Thanks!

[Cephrir]

Yes, I've read what you type.
If what you say is true then great!
But maybe you're scum-who knows!

Try reading this part again. After you do, respond to it. After that, if you still think I'm scum, you're going to have to give some different reasons because the only ones you listed were false.

Explain how I've been "desperate to get a lynch", because I'm pretty sure I have no idea what you're talking about or how my actions could possibly construed that way. I've made two votes outside of the random phase. First, for windkirby for being defensive, and iirc, he had no votes at the time. but I later decided overdefensiveness wasn't the greatest tell and he was reacting in a fairly protown way. I am now voting for you, and at the time it was for pressure, and you had zero votes on you. Your recent posts have definiely justified my vote, so it's staying there.

If you can explain to me how hunting scum and voting for people who happen to not have any votes is desperate, I'll eat my hat. And I'm so confident you won't be able to that I'm not even wearing a hat.

Also, your continued assault on vikingfan for no apparent reason other than his vote on you is noted.

[Cephrir]

Yeah, exactly. You're attacking him for being suspicious of you. I'll just go ahead and tell you that that won't work out well in any game regardless of your alignment.

[Cephrir]

Dang ninjas.

well, maybe i was wrong-it just seemed to me you put pressure on afew people to vite

Thank you.

I suspect your mistake, looking at your phrase (about windkirby) that he reacted in "a fairly pro town way" might be that you stereo type too much.
Because it seems like you think i am not reacting in a "pro town way"-and yet i am pro town!

1) Obviously, I can't read everyone perfectly.
2) Actually, I'm thinking you're town, actually. I just didn't bother telling you because you'd feel more pressure that way.

I dont really think you are scum, its just you seemed as good as bet as any.

Here's a hint. If you don't think someone's scum, don't vote for them. And if you have no idea who to vote for, don't vote.

[Cephrir]

Yes, I do. If you don't like me, that's your problem, but you shouldn't be letting it influence your vote...

[Cephrir]

Try a different perspective. I dont like the way you are hunting me down for NO REASON!

Plenty of reason actually.

I was perhaps too generous to you when i said "i don't think you're scum, just as good a bet as anyone else" or words to that effect.
There isn't much evidence that you are scum, but since i know i am town, your pursual of me makes you look a bit scummy.
Thats why i am voting for you.

NO. You don't seem to be getting the point here. You're suspicious of me because I'm voting for you. That's not how it works. Because

town don't know you're town

. You are acting ridiculously scummy, and there is plenty of reason to be voting for you. It's just that my gut is telling me otherwise.

If other people think i am wrong, i'll be guided by POLITE experienced players, and unvote you.

In the game of mafia, people will argue with you. Disliking them personally because they argue with you is not how it works. It's a freaking game.

I might even unvote you if you admit you had NOTHING to go on when you were trying to lynch me

1) Voting for someone is not the same as trying to lynch them. If you had five votes on you, I would have unvoted because I wasn't 100% sure I wanted to lynch you yet, or even close.
2) I had plenty to go on as you were and still are acting very much like scum. Your vote doesn't mean anything to me because I know that it's based on ridiculous reasoning and thus nobody is going to follow you in voting for me. If you're reasons weren't atrocious, maybe I'd justify them with a response other than "NO".

[Cephrir]

Pooky claimed scum in "Choose Someone Else's Role Mafia"
and i think Now A Ranger claimed scum somewhere as well.

What, have you read, like, every game ever? o_O

My logic is perfectly fine, and even if it weren't, you have no business insulting it, Captain OMGUS.

Yeah, so I'm being a little aggressive. Get over it. I really don't care what you think of my tone, feel free to stop telling me you think I sound patronizing. Disregarding peooples' arguments because their tone is offensive to you is not going to get you anywhere besides lynched.

[Cephrir]

Just trying to help you. if you werent so agressive, you would win more arguments-basic rules of sophistry and debating-no one likes the kid who tries to throw his weight around-he normally ends up on the floor.

I appear to be winning this argument, so it doesn't work that badly, eh? Although the main reason I'm winning this argument is because I'm so right that nobody could ever lose it from my side...

I agree 100% with what Yvonne says about not letting newb behavior slide just because it's newb.

Mm. Maybe my gut reads are writing off newb behavior as "newb town" without considering the "newb scum" possibility.

The even more bad news, for me, is that i am avanilla townie. Not a cop. So you prob dont lose too much by losing me.

The worst news of all is that no one believes me *pathetic sobbing*

Vanilla claim equals not convincing. Maybe people would believe you if you didn't do things like bandwagon for the sake of bandwaggoning.

If i've learned anything, its not to post-i was doing ok until i opened my mouth. Now i see why pople submarine.

Please, don't let that be the lesson you take away from this game. Once you become a better player, this won't be an issue.

Unvote

. I'm feeling really ambivolent toward the mozsuggs wagon, I've been reading him as newb town for a while now but, as I said, I think I've been attributing all newb behavior as newb town. The votes are gathering and I need to think about this.

[Cephrir]

AS i ma town, your entire argument was wrong.

Wow. I've seen some pretty bad arguments from you, but "you're wrong" definitely takes the cake.

zedd, i dont think you've been following. i made numerous attempts to defend my position, in numerous ways, but when i got minus 2 from a lynhc i thought i'd claim.

Okay, now you're just lying. Your defenses have been crap if one would say that they even

existed

, and I don't think I would.

Its funny really-everyone has disected my arguments, often quite logically, and yet you are still going to get the wrong guy-good for scum, bad for town.

Hence why i got to my (as you say, not very logical) "Fuck off, I'm innocent"-cos thats all it boils down to, in the end.

The emo attitude is not helping. You're supposed to

convince us

that yuou're town, not say "yeah, I'm town, so I don't need to respond to your arguments because I know you're wrong, and I don't care if anyone agrees with me". And y'know what? If we were to lynch you, and you happened to come up town, we wouldn't be the ones looking stupid like you think we will-- that'll be you for not trying to get yourself out of it. Actually, you'll look pretty stupid overall if you're scum, too.

I was unsure of mozsuggs' alignment. I'm still a bit hesitant, but I'm pretty sure we've caught ourselves a scum. I've been reading his wanting to get to night as either scum or a power role, and he's claimed vanilla. If mozsuggs is a townie, which I doubt, he's a really horrendous townie and utterly useless anyways, given that he won't respond to cases and does nothing but proclaim "I'm town", add senseless bandwagon votes that only help the scum, and throw hissy fits when people build cases on him while still pretending he's the one on the moral high ground. He's obviously going to get lynched eventually regardless of his alignment, and since I'm pretty sure that alignment isn't a town one anyways,

Vote: mozsuggs

Prepost edit @zeddicus: yes, L-1 claim is standard.

[Cephrir]

n fairness, i am in anoob game, and have just realised this isnt a noob game!so i understand the intolerant, short sighted, bullying, illogical, arrogant twaddle now

Right, because experienced players are... worse... players...?

Christ! Guys after i get lynched, read Cyphillis post again-a tad scummy?!

Not justifying this BS with a response. Assuming it's directed at me, anyway.

[Cephrir]

Ninja'd by an idiot. How embarrassing.

Hmm unpleasant and dumb, eh? An attractive combination. i have no more senseless bandwagon votes than you my dear syphillis, (are we both 3 bandwagons each-i'm tired and its late, but its roughly the same for each of us).

1) I've been on 2. And neither was a bandwagon when I originally voted on it, I started the wk thing and was the first on you.
2) Mine are not senseless, they were based on logic. You admitted at the time that you had no reason. Don't even try to make it sound like the same thing.

i dont know what cases you are refering to -i have rebutted your hopeless arguments one by one in fairly short order.

One of the most hilarious things I've ever read in a mafia game. No, seriously.

[Cephrir]

You say it like I'm the one being lynched

[Cephrir]

I think he means he thinks the scum were trying to set him up with the Yvonne kill.

A little content will come tomorrow, I have something to say but I don't feel like it atm.

[Cephrir]

The darkdude thing is Wifom. So is the fact that he brought it up. I propose that we ignore it for the time being.

But I would imagine there's some scum on the wagon somewhere.

Well yeah, of course. I mean, it's like everyone in the game. There almost couldn't not be.

At the moment, I'm not going to hold the mozsuggs wagon against anyone. Maybe I'm biased, being the most vocal about the wagon, though not its greatest supporter. But we all know mozsuggs was asking for it, and I don't think anyone who wasn't on mozsuggs when he was lynched gladly would have been on him had they had the oppurtunity, except maybe for Yvonne (oh, and apparently Akonas, even though he was) as she pursued darkdude exclusively and pretty much ignored the wagon.

So I'm going to ignore whether or not people were on mozsuggs when analyzing, and instead look at how they did so, maybe voting in the mid-wagon area with little explanation. Although, not much explanation is needed seeing as reading mozsuggs' posts was enough to draw votes.

I dunno.... I'll have to look back at it later.

@Akonas... he said it was a mistake. If you don't believe him, pursue that, I suppose. And besides, it was obviously going to happen at some point. I would have done it in that situation (well, I might have waited, but still). Not caring is just a noob tell. And do you really think he didn't deserve it? He was erratic and couldn't be trusted in endgame anyways (see: voting for me because he doesn't like me), and we almost certainly would have lynched him at some point, especially given the townie claim. Pretending otherwise is really just silly.

[Cephrir]

but was he really acting all that scummy?

YES.

The "accident" excuse quell me: especially after QF's warning, it takes a hammerer's substantial lack of care about the town to instigate an accidental lynch. Yikes, zed even posted that it was L-2! The sudden hammer without a lot of posting beforehand just seems like eager mafiaman who can't say no to finally being able to get out his gun.

That's true, I didn't notice that stuff. I suppose you do have a point, it's just that VoD seems like a good player to me, and I can't see him hammering so suddenly as scum. Even most noobs know that hammering a townie makes you look bad. I also can't see him missing those warnings, either, though. I'm still inclined to believe him for now based on his not being a terrible player, but if a case builds on him later based on scummy behavior, that might be something I'd reconsider.

I really don't think he deserves a lynch for just that though, and I won't be putting my vote on him without more evidence, as he's been doing a reasonable amount of contribution, especially since I think there are some better targets just waiting for me to have time to seek them out. At the moment, I'm thinking maybe Akonas, as he did put his vote on mozsuggs quietly iirc, and he's now done a 180. That said, I'm less suspicious of those voting for VoD than I was.

[Cephrir]

Pink Puppy, you're pursuing this very hard and not really giving VoD the benefit of the doubt at all. I do see what you mean with some of your points, but I can't tell exactly how serious you are about this from your posts. So here's a question: Based on the evidence we have and that you are talking about, do you want us run VoD up to a claim right now? Or do you simply think he's the most suspicious and want to have your vote somewhere, like wk does?

[Cephrir]

I'm seeing a turnaround here... mostly the point I'd like to ask you about is why you think that the fact that you consider VoD to be a good player gives him extra leeway; if anything, I would think it would get him less. Yes, I can see the "it would be bad for him as scum" argument, but he could easily say it was an accident or that mozsuggs deserved it as well.

It's because he would know better than to quicklynch someone. Besides, look at that post. Is that the post of someone who knows they're hammering? Not really. The only possibility, if he's scum, is that he was already planning to make this argument. I find that difficult to believe because he could just as easily have not voted and not been put in the spotlight like he has been today, as mozsuggs was obviously going to be lynched eventually.

[Cephrir]

@Akonas: Well, did you want him (VoD) to lie?
And fine, they don't always do something habitual. What I'm saying is, if he did this multiple times, it'd be scummy and I'd vote for him. Doing it once is a reasonable mistake - plus, you know my timing with witticisms. Very inopportune. So, I understand VoD and that's that.

Ding ding ding, winner!

[Cephrir]

I'm not "praising". I am expressing my agreement in a slightly humorous way.

Y'know, wk, it's not like scum always agree. If VoD were hypothetically scum and we found this out later, I'd look back at this and be just as suspicious of PP and other people gunning after VoD hard (potentially bussing him) as I would be of those defending him. And it's just as suspicious to not take a stance at all in a way... it's hard to tell tbh. But anyway, a lot of the time, scum don't neccessarily defend their partners adamantly, because they know it'll look bad later. Granted, it's Wifom, but you get the point. Also, sometimes townies agree with each other.

[Cephrir]

I think VoD should claim to at least give us something to work on. Right now I feel as if we've been going over the same thing again for weeks. VoD seems most suspicious right now, so I think it's a good idea for me to ask for a claim. The resulting reactions could be what we need.

Perhaps for some reason I am not reading well enough, but all I see is defense after defense.

Everything in mafia is defendable, and WIFOM is so common that it makes little sense not to act on something just because it could go on both ways.

In this situation I believe we have to think simple and avoid over analyzing things. Because the way I see it is that the mafia is currently confusing the town by turning down one lynch proposal after another. I guess that's what happens when you lose 3 town in a row. Possibly one third of the players here could be scum. This would explain the lack of decisions.

How are the mafia "turning down one lynch proposal after another" if VoD is the only wagon we've had today? There are only 2-3 of them, y'know (probably).

And what, are we supposed to ignore what people say in their own defense? Lesse here, you were under suspicion at one point, right? Maybe we should bring it back up and disregard completely anything you or anyone else said defending you. And why the push for a claim? It seems to me that the three people voting VoD are the only ones that actually want him lynched, and as such I don't see him as in danger of a lynch, so why risk outing a power role?

Seriously, the guy has done only one thing even a little wrong, and other than that has been relatively protown IMO (though those long posts can be a lot to wade through). You really are far too guided by what seems to you to be "the general consensus". I think you're just trying to go with the flow and not be noticed.

Vote: darkdude

As for PP. I dunno, she seems townish to me. She may be pursuing one thing a bit overzealously, and it's something that's not much of a tell, but scum and town alike would be equally likely to not notice that the case on VoD is... lacking. But she definitely hasn't changed her opinion much if at all and hasn't backed off in the face of decent defense, and to a point I think it's a town tell. Maybe. Her backing off a bit in her most recent post is good. I think. For some reason she just doesn't feel like scum to me... I guess I can't really explain it. But I tried.

[Cephrir]

Ceph - I don't feel comfortable lynching VoD. As I've said before, I just feel that seeing as how my vote is my only weapon, I'd like to have it in use at all times.

Your vote is helping pressure VoD to a claim right now, and if you don't really want him lynched you might want to move it.

I don't think VoD has a good defense. He's basically saying that he made a mistake by accident and we should ignore it. To me the best way to deal with this is to push for more information.

That's not what you said. You said, "anything in mafia is defendable", etc. To me, that means the same as "defenses should be ignored", and that's ridiculous.

[Cephrir]

Ceph - I don't feel comfortable lynching VoD. As I've said before, I just feel that seeing as how my vote is my only weapon, I'd like to have it in use at all times.

Fair enough, I guess.

VoD and I think someone else- People potentially to be lynched

do

have to claim eventually, dd was just being extremely premature. 'Cause lynching cops is bad.

dd's "explanation", if it could even be called that, was decidedly lacking. Vote stays.

[Cephrir]

But from my perspective, since I know that I am pro town, I can 100% eliminate this possibility. Of course there is no conclusive proof which I can present to you, especially since you have made a case on me already which I cannot defend whether I am actually pro town or not; if I stay my opinion I'll get suspicion, if I change my opinion I'll get suspected for conforming in order to seem less suspicious.

= "I have no defense and refuse to do anything about it"

Yes I concur that from an objective point of view I do seem the most suspicious out of all players right now. But you cannot use that as a case against me; for as mentioned before I alone know that I am protown, therefore ignoring my own suspicious actions is fully justified.

"I'm the most suspicious player, but you can't use that as a case against me because I'm town"

Now that you're under pressure, you're starting to sound like mozsuggs.

[Cephrir]

It's not tripe and horrible for town. There is something to discuss, which is our reactions to it. No, maybe we don't want to lynch him right away, but we want to see how he reacts to having votes on him. What you're arguing for is essentially to ignore the fact that he did something stupid/scummy.

I think you missed QF's point. Pressuring VoD more because of the supposedly accidental hammer is useless and retarded.

Originally I was pushing VoD because of my suspicions of his actions. Then I was told to "put my vote where my mouth was", so I did that, but then got criticized for conceding so easily. Then multiple people put up good reasons as to why I shouldn't have asked VoD to claim, and that doing so makes me scummy. If I stand my point I will appear scummy, and if I change my mind I'll still be scummy.

You're sort of right, in a way. Now that we realize this, we can choose not pursue that particular argument and focus on his having done it at all. But it was a scummy action that got you in the situation, dd.

[Cephrir]

ciepher mentioning cop.

I did? (I assume that's supposed to be my name, since nobody else's starts with a C )

No as I have said earlier I am still new and only know certain aspects of the game so far, I have heard of role fishing but have not been able to find a good definition of it or how it is done/how it works so If someone could eplain this to me more fully that would be great.
I take the role related words from dd and wk to mean respectively I'm trying to say I'm cop and I'm trying to say I'm town, now I can understand wks rather blatant attempt to say I'm town (but it means mostly nothing but seems odd to use role related ideas in a post), I'm really not sure about what darkdude ment by this but I find it very odd.

It's pretty simple, really. Rolefishing is trying to find out someone's role or get hints as to it in a way that attempts to be subtle. Also, and this is one of my things that really annoy me, don't point out power role tells. Or vanilla tells. It only helps the scum, generally. Although I suppose it could, maybe, help the doctor, which is irrelevant seeing as we don't have one anymore.

[Cephrir]

I find it strange a power role holder would put a tell in their posts or game style, obviously you would not want to give scum a chance to detect this.

It's often unintentional. Certain power roles have a tendency towards certain behavior, which I'm not going to talk about farther so as not to help scum choose an NK. Suffice it to say that I can remember at least one incidence where my (true) claim was believed based on stuff like that.

Cephrir continues to rub me the wrong way, by saying that pressuring a player is useless and retarded. When people make comments like this it gives me the impression that they already know that person is town.

What I meant is that we have already gained as much information as possible from that line of questioning and pursuing it farther isn't going to do any good.

[Cephrir]

Well it has occured to me that scum can play this put town power role tells in their post if they are setting them selves up for a possible claim, I see that as more likely that a town power role putting them in

If it's true, it's generally unintentional.

[Cephrir]

Well I can see this as ok in theory in practical usage it doesn't exactly help town win, if a townie does something they know might appear scummy then the are generaly going to be questioned over it and firstly this detracts from focusing on possible real scum and second endangers a townie for a lynch. The only time I would see this of use would be if the pay out was greater than the bet.

The idea is that if a townie is doing what they should be doing (hunting scum), they don't look bad. Worrying about seeming like scum shouldn't be a townie's priority. Not getting lynched is important, but what some townie's don't factor into their thoughts is that they still win with the town if they die. Therefore, finding scum is more important than not getting lynched. That's not to say that getting yourself lynched to prove your suspiciouns were genuine is a good idea; it's not.

The thing I was interested in while being under suspcion was that I had become suspicious of my accusors. Now this I'm sure is natural if you are town and find you accusors arguments and constant pressure rather wierd behaviour or in my case I felt the attention that was being paid to me was too much and the "evidence" of my scumminess was rather light, then how do you try and hunt scum in that person without it apearing as an OMGUS kinda thing.

It happens. If it seems like one's accusors have built really bad arguments, it can be difficult not to call them scum. If other players don't agree that the arguments are bad, there's a good chance that it

is

OMGUS and you don't realize it

Yeah this happened to me and Yvonne. When you're pro town and someone's constantly calling you scum you tend to think that way....

Exactly. Case in point: mozsuggs. He calls me scum in, like, every one of his last five posts. Granted, he's an idiot, and I wasn't even as convinced as he seemed to think I was, but you get the idea. Some people just go TUNNELVISION BLAAAAGH on someone voting them and don't let up.

[Cephrir]

Yeah, she wasn't acting very doccish. Please stop talking about it. If you want to talk about power role tells, do it after the game. Your post there could definitely give a noob scum a hint as to how cops act. I suppose talking about doc tells is okay at this point: they try not to draw attention to themselves.

[Cephrir]

EBWODP: That sounded a lot angrier than it actually was.

[Cephrir]

(I know ppl can buss, but that's not the first thing I look for or worry about. I think bussing is less common than some ppl think).

Yeah, it's annoying when a scum gets lynched and everyone looks for who who bussing rather than who was avoiding the lynch. Neither is infallible.

@darkdude: But but but...you're bandwagoning again! VoD just voted zeddicus before you...Please do your own thinking. It's not exactly a scum-tell that you don't (a tiny bit of a newbie scum tell because obviously if you're agreeing with someone else, you won't look so suspicious since they believe what you believe, etc.), but it's frustrating.

He is doing it excessively, but sometimes you really do agree with someone, like, completely. If everyone strictly thought for themselves, we'd end up with everyone having one vote.

Bah, everyone seems town. I might look at some lurkers later.

[Cephrir]

@Whoever said anything to this effect: Lurking is a really lame scumtell. If you want to vote someone to make them post, okay. Lurking =/= suspicious, though.

Apparently I am still voting for darkdude.

Unvote

.

[Cephrir]

I don't really get either of your suspicions. People sometimes post and then think of something else to say-- it happens. Why is that scummy?

The QF thing is really minor if it even exists, but either way I don't get it.

[Cephrir]

What both of you are missing here, IMO, is that tone doesn't translate over the internet. I haven't actually gone back and looked for evidence of "meanness", but that's just my guess at what's going on here. I think darkdude is making a massive reach here regardless though, because he seems to think QF is scum based on her misinterpreting his tone and/or just disagreeing.

Furthermore, it is within my experience that most scum would try to appear "nice" in trivial issues like this one. This is definitely not the protown-protown advice/help such as the one given by Akonas.

You are soooome sure Akonas is town. Based on that one piece of advice he gave you, you're basically deciding he's town and giving him a free pass?

I find this ionteresting because Akonas is up pretty high on my suspect list, even if that list isn't very long. Also, I'd like to hear more from vikingfan, but what little he has posted is, to put it in his terms, "concerning".

[Cephrir]

@Cephrir: Why Akonas high on your suspects list? Actually, what is your suspects list?

I don't really remember why, but I recall a few things he's said rubbing me the wrong way. Maybe it's gut as well.

My suspects list is bordering on nonexistant... basically just Akonas now that I think about it. Next up would be darkdude who I'm not really all that suspicious of, followed by the people I don't think are scum but can't get a good read due either to lack of content or just not knowing: Talitha, vikingfan, PP and zeddicus. While I'm at it, the list would continue (now in the protown end of the spectrum) with VoD, windkirby, then QF.

[Cephrir]

She was making fun of his calling Talitha scum for triple posting.

@Cephrir: Is your whole list mostly based on gut feelings? If there are specific triggers for you, it'd probably be good to know.

I just thought about how I'd felt about them earlier. What I mean by that is that I remember a few posts of Akonas' that I read and noticed something I thought was scummy, iirc, and figured I'd go back to it later. I'm going to have to do a player-by-player analysis to really get my thoughts in here seeing as I'm not even exactly sure. My earlier LoS may change because I'm actually going to go bother to isolate peoples' posts now rather than giving a list off the top of my head. In no particular order:

zeddicus- Isolating his posts has made me realize that I've been seriously overlooking zeddicus. I think he just... faded into the background for me, somehow. He's actually pretty light on content, and has a tendency to just show up and quote a bunch of things, agree with or critisize them, then drop off the face of the earth again. It sort of allowed him to get away with little content IMO. His only real input was critisism of mozsuggs, which was the popular thing to do at the time (don't take me wrong, I'm not critisizing that wagon, he just seems to go along with others often is what I mean) Followed PP on VoD a bit today (but not with a vote), but so did some others. Definitely rising on the scum-o-meter.

windkirby- Was defensive D1. He strikes me as a very jumpy and/or excitable player, moreso than I had realized. Made weird excuses after mozsuggs was lynched, should have said that at the time of his vote Made a really big logical leap to a me-VoD-QF scumgroup today, which was weird. Went onto VoD today. Recently, good analysis of players. Not sure what to think of him at this point.

vikingfan- A bit light on posting, but there's not much wrong with what he

has

said. I like his suspicions right now.

VoD- Enjoys walls of words. Does a lot of summarizing, seems like a

very

logic-based player (as opposed to gut). I've already repeatedly posted my opinion on his hammer vote, and don't think there's a whole lot of conclusions to draw from it, though it could be a factor later. Other than that he seems pretty much fine to me, contributes a lot to the game. Since he uses almost entirely logic and facts for his votes and suspicions it seems like he can be difficult to read.

Talitha- As we all know, she didn't post much until recently. Not a lot to say, not sure of her alignment, but I'm very interested to hear what she has to say about vikingfan and myself, especially because I have zero idea what she could possibly find suspicious about vikingfan since he's said so little.

QF- Talks a lot. Analyzes things a lot, sometimes too much, but seems to me like a very good player. Makes a lot of sense almost all the time. Seems pretty genuine, both her posts/logic and my gut feelings tell me she's town. Very clearly protown to me, easily moreso than anyone else. Don't think I'll be voting for her for a long time if ever.

PP- Hard for me to read for some reason. I find I usually disagree with her, as she was suspicious of QF on D1 and went hard after VoD for the hammer. She finally did back off and look elsewhere, though, which was good. I may have to revisit her posts in a game day or two if we're both still alive.

darkdude- Most everything that can be said about him has been. He's sometime illogical and often a follower, he doesn't scumhunt as much as he should and is too concerned for his own survival, currently suspects QF and Talitha based on next to nothing.

Akonas- The post that really got me going on him was when he voted VoD and afterwards said this:

I believe that's three votes; let's not run him up too fast, now, okay?

That really rubbed me the wrong way, encouraging people to bandwagon in a sort of subtle way. It's not just aggressive, it's aggressive without being, like, openly hostile. And plus, he seems really resistant to giving VoD the benefit of the doubt, like he wanted a lynch too much to listen to reason. He then unvoted VoD because he "didn't see much merit in the wagon", even though he claimed to be suspicious of VoD. Sort of like the opposite of wk's attitude which was that his vote should always be somewhere unless he has no idea; but this way makes one a bit more transparent in voting records. Also, he has a lot less posts than I realized. I'm willing to admit that he hasn't been that bad in general, though; this is a lot more based in gut than my other two suspects. I just have a lot to say about him is all since I haven't already said any of it.

I've notied that a lot of players in this game have been willing to go after people based on one or two posts rather than considering their overarching scumminess (going after VoD for the hammer, dd's attack on QF and Talitha). I think some of us need to think more broadly on occasion.

Updated scumlist:

zeddicus
Akonas/darkdude
(gap)
Talitha
Pink Puppy/windkirby
(small gap)
vikingfan
VoD
(gap)
QF

Vote: zeddicus

[Cephrir]

I guess. But it does help youu to organize your thoughts (it certainly helped me, at least), and if everyone does it then it forces the scum to come up with some concrete fake suspicions so that later they can't just mislynch/bus whomever is convenient later on.

[Cephrir]

zeddicus- Isolating his posts has made me realize that I've been seriously overlooking zeddicus. I think he just... faded into the background for me, somehow. He's actually pretty light on content, and has a tendency to just show up and quote a bunch of things, agree with or critisize them, then drop off the face of the earth again. It sort of allowed him to get away with little content IMO. His only real input was critisism of mozsuggs, which was the popular thing to do at the time (don't take me wrong, I'm not critisizing that wagon, he just seems to go along with others often is what I mean) Followed PP on VoD a bit today (but not with a vote), but so did some others. Definitely rising on the scum-o-meter.
... [snip]...
vote zeddicus

Cephrir... did you not read my post saying that Zeddicus is absent from another game I am in (Roach Mini if you want to check)? Most of your argument falls apart if you consider that zeddicus hasn't been around to post more content and will need replacement.

I absolutely did read that, and I definitely don't agree that my argument falls apart based on that. I reviewed his posts in isolation. I didn't consider dates really, and my entire case was based on what he actually had posted.

While he was around

, he was low on content, and even on Day 1 when he was here I totally overlooked him. Look at the way he posts. All he does is quote something, type a line, move on. He wasn't playing proactively, just responding to what others said. The vote on moz is the only post where he didn't do that outside of the random voting stage.

I guess. But it does help youu to organize your thoughts (it certainly helped me, at least), and if everyone does it then it forces the scum to come up with some concrete fake suspicions so that later they can't just mislynch/bus whomever is convenient later on.

I think you are not taking into account that townies can change their mind according to how play develops and what others do, and maybe just time it takes to notice something. Usually a person's mental scum list is always changing, and anyone who tries to convict another based on a change in their scum list is pretty scummy, IMO.

I realize that town can change their mind. But if someone posts alist, then only one day later is going hard after someone they listed as protown, say, the previous gameday,

and are basing their arguments on activities that had occured before they posted that analysis

, there's some reason to be worried. Obviously I wouldn't go so far as to "convict" someone over this, but it's something to consider. You're putting more extreme words in my mouth than were actually there.

[Cephrir]

You like him for who he is suspicious of?

No, I just like his list, as in, it's close to mine.

It's aggressive, yes; I put a vote on him, didn't I? It was more along the lines of "let's put pressure on him but not lynch before letting him have a say."

Alright, I see, I took it as sarcastic. In that case, it's just aggressive and nothing more.

You're saying that I want to get him lynched so badly that I unvoted? I simply wanted to get the point across that he did something bad. QF seemed very dismissive of it. I didn't see that much merit in the wagon because I acknowledge that it could very well be a slip-up, and I don't see him as all that scummy other than that.

If you acknowledged that it could very well have been a slip-up, why did you say this?

For all my suspicions at the moment

, I will unvote. I don't see quite enough merit in this wagon at the moment.

Doesn't sound like nonsuspicion to me.

[Cephrir]

@Cephrir: Suspicion is not the same thing as wanting someone to get lynched/supporting a wagon.

But if you thought it was actually a mistake, why were you still suspicious?

Vikingfan especially seemed completely fine with lynching darkdude, and that bothers me.

Why?

[Cephrir]

Cephrir. Yvonne nailed you good in [135], hm?

No. But anyway, do you think I'm scum because of this? I can't quite tell because you phrase it like you're sure I am and then go on to say you want to vote darkdude, and you didn't say anything else about me. So... what's up ith that?

This sounds like he knew mozs was going to turn up town.

I can see what you mean here, but it sounded to me like he was speaking hypothetically. If you don't buy his explanation of the hammer, I'd think that would be a bigger strike than this.

[Cephrir]

I still don't see your arguments. I viewed his posts in isolation too to try to see it your way. I do agree that his posting style is very different that some players in this game. He did quote stuff, post a line of his feelings on it, then move on. I don't think that's bad though. Concise? Yes. Scummy? I dunno. Maybe you can explain this further if you still disagree.

But concise is not helpful if he's not really saying or contributing anything.

And the "not proactive" argument. In certain cases, I agree that somebody who acts ONLY reactively, and does not contribute original content ideas, or lead any voting, IS scummy. But I don't think that is what zeddicus did.

Well, it is what zeddicus did. He didn't really say much, he just used others' reasons, and didn't lead anything. Go ahead, find me a place where zeddicus "led voting". It doesn't exist.

The argument that someone is "reactive" and therefore must be scum, does not fly with me -- it must be combined with other factors for me to care. The whole game is reacting to what people say.

It's not that he was reactive, but he was

not proactive

-- you can be reactive

and

proactive, which is what you need to be in order to accomplish anything in this game. And if you don't think it's enough of a scumtell for you to care, good for you. I disagree. If you never really add anything to the game... it's just so easy for scum to slip under everyone's radar like that, and I feel like that's exactly what he did.

That said, I am going to back off on EmpTyger for a while. I overreacted a bit to my discovery that zeddicus wasn't contributing enough and put him higher than he should have been on my scumlist, I guess I was just excited about having found something. I also want to give him a chance to prove himself, being a replacement, and his first post is a step in the right direction. If he's acting scummy later, I'll be extra suspicious because of zeddicus' actions, but for now I'll give him a mostly clean slate. He's now below Akonas and darkdude.

Unvote

.

will go so far as to say people who use "he's overdefensive" or "he's reactive" as a argument, are probably scum. This is because it is such a gray area -- where does defending yourself become overdefensive? Where does reacting to other people's scummy actions become reactive? And it is much to easy for scum to accuse someone of this, and when they try to defend themselves, the scum can say "see? You're being reactive again! You're soo overdefensive!"

Cephrir, you have used both "overdefensive" (regarding windkirby) and "reactive" as arguments in this game. Do you still think they are viable arguments?

I have to address the two parts of this argument seperately. You keep using the word reactive, but that's not the problem. The problem was "not proactive", and there is a significant difference. And when someone responds to a case against them, that's when reactive is good. You're saying this argument is one scum would make based on things you think scum could do with said arguments but that I haven't done. Putting words in my mouth again.

Your argument actually does apply to overdefensiveness, though. I've realized in the interim that overdefensiveness is a sucky scumtell, and no, I don't think that argument holds any water anymore. You'll notice from my list I'm no longer suspicious of wk, and I haven't been for a while; that's why.

[Cephrir]

Well, I do think it’s a suspicious strike against you ipso facto, although not conclusively. What I’m more concerned about is how it didn’t get picked up by anyone else. That’s the type of accusation that early D1, with a daystart, should have been picked up by *someone*. And, temporarily assuming that you’re innocent- I just don’t see the mafia letting that go by.
I mean, we could just have a very inexperienced mafia, too. But to me, it’s one of the most hm-worthy things that’s happened. Did not want it to get lost.

Okay, that's fine. Couldn't tell what you meant is all. And I would assume the mafia didn't bother because it's a bit weak as a sole means of determining someone is scum, and besides, they knew I was telling the truth. I was surprised no one else commented, as well.

was surprised you thought this worth ignoring. See below to darkdude.

Well, I

did

say "for the time being". I totally forgot about it later though because I'd dismissed it entirely in my mind, and I suppose it is another point against darkdude, now that he's been acting like he has been. Wasn't really suspicious of him at the time.

@Cephrir: I think what Akonas is saying about the hammer was that he didn't want to just dismiss it when there could be some validity to its scumminess.

Meh. I'm sick of arguing about that hammer. Like I said, if he's acting suspicious later then it'll be a factor for me, but not until then.

And as a final question: does anyone know how to quote multiple posts in a single reply?

Words[/quote ] ?

[Cephrir]

Well, let’s not go so far as to dismiss it as “weak”. It wasn’t.

I don't agree, but I suppose I'm biased.

[Cephrir]

Mod: You have me voting for EmpTyger and Not Voting at the same time.oops - fixed.

[Cephrir]

PP- why are you still voting for me?

[Cephrir]

I still think you're scum...

Okay.... why?

That quote you took from me on D2 wasn't criticizing you for being aggressive. I wasn't being sarcastic, I actually couldn't tell how aggressive you were trying to be and wanted to know.

I toned it down a bit on D2 because, well, D1 is D1. On D1, you sometimes need to be aggressive to get reactions out of people and/or to get things to actually happen. I also am not as sure about my suspects right now as I was about moz.

[Cephrir]

was more suspicious of windkirby than Cephrir, but while I agreed with a lot of Cephrir's reasoning, it seemed like he always just wanted to move on.

There have been quite a few things brought up that I think are weak tells; I also tend to want to decide my suspicions by tyaking all of someone's posts into account rather than lynching them based on one thing. That's probably why.

Taking someone's life should always be serious business. But seriously, though, we don't want to lynch a townie.

I don't follow. Do you know he's a townie? More seriously, why were you suspicious of vikingfan for being suspicious of dd, but not anyone else who is/was suspicious of him?

Right, the game is all based on what other people have said and reacting to it. But there's a difference between waiting for someone to accuse you or just riding whatever wagon's going at the moment (not looking for scum) and actively reading, rereading, interpreting (yes, I know this is quite idealistic and just about nobody always lives up to it).

/agree

I find it interesting that people are saying they were really sure that they found mozsuggs scum. I didn't see him as all that overtly scummy; more overtly moronic. But when people do that, more often than not they are town. The problem is that they then proceed to clog up the work and cause problems for town.

I don't agree. Stupidity =/= town. Would you let idiot scum ride by because they're idiots? Didn't think so. moz was obviously either awful scum or even worse town at the point we went after him, and I'm pretty sure most of us thought the scum option was more likely.

[Cephrir]

No, we're not masons. We just agree a lot for some reason.

Miller vig claim? Huh. That's.... bizarre. Claiming was probably the right thing to do though. And I'd say you should have kept the vig part to yourself, but... if you only said that you were a miller and tried to claim that later, nobody would believe you.

Oh wait, hold on a second. Miller vig, and you only need to survive to win? Way to claim SK... lol.

Vote: EmpTyger

[Cephrir]

After what happened the first time, haven't you learned not to joke-claim? I've been thinking you were a Jester for the last few hours... Heh.

[Cephrir]

QF/Cephrir:
I’m serious- the interaction between you 2 really makes me nervous. I’m rereading, looking for something to quantify it in some way.

I guess I can see how you might think this. Seriously though, we're not masons. We're just both always right. <.<

[Cephrir]

I'm not sure why so many people are suddenly expressing suspicion of me for no apparent reason. Anyone?

[Cephrir]

Even though I have disagreed with you at times (like when I was voting you) throughout this game QF, I feel your behavior has been pretty much the same. Cephrir was much more aggressive D1, had a big part in the mozsuggs lynch, and now is playing much "safer."

I toned it down a bit on D2 because, well, D1 is D1. On D1, you sometimes need to be aggressive to get reactions out of people and/or to get things to actually happen. I also am not as sure about my suspects right now as I was about moz.

Is that not good enough for you or did you not see it?

I keep thinking about the post where he said "I don't know who to suspect now, everyone looks town." That kind of post always sets off my scumdar. When people "don't know what to do!!!!!1111" For a variety of reasons, I don't like this argument.
1)None of us really know what to do... we're just pushing people to try to figure it out. So... why even say this? It's like you're trying to act town wihtout helping.

Not like that! Sheesh. Of course none of us know for sure, unless we're cops with a guilty; I obviously meant that I didn't know who to vote for. You'll notice that 2 pages later, I came up with a scumlist and voted based on it. If I was acting like I didn't know who to vote for for a substantial amount of time, I could understand your suspicion. But that wasn't the case. Also, you refer to my not knowing what to do as an "argument"; it wasn't. I just needed to reread, and I did, problem solved.

2)This argument is convenient for scum because: It's hard to manufacture reasoning as scum! Scum know they're lying and thats hard for most people. Scum are afraid to be caught, and they know the more info they give, the more chance of them contradicting htemselves because its all lies anyway.

I made an LoS two pages later. I wasn't sure for a little bit, reread the thread and then voted. You're making this into something it's not at all.

3)Scum want to pass through without making themselves a huge prescence in the town. The don't want to be blamed too much when town mislynches.

Right! That's why I've been one of the more posty players in this game! That's why I was aggressive on D1! Because I didn't want to get noticed! Wait, that doesn't make sense.

This is getting obnoxious. When I responded to your case the second time (my 491) you ignored it and kept saying you thought I was scum. Stop twisting my words and making up scummy things I've done.

[Cephrir]

But idiocy isn't really a scumtell. It's more likely to have idiot town than idiot scum, simply because there's more town than scum.

Meh. That wasn't the #1 reason for his lynching, although his lack of defense due to stupidity was a factor.

No, I don't know he's a townie; I'm suspicious of him, but I'm not sure.

Yeah, but why were you suspicious of vikingfan for being suspicious of dd?

[Cephrir]

Way to ignore the rest of my post, which was also a response to you. And you absolutely did ignore my case. Pretending something isn't there and ignoring it ARE THE SAME FUCKING THING. Saying "I don't buy your excuses" is complete crap. That's just an excuse to be suspicious of me regardless of any defense I post; you're basically saying "here's why I think you're scum, and I will continue to think you are scum for these reasons even if you explain yourself reasonably". You can't still be suspicious of me for saying I didn't know who I was suspicious of, because I've since explained that I just needed to reread; and I did so, and then had suspicions. Continuing to hold that against me is utter bullshit.

Unvote, Vote Pink Puppy

[Cephrir]

It's not an excuse, it's the truth. If you're going to make a case against me, you can't expect to completely ignore my response. If someone is accusing you, and you defend against their accusations, do you think it is reasonable to go on voting them with no more reason than "I don't buy your defense"? If ou still suspect me, give me some freaking reasons. I explained why my "scummy behavior" is not scummy. Example: You claimed that I was suspicious for not being suspicious of anyone for a short while, because "scum don't want to get caught in a lie". This theory makes no sense considering that I reread and came up with suspects 5 posts later. Therefore, why is it still suspicious?

Seriously, it's sooooo obvious that you've realized I'm right and you can't beat my defense, so you've decided to continue to claim I'm scum with no reasons.

[Cephrir]

[qote="Emp"](Cephrir’s 3-mafia slip > your early D1 freakout.)[/quote]
I can't believe you are using that as a scumtell. I have never even seen a 12 player mini normal that didn't have 3 mafia.

[Cephrir]

Because you still said it. And about your whole LoS. I don't think that's such a pro-town thing to do when you also say that mafia wouldn't do it because it causes them to get caught later. Maybe if someone else had brought it up. But the fact that yo usaid it makes it look to me like that is why you did it -- to look pro-town.

No, that's not my point. My point is, you say I'm suspicious for not having suspicions, but I did. That was only for, like, one post that I didn't. Is saying "I need to reread" scummy? 'Cause that's what I meant.

Why on Earth would I keep voting you if I realize you're right?? When I think you are right, I will stop suspecting you. And you are totally FULL OF IT, when you say I keep suspecting you with no reasons. I am the only one who keeps posting reasons.

If you don't think I'm right, TELL ME WHY YOU ARE PRETENDING TO THINK I AM WRONG. And you may not be "suspecting" me with no reasons, but you are as far as I can tell, because I've defended against all of the ones you've posted and you haven't followed up on that.

You can disagree with me... that is not scummy. But to say I have no reasons -- that is scummy.

Would you prefer the phrasing "your reasons are no longer valid"?

[Cephrir]

Please do. My 491, 520 and 553 are the ones you've ignored or only quoted very small parts of.

[Cephrir]

Cephrir... I will do what you ask, but it is tedious and stupid. And I resent you saying I ignored all your posts. Just because I did not quote every part of it or comment on your every sentence does not mean I "ignored it."

You hardly quoted any of it at all; only the parts you couuld use to make me look bad. And you may as well have ignored them because you just kept going without acknowledging them at all.

(Example of one time zeddicus was proactive)

Okay, that's one. I was talking about on the whole.

I think there is a problem with this whole exchange. I don't think zeddicus was "not proactive" and I think for you to phrase it that way makes it impossible for him to defend himself without you being like "that's not proactive. you're just responding to what I said." That's what I find scummy, that you are setting him up for failure based on something I don't even think he did.

But it's not like that. Because i wouldn't do that. It's obviously wrong and silly. I meant his general playstyle, because obviously you have to react to other peoples' posts (*cough*). If I did make that argument later, then you would have reason to be suspicious, but I didn't. You're basing this on a hypothetical argument that I could have made, but that doesn't matter, because I didn't. You could roleclaim scum right now, but that doesn't matter, because you won't; and I'm not about to be suspicious for that because you didn't do it.

still think you're scum for all the reasons I have written. You can sort posts by Pink Puppy for the answer.

Once again, you're basically saying that you would simply disregard anything I said in my defense. Is this the case? I could just as easily do the same thing toi you that you're doing to me right now; I could make a case on you and ignore everything you say in your defense. Would you like that?

I disagree that you have to be agressive on D1 and not on other days.

It's not that you

have

to; I just thought it might be a good idea. That's how I got through Day 1; afterwards I went back to how I play normally.

[Cephrir]

Haven't I already answered this?? I think people expressing the feeling that they "don't know what to do" is scummy. Sorry if you meant it otherwise, but that's the way it sounds to me. I have just seen scum do it before.

Town can not know, too.

Why does the amount of time between your scummy post and your next post make any difference? Because you tried to correct yourself I should forget?
No; you argued that it's convenient for scum to not have suspicions, because they don't want to manufacture reasoning, and I was pointing out that I did, so the "scum don't want to manufacture suspicions" thing doesn't apply.

You were agressive D1 but not today, and the quote and behavior I am commentin on is from today. So don't make it like I am referring to D1. I am not.

The way you said "scum want to X" implied to me that you meant in general. If you think my being less aggressive today is a scumtell, fine, you're entitled to that opinion. Your whole post I responded to was about general scum mannerisms, and I was pointing out that my D1 play was no consistant with that.

What is obnoxious is that you claim I have no reasons if you disagree with mine, and say I "ignore" your posts if I don't quote and respond to every sentence that you write.

It's not because I disagree with your reasons, it's because after I respond in a way that (to my mind, at least) is a fine defense, you don't back them up again and instead go on claiming I'm scum. You don't have to respond to everything I write, but when you attack me, and I defend myself, I definitely do expect you to either have something else to say on the matter or back off.

[Cephrir]

Akonas has been consistently highly in the top 2 spots in your list today, yet you’ve done almost nothing against him. You accuse him in [271] of quietly voting mozs and then reversing himself, but in the same post you quickly add that you’re now “less suspicious of those voting for VoD”. In [440] you say that Akonas is high on your suspect list, but when pressed, in [449], you can’t really give any reasons. And yet despite Akonas being the only one on your suspect list at the time, you’re not voting him- in fact, you’ve never voted him.

Just because he was the highest on my suspect list means I have to vote him? I wasn't necessarily certain enough to vote, y'know.

You finally do explain with your list [461], but then you vote *zeddicus*. And after that vote is invalidated and retracted when he was replaced, and despite a couple others turning their attention to Akonas, you barely follow up, and quickly drop that line.

I agree with PP. This just doesn’t gibe with the rest of your play. I think I’m ready for a Vote: Cephrir.

After a reread, I decided that pursuing zeddicus was a better idea, yes. Akonas is still second on my list, along with darkdude, which has been the case ever since. I also didn't vote because I wasn't sure which of the two was scummier, but dd's play has gotten ever-so-slightly better since then. Since we've gotten most everything we can out of darkdude, anyway, I would be pressuring Akonas at the moment, but I have more pressing issues to deal with (i.e. Pink Puppy being scum).

[Cephrir]

My point is that, for someone you’re allegedly so suspicious of, you haven’t shown the same kind of aggressive play towards Akonas which you’ve had towards most others. If you legitimately weren’t certain, then why didn’t you aggressively follow up? Like you’ve done with windkirby, mozs, zeddicus, darkdude, and PP? Instead, you’ve found reason after reason to avoid aggressively pressuring someone *despite* the fact that you’ve consistently stated you’re suspicious of him.
Not voting is only a small part of it. Don’t pretend it’s the only part.

I haven't YET, actually. That doesn't mean I'm not still planning on it after this silly mess is sorted out.

Cephrir, I always thought your vote on zeddicus was weak and unfounded, not to mention opportunistic since you voted him when he clearly needed to be replaced. Not that you can't ever vote a player you feel is scummy who needs replacement... but after zeddicus did get replaced, you unvoted his replacement. What is the point of voting someone who needs replacement if you're just going to back off?

My vote on him and the replacement were not correlated. When I isolated everyone's posts, as I'm fairly certain I've already explained, I had a "holy crap how did I miss that?" reaction and overreacted. I back off Emp because I'm giving Emp a chance to prove himself, and I still think zeddicus' actions were suspicious. I think it's a good policy to lay off on replacements for a bit while they get up to speed, and he's still in the upper ranges of my scumlist. Just because I'm dealing with obvious scum for a little while doesn't mean my suspicions on Emp, dd and Akonas have evaporated.

And you ADMIT that you ovverreacted to zeddicus and made a mistake. I am the one who pointed this out to you. You first say that you are right and I am wrong, and then say you overreacted about zeddicus. I don't see how both these things can be true.

It looks more to me that you realized your vote was weak, couldn't defend it to me, and backed off to make it go away.

Or, I realized my vote was weak, and backed off because I realized this; not being able to defend it to you has nothing to do with it seeing I don't care what you think at this point. You're looking actions that could easily be made by a protown player and finding reasons why scum could do the same thing. If, by some stretch of the imagination, you are town, you are viewing this thread and my posts through a "Cephrir is scum" lens. Kindly remove it and try to see how I might say the same things I am saying as town.

[Cephrir]

This is a good point about his suspicions on Akonas without ever really making a case.

I started one in 461, I just haven't continued with it yet.

posts 42 & 53 where he seems to be trying to shut down scum-hunting.

That's a bit of a stretch.

VoD's most recent post is right.

[Cephrir]

When you first voted Zeddicus, I asked you if you had seen my post stating zeddicus was also absent from another of my games and needed replacement. You said you had seen my post and didn't care. Scummy play is scummy play, etc. If that is the way you play, I would not expect you to unvote the player who replaces in, because afterall they have the same allignment.

Well, I didn't do what you expected, then. Deal with it. It sucks replacing in with votes on you and I didn't want to make him do that.

It's true that in a way I am looking at your posts from the POV that you are scum, but that's only because I was suspicious of you after what I took to be an opportunistic vote on zeddicus. After that, yes, I will question everything you do that I find even a little bit scummy. You should not be worried about it if I am wrong. If your explanations are so compelling, nobody will agree with me. A majority of players need to think you're scum to be lynched, not just me.

Oh, I fully realize that. I'm just waiting for everyone else to chime in and tell you you're wrong.

I also find it funny that you were never suspicious of me until I started questioning your actions. Your vote on me is basically glorified OMGUS.

I realized that it sort of was, and I tried to avoid voting for you earlier because of that. I almost voted for you in 553 but tried to hold off. Your case on me was just so weak that I couldn't take it anymore eventually.

You asked why people are suspicious of you, and I am the only one who told you in great detail, as I find you and DD most suspicious. You are really freaking out over the person who is dealing with you most fairly and directly.

Oh, I know. I'd love it if Talitha would explain her suspicion on me, and I believe there was someone else as well. I wouldn't be "freaking out" if your points made sense.

[Cephrir]

I wasn't thinking about the fact that he needed replacement.

[Cephrir]

I guess. It still wasn't a factor in my thought process. It's not like I thought, "Oh, this guy's going to get replaced soon so I'm going to unvote him" at the time.

[Cephrir]

If nobody else votes PP soon, I would vote for Akonas or darkdude as well.

[Cephrir]

Your suspicions haven't changed in 7 pages...?

[Cephrir]

and then states that he isn't sure how to proceed

...for all of two seconds. I have no idea why everyone is making a huge thing out of this; dd had no suspects, like, forever, but I'm the one getting attacked for some reason.

dd's latest post almost is enough to make me prefer him to Akonas, but not quite. People talking about how they will vote at deadline, myself included- there's no deadline yet, you know. We

can

still do other things. It seems that either darkdude or I will end up being the lynch if there is a deadline soon, seeing as just about everyone has stated they would be willing to go with him and several want to kill me, but I'm really not satisfied with a darkdude lynch and I don't plan on selfvoting. That said, PP is obviously going nowhere; I have no idea why. Nonetheless, I should place my vote somewhere useful. I wish I could figure out what it is that seems off to me about Akonas. His vikingfan suspicions seem a little fake, but maybe that's just me disagreeing, since I see at least three better targets. And there are a few people just sort of hanging out in the background, saying nothing controversial, that bother me... hmmmmm. Well, my top suspect isn't going to get lynched today, and I don't think there's much against said background people, they're just quiet. Between the two, I just have to

Unvote, Vote Akonas

. My gut is often wrong, but this is one of the strongest feelings I've had in a long time.

Well, that was rather stream-of-consciousness. I love doing that.

[Cephrir]

What? You just said I was suspicious for not changing my opinion on QF for 7 pages. Now I'm lower on your scumdar?

No, higher. Prefer as in prefer to vote.

By the way I still suspect QF because of the previously mentioned things. Cephrir doesn't seem very suspicious to me

...yet

. QF seems to have sort of decreased her activity when suspicions were cast on Cephrir. But it could be that I'm only noticing this due to my previous suspicions; activity overall was low enough for the mod to issue a warning for deadline.

Mmmmm.... excuse to change your opinion later... no, I'm not actually using that as a tell, it's just odd. Your QF thing was really just one little thing, I'm surprised you aren't more moved by

something

, be it Akonas, PP, me, vikingfan, zeddicus... basically anyone that a case has been made against since page 18.

[Cephrir]

Cephrir:

and then states that he isn't sure how to proceed

...for all of two seconds. I have no idea why everyone is making a huge thing out of this; dd had no suspects, like, forever, but I'm the one getting attacked for some reason.
<snip>

Who is attacking you who isn’t also attacking darkdude?

(As far as your “feeling” about Akonas, it’s falling squarely in my “too little too late” box.)

Well, PP has sure been all over me for it, much moreso. And there's probably someone.

I really, really don't care what box of yours it falls in; I'm not voting to please you, you can think whatever you want but I am going to try to get a scum lynched today.

[Cephrir]

Why not? That seems like kind of an important thing.

What I mean is, when I voted, it wasn't with the intent of unvoting soon.

It could be worth looking at; often gut feelings are useful (see my sig for the purpose of talking). See if you can find something to back it up, though. Or if you can't find anything, maybe put it to rest.

Saying this when the context is yourself and sounding all helpful-ish is weird.

[Cephrir]

Guess again. PP is *voting* darkdude. Do you have any other empty accusations to toss out?

Oh, give m a freaking break. She's been attacking me ovr it madly, and she might as well be voting me as she is clearly more sspicious of me than dd.

Isn't that what she's doing? I dunno, just saying.

She has been since I said that, yeah...

@PinkPuppy and Cephrir: Perhaps Cephrir/you (as the case may be) thought zeddicus would have a chance to respond before the replacement and the vote would put pressure? That's only thing that could really make sense.

Sort of. It was definitely written with the intent that zeddicus respond to it, not a replacement; like I said, I just wasn't thinking about it. When you're attacking someone, you don't think that they might be replaced soon. You just don't. If it had occured to me, I'm sure I would have said the same stuff anyway, only with an addendum and without a vote.

[Cephrir]

My point about Cephrir being aggressive D1 and then not on D2... yes, I do see a change in playstyle like that as scummy. I don't understand the reason for it. I THINK its because scum don't want too much pressure on them for the whole game -- eventually they'll get lynched for it. That may be just my opinion. Cephrir says he's aggressive D1 to get reactions, but not after. Actually, that would be an interesting thing to meta. I think that is a good idea. If I read games where he is aggressive D1 and not afterwards, then I would concede that he just plays that way, and it's not scummy. I will check on that.

That's probably not going to help. I didn't say it was something I usually do; you'll find that I am usually passive on D1 and for the whole game, but (I think) my play has been improving lately. In Mafia 69 (noXkill) I was aggressive D2 and D3 (I think), so if you want to see me playing aggressively that might help. But it's not a usual tactic of mine.

I am clearly having to defend myself multiple times for every little thing I say about you, that is why I have to keep posting about you. You are perpetuating this cycle.

One of the reasons I am not voting you is because I do realize we have very different styles, and some of it may be lost in translation.

So give me a freaking break.

That's an exaggeration. Back-and-forth is perfectly normal, and you can't expect to say things about me, have me defend myself, and then all but pretend I didn't. I find it frustrating when, after I defend myself, you continue to think I'm scum even though I have (as far as I can tell) adequately responded to the points hyou've made.

[Cephrir]

Mod- I am voting for Akonas.

Sorry That's twice with you!

[Cephrir]

I don’t have anything I’m close to certain about

darkdude- honestly, I’m skeptical of him being with Cephrir/Akonas, which is the primary reason I’m hesitating against him right now.

If you're not certain about anything, why would you not be suspicious of dd because you don't think he's scum with me? Basing arguments on pairings when no scum are dead is not helpful.

You're also wrong, but I may as well give up on convincing you on that, apparently, since you and PP don't seem to feel like listening to reason.

[Cephrir]

I think you're stuck on that because it was your idea, if you're town. There are so many better cases out there. Honestly, I'd think better of your alignment if you voted for me right now, because at least there is a case, even if it's awful. And there's also Akonas, vikingfan, PP and zeddicus whom cases have been made on. You're voting QF because of 1 contradictory comment, and because she might be scum with Talitha (basing anything on partnerships while both are still alive is useless), based on said 1 comment. It's okay to agree with someone, you know.

Starting to think he may be trying to look good by sticking to his guns, but it'll take a lot to make me vote darkdude today.

[Cephrir]

Why would I go for a case which is worse in my eyes than the one I already have?

I'd think you'd be able to find one you agree with, since several of them make sense.

Contradiction again? Are you saying you WILL or WILL NOT vote for me?

I'd prefer not to, but you get worse with every post.

[Cephrir]

So if you want to vote for me why do you say that "it will take a lot" for you to do so?

What part of "not" are you not understanding here?

Outline your case against QF from beginning to end, please. As far as I see, you haven't done it yet.

He made a "case" on page 18; I haven't seen anything more to it than that, and it's pretty lame. dd, is there anything else?

[Cephrir]

You might understand me better if you don’t take my phrases out of context.

darkdude- honestly, I’m skeptical of him being with Cephrir/Akonas, which is the primary reason I’m hesitating against him right now.

"Primary reason" indicates to me that you're putting a lot of stock in that you don't think he's scum with me or Akonas, meaning that you've already assumed one of us is scum (and I do believe you're right, but that's not the point), and thus are basing your (non)suspicion of dd on who he might be paired with. I can understand that VoD asked you about it, but you're putting more stock in it and seem to be leaving your hypothetical scenario.

I’m not voting based on pairings- you’re my top suspect independently. I wouldn’t vote darkdude under the assumption that you are guilty and Akonas innocent any more than I would vote Akonas under the assumption that you are guilty and darkdude innocent.

Good. It's pretty useless.

[Cephrir]

So, you're voting me because you think dd might be a cop, even though he probably would have claimed by now if he was, not to mention that I didn't know that holding onto weak suspicions for 8 pages was a coptell(and if it is, that would imply he has a guilty, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't, as he stopped talking about QF for quite a while), and you're suspicious of QF because of something she did on page two. That about sums it up, yes?

[Cephrir]

This is interesting. QF's post was very fence-sitty (that's an adjective, deal with it), and I find myself (to my dismay) agreeing with PP's initial analysis of it. A player analysis giving no real opinions at this point is useless and "muddies the waters", so to speak. QF's previous behavior, I think, is protown enough to outweigh this; and I'm not sure this is even a tell.

I'd think a scum would fake something on someone, at least, and want to vote and influence the lynch in this high-pressure situation (unless all prospective lynches were town, I guess, but even then scum would still care or try to look like they did). Call it Wifom if you want; I just don't think a mafiate would fail to notice that their list of everyone gave no real opinions. Still pretty certain QF is town, maybe it's just because I tend to judge based on play as a whole and rarely vote based on a single post.

I would also like wk to answer Emp's question; that vote was a bit weird.

[Cephrir]

You're right, if someone turning up town would be beneficial, we should let them keep cruising along, because obviously the point isn't to lynch scum

[Cephrir]

EBWODP:

wouldn't

be beneficial.

[Cephrir]

Doesn't that argument fall flat on its face if Talitha isn't scum?

Also, No Lynch = fail.

[Cephrir]

I could go over Akonas' posts between my case and now, but I can see that that wagon isn't going to happen today. If both of us are still alive tomorrow, I'll worry about it then. Between dd and QF I would obviously prefer to lynch darkdude, who has been a suspect of mine all day if not quite a voteworthy one, to someone I find protown. Besides, if we don't lynch darkdude today then we'll probably do it tomorrow and I doubt he'll magically start playing better. I'd want to lynch him even if he did, anyway.

I did say it would take a lot to make me vote dd today, but leaving my vote on Akonas isn't doing the town any good, we need to pressure someone to a claim and quickly. And his posts have been even worse, I think, since he became the major wagon.

Unvote, Vote darkdude

, if only to help ensure that we get a claim from him with a reasonable amount of time left in the Day.

[Cephrir]

We can do it later though. All No Lynch does now is remove the opinion of one protown player from the discussion. And then we still have pretty much the same suspects.

I'll post that case either tonight or soon, depends on whether I have time and whether I feel like it.

[Cephrir]

Now...in terms of your list against me: I've answered your questions! I've replied. And then you insist on the same things

Now you know how I feel!

On the off chance I should die overnight, please make sure that Cephrir is tomorrow held responsible for, among everything else, his audacious stalling tactic today.

I assume you mean my lack of Akonas case. I planned to do that yesterday as I had the day off, but I've been sick for the past few days and have been putting most of the effort I care to give into my one really active game. I'll make sure it gets done before deadline no matter what.

[Cephrir]

Well, I honestly don't find much Akonas has said since my analysis of him, save for a few wording issues (mostly from him referring to darkdude as a townie, like, three times). His case on vikingfan was mediocre and his posts just seem a little forced. I also have some lingering doubts about some of what I said about him before. So basically, I still get the gut feeling about him but there's nothing concrete. I'd say he's still third on my scumlist, but I should probably isolate everyone's posts from the last time I did it until now. I'll do it over Night since I don't seem likely to be NKed.

[Cephrir]

EBWODP: First clause should end with "since my analysis of him

suspicious

[Cephrir]

Cephrir:
You’ve often said you find Akonas suspicious. But you' never show any inclination on following up- I shouldn’t have to force someone to present a case on someone they find suspicious! Now, you’ve [finally] said that you don’t know why you find him suspicious- but the thing is, you never have wanted to find out why. You aren’t aggressive against him in the way you have been towards others. It just feels insincere from the top to bottom.

Since I made my first case on him, I've been assuming he still would seem like scum. Of course I wanted to find out why earlier, when I made said post. Besides, gut is a perfectly legitimate reason to suspect someone. Actually, when you're not me, it can be a very good reason. My feelings have to be right eventually though.

[Cephrir]

Oh, thank goodness, I thought you guys hadn't figured out it was PP. I figured PP had killed me when I died because I didn't think anyone else would have killed me, although at the time I would have guessed Vig. Should have known nobody could make such bad arguments and still be town =P

I was planning to claim Cop D3 with one investigation being an innocent on QF; hence the buddying. I knew I wouldn't likely survive the game, but it still sucked dying to an SK I hadn't known existed =/

[Cephrir]

No, it was Jenter.

[Cephrir]

We killed Yvonne as well, so we didn't know you existed.

[Cephrir]

Yeah, at the time I was thinking that, I didn't yet know there was a second doctor. So I guess it didn't really matter anyways. By the by, the frustration with PP was real, but Emp terrified me. You had me sooome caught, I'm just surprised nobody really listened to you. As to the slip-up; I didn't see it get pointed out and go 'oh crap, I'm dead'; I'm not really sure how much of a slipup it was. The thing about confusing two games was BS though.