Okay. I'm generally going to address things I find interesting or statements/questions directed toward me.
Post 108 (CKD):
BackinBlack (just going to call you Black), why is your vote still on JS?
It was a random vote that I never really took the time to unvote. There's no particular reason behind it still being there. I'll
Unvote,
even though I really don't think it's a big deal.
Post 111 (BaB):
I concur with CKD's finding of BaB's questioning of Amor's time spent in the forum odd, and I'm also curious about why not unvoting a random vote is a scummy action(inaction?).
Post 116 (BaB):
BaB sort of seems to be attempting to downplay his involvement/deflect attention in this post, while at the same time complimenting CKD's summary and commenting on a case against Occult that I'm not really seeing.
Post 117 (RI):
In my mind Occult and BaB are connected relativly strongly, and I can't see both of them being scum. I feel a relative connection to and from Occult, I also see Occult conveying a small connection to Boggzie (Aka CKD) These I think are all relativly strong connections.
I agree with a lot of this, but I wouldn't count out a BaB/Occult scumpair because of a strong connection alone.
Post 120 (BaB):
My "possible clue" is destroyed. I saw RI make a post ( i guess this is called meta-ing?) that implied he had played mafia online again. I wanted to trap him in that lie, but he answered honestly. This gives me very pro-town feelings towards RI. I feel that his recent post is something I needed to see from him.
I know Lynch All Liars is a common philosophy, but do you really think whether he is lying about playing before would cause him to change from pro-town to scum? It just seems sort of irrelevant to me.
Another instance of BaB attempting to deflect attention, and this time, seems to want to avoid being connected with others.
Post 122 (Amor):
States that the "pattern in his posting is a result of unwillingness to falsely accuse someone. I can buy that, as his posts do come off with that sort of feel IMO.
Post 125 (Amor):
Duly noting Boggzie's use of his IC status.
Comes out guns firing at BaB. Many valid points here, IMO. Parts that stand out to me are BaB's seeming effort to look town and use of the newbie card, as well as some flip-flopping. Your analysis (about trying to throw a case together to quicklynch Occult) may be oversimplifying things a touch, however. The BaB-RI exchange is slightly strange.
This post is rather out of nowhere, and it's an awfully large jump from being unwilling to falsely accuse someone to this post. Could it possibly be prompted by your perception of BaB trying to get RI to push a case on you? It IS backed with solid points though.
Post 126 (BaB):
BaB defends himself. Newbie card is played.
Despite your first two posts being your first ever, they're still part of the game and need to be analyzed. We can't just disregard them.
BaB seems to concur with my thinking that Amor's post is a rather large change from his previous playstyle.
Post 127 (BaB):
More defense. Denies using newbieness as an excuse, while I feel that you really have been bringing it up quite a bit to defend yourself. See: later in the post. Generally refutes Amor's points pretty solidly.
Your one reason that you attacked Occult is essentially this:
Also, to clarify, this is what I did:
1) I saw that Occult was a little scummy
2) I wanted to start with action,
3) I random voted Occult
4) Someone ( i forget who) asked me to defend my choice. I didn't really have reasons, but I wanted to start with action, so I pick apart his posts for a very bias and week post.
5) He shows me (and I realize) how terrible my post was,
6) I back off because I realize I don't have enough evidence.
Correct?
Post 128 (BaB): Comments on WLC kind of out of nowhere. I'm not really a fan of metaing to determine alignment, but the analysis has merit.
Post 129 (Occult): Sort of bandwagons BaB with Amor for being contradictory.
Post 130 (BaB): Seems almost apologetic.
Post 132 (BaB):
I was actually delighted to have been mentioned so many times.
Your earlier posts didn't really come off that way.
When RI caught up on that, Amor realized that he had to actually attack someone to not look like scum. So he does just this on post 125.
I think it's far too coincidental that Amor wrote an extremely direct attack against me, right after we suspected him of not being direct enough.
I don't really think that he needed to attack someone to avoid being cast as scum. Which is why his post IS kind of strange. Seems like a major overreaction to what was kind of a side comment by RI.
Post 140 (Amor):
More attacks on BaB.
Admits that 125 was a response to RI's comment. I don't really think that RI was insinuating that you aren't helping the town.
In my opinion, there's nothing really wrong with careful posts.
Post 141 (JS):
Defends himself. Later cleared up by Amor in 144.
Post 145 (BaB): Backs off Amor. Not entirely sure on what to make of this.
Post 147(cerebus):
BackInBlack: Background noise. Makes only one post longer than 3 or 4 sentences, and that was awhile ago. I would like to hear more from him.
Fair enough. Your points on Boggzie are not without merit, either. I think this is a generally solid summarization of everyone up to that point.
Post 149 (BaB): "I'm not inconsistent." A bit more playing of the newbie card as well.
Post 150 (RI): Believes that CKD was reaching on BaB's desire to keep involvement low. To me it seems more like he doesn't want people to think he's overly involved than purposely keeping involvement low.
Post 152 (WLC): I don't really feel that Boggzie was trying to "step out of the heat" as much as simply overreacting.
Amor's remark could be a little constructed, as was BaB's. I always see posts like these as strange, but not necessarily scumtells.
"For some reason I think this Amor/BaB interaction is a bit of a charade."
Very possible.
In all posts after BaB comes across at some moment eager, at some moments experienced, at some moment playing the newbie card, if that doesn't work playing the stupidity card. It still doesn't really sit well with me.
I agree with this.
Post 154 (BaB): Restates essentially everything he's been saying thus far except with new words to replace "i was new." Kind of a pointless post, IMO.
Post 158 (BaB): Definitely flipflops on Amor here, though he already began that in an earlier post. I disagree with CKD being a flagrant liar.
This post was going to be a long post against Backinblack, but he might be replaced, so I decided I didn't want to bother until I knew he was coming back.
I'm here. Let's hear it.
Post 159 (BaB): Do you think it's a bad thing if people don't post every time they browse the forum?
Lots of summary, etc, then:
Post 170 (BaB):
Three reasons for my vote against bib
1) I actually have quite a case against him; however, none of the case is typed out (it's all mental notes), and there is a great chance that Bib will be replaced.
2) I also have zero tolerance for the game bib is playing. He has been ridiculously inactive, and mafia or not, he is not helping this game.
3) I want to get his attention. If he is indeed lurking, this is the way to do it. But in case he wasn't lurking, I make sure I added a prod as well.
yes my vote was a little quick, but it's the only way I can get his attention. My vote isn't to lynch him, it's to get his attention. If someone else votes for him I'll take my vote off.
Very sorry for my play not living up to your standards, but your votes aren't really going to get my attention if I don't have time to check the thread or post.
CKD: You are the scummiest person in this game right now. Not only do you contradict yourself, but you refused to answer my question. I've picked up major scum waves from you througout this game.
scumminess doesn't inherently mean mafia.
Evidence to come later (I think two days. busy tomorrow), I got to go to sleep.
In the mean time, FOS CKD
Huh? Where does he contradict himself? If a scummy player isn't more likely to be mafia, then what exactly DOES being scummy mean?
And that's my semi-post-by-post summary. If something needs elaboration or I need to address something else, feel free to ask.
As for player by player:
CKD/Boggzie: Boggzie kind of overreacted but I don't think he was really scummy or suspicious like everyone said he was. CKD has made some good analysis IMO.
Occult: I've never really thought the deadline suggestion was scummy, and really hasn't done much since then that makes me think he's particularly scummy either.
Amor: Early in the game accused for being indecisive or making posts that didn't progress the game, I don't really think that was scummy. His quick post style change after being questioned by RI is a little suspicious in my book.
Cerebus: Most of his posts have been on the topic of JS' "contradiction," which did require some explanation. Don't have a great read on him yet.
RI: I like his organization in particular, and generally I think he's played a pro-town, solid game. Generally elaborates his points well.
WLC: I agree with RI's earlier assertion that he is kind of "outside the web." I'm kind of neutral on him at the moment.
JS: I thought Amor summed it up well when he said: "JimSauce - Seems to avoid taking a stance on things a lot." That said, he has explained his points well when questioned. I get a townie vibe from him, but I'm not entirely sure.
BaB: Oh, BaB. Some have bashed you for being inconsistent, I'm not really sure if I agree with this, but you definitely have been playing the newbie card, I sort of agree with CKD's line of thinking about you trying to divert attention from yourself, and your recent attack on him has me scratching my head as well. Probably the person I have the most question marks about at the moment.
At the moment, I have no real conviction on a scumpair.
"JimSauce - Seems to avoid taking a stance on things a lot."[/dice]
