Newbie 982 - Shadows of Death, Game Over!

[zauper]

@Zauper: If you re-read posts 66-67, 78, 80, and 82, I'm trying to hunt. Yes, it's with one person, but as I also stated in 84 I haven't seen anything I can add to others' interrogations and decided to try and have my own that others could follow.You could also just look at the post above you and see I'm trying to scum-hunt. I honestly just don't know what kind of questions are good to ask for scum-hunting, so I'm asking anything that might make someone slip. I really don't understand your vote for me in this regards and I think that you're just trying to cover up for AurorusVox by voting for me, making the two of you both scum. I need some concrete evidence from you as to why you're actually voting for me.

FoS: zauper

I just did re-read all of those.

How are you trying to hunt? The post above mine just says "I feel I've been trying to hunt". Have you been trying to hunt by not contributing to the conversation?

What questions have you been asking, and to who? Other than your back and forth with Aurorus, I don't see anything.

I'm voting for you because you say you're trying to scumhunt and I have seen 0 evidence of it.

[AurorusVox]

I still do have my suspicions on AV.

And I still have my suspicions of you

Also, Michel, you clearly haven't posted as much as the others here. Is there a reason to why you've been lurking in this game?

2k3, what's your opinion of Loaka Massi? He's posted less than Michel, but you chose to accuse Michel of lurking. Is there a reason for this?

Quote Tags Fixed ~ Hayl

[AurorusVox]

^fail quote tags, again ><" sorry

[2003041]

@zauper: Just because YOU say I haven't hunted at all doesn't mean I haven't hunted. Players styles differ in the way they play the game. I tried pointing this type of situation out very early in the game when I was helping out Bazz in 37.

Actually, you can do what I've been doing since I've joined and just click the 'View Your Posts' clickable to the right of the 'User control Panel'. That's what I do, but you don't have to do it.

And you don't know who else I've been asking? Stop looking around and look at yourself. And if you also catch up on the reading, you should've noticed my post to Michel, but you haven't. Why is it that no one believes I'm questioning people when they can't look at themselves? That's the main reason why I think both zauper and AV are both scum-buddies. You also totally misconstrued the point in that quote as well. I'm saying "I'm hunting, but I may be going about it wrong". Why did you think I was saying "I feel I've been trying to hunt"?

@AV: Huh, you're right. I think that's mainly due to the fact that Michel has posted recently while Loaki hasn't posted since page 2. I forgot (s)he was even here. Thanks for that.

@Loaki Massi: Same question as Michel. Is there a reason as to why you haven't posted anything of use except an anti-RVS comment? Why are you lurking? Do you just have no time or are you trying to hide something by not saying anything?

[MichelSableheart]

3) Re-read post 94. I clearly give the reason on why zauper is on my FoS list along with AV

It was definately not clear that you were scumhunting. It felt to me that you were defending against Aurorus attack, rather then actually trying to determine the alignement of Aurorus. Because of this, I find it far more likely that zauper has suspicions of you then that he is trying to cover up for Aurorus.

You also haven't given me a good reason for your suspicions of Aurorus. As far as I can determine, you believe he is scum because he is voting you?

Also, Michel, you clearly haven't posted as much as the others here. Is there a reason to why you've been lurking in this game?

The accusation of lurking is ridiculous. If you look at the posts I made, you'll find that I have posted plenty of content. I really don't believe you can accuse me of trying to avoid giving opinions in order to stay under the radar.

The accusation of me not being very active makes more sense. I posted on monday morning and tuesday evening, and didn't visit the site in the meantime. Posting once a day is the standard on this site, which I did. I haven't been more active then that due to my personal schedule, which is none of your business.

[Guybrush]

My argument that Aurorus was trying to stifle discussion completely was not joking. It was a rather

strong accusation

given the information available, but it was a possible explanation for his behaviour. In fact, it's an explanation I still believe possible.

It may be relevant to mention here that early in the game I look for anything that can be turned into an accusation. As I said before, I prefer to get discussion started with actual accusations, but early in the game those are difficult to come by because there isn't much to go on. The result is that I'll usually make a pretty

weak accusation

to which I'm not very commited, and in which I haven't put a great deal of thought. The part I quoted looks like it's describing my town play pretty well.

I find your inconsistencies very unusual for an IC.
I don't think it was meant as a weak accusation. You said so yourself.
You had double standards. Valk stated what she meant.
Since you now say you were looking for

anything

- then including Valk in your accusations would fit perfectly into that description. But you didn't. You said why, but it still doesn't look to me that convincing.

So no need to discuss it anymore. I just hope your level of commitment and consistency will increase.

[Guybrush]

And to all people who mess up the quotes:
There's a

Preview

button you can hit (next to Submit) before you post.
You'll then see how your post will look like, and if you're satisfied, you can press

Submit

then.

[ooBAZZoo]

@ Aurorus - You say - "I'll vote: ooBAZZoo while I wait for a response to my questions." - but I was unaware that you were awaiting for a response. I've read your posts carefully and as far as I can tell the only questions you have directly asked me are in post #50 which were as follows:

Do you think that the post you are referring to (#37) is really all that scummy? I.e. do you think that what 2k3 said in that post ("That's what I do; you don't have to") shows legitimate signs of him being mafia? Afterwards it seems like you're back-peddling from any accusations you made, so I wonder if you never really thought he was scum. I'd like to get an idea of how strong your sense of him being mafia was when you made that post, because it looks as though you could be clutching at straws to appear to be scumhunting and to appear to be pro-town.

In my post #56 I tried to answer this questioning as comprehensivley as possible. Did this post not satisfy you. My suspicion is that you either missed this post, and/or think you have asked further questions which you never got round to posting.
Could you please clarify.

I'm more than happy to accept a vote against myself if I feel it's justified, however I fail to see how yours is.

I also have a few suspicions of my own, but will save them untill this business with Aurorus has been addressed. x

[2003041]

@Michel: I wasn't talking about posting content-wise, but rather the number of active posts. No, there is no need to reveal what you do in your personal life, but the fact that you have a personal schedule is all I was looking for. I do apologize that it looked like I was intruding in your personal space, but I wanted to make sure there was a reason that there's not as many posts number-wise by you. And no, AV's not scum because he voted me. I feel he's been misreading every post I've made when questioning him and trying to turn it back on me. That's why I'm suspicious.

[AurorusVox]

That's the main reason why I think both zauper and AV are both scum-buddies.

And no, AV's not scum because he voted me. I feel he's been misreading every post I've made when questioning him and trying to turn it back on me. That's why I'm suspicious.

Hah, you think I'm scum (with Zauper) because we both agree that you haven't/hadn't been scumhunting?

Let me point out that Akira also said he felt the same way earlier in his ISO 6 and his most recent post in which he said you hadn't (until I voted for you) made any accusations; and Michel has also said that he doesn't think that you've been scumhunting. It can't be

that much

of a misreading when there are four people who feel similarly (albeit at varying strengths). And we can't all four of us be scum.

---

ooBAZZoo;

I see, I see, I missed your post, so apologies for that. So now I have some follow up questions for you

No, I didn't think the content of the post was particulalrly scummy, rather that (as I have stated) his style

could

be an indication of something to hide.

In your reply, you pointed me back to a previous post (with the "as I have stated") - when I went back to read this post, I see that you use these terms to describe what you think 2k's writing style betrays; the fact that he is

too ready to cover [his] ground and justify what [he] says

1) Do you think that scum are more likely to cover their ground and justify what they say than town?
2) Do you think that regular, vanilla townies should ever hide information from the rest of town?

Later, you said that;

Firstly, his response did not totally alliviate my suspicion, but I thought it was sufficient for me not to persue it further at this time.

3) Could you expand on this please? If you had suspicions that were not alleviated, does this mean that you found his post (or rather, writing style) suspicious, but not scummy?
4) If you still were/are suspicious of him, why did you think there was no need to pursue it further?

If it feels like I'm clutuching at straws its because I probably am, but because I'm new to the game, not because I'm trying to appear pro-town when I'm not.

I was wondering if you would have said something along the same lines as Michel - using "weaker" arguments to try to get a read on players (you did earlier say that you had gleaned some information from 2k's reply). That would have satisfied me much more :\

5) Now for a killer question: do you think you've done more scumhunting than 2k3?


---

Unrelated posts:

I'm going to point out in advance that I probably won't be very active from tomorrow (Wednesday), til Friday-Saturday (GMT), because I'm attending my girlfriend's graduation and my own graduation respectively. I should be able to get on Thursday, and on Saturday late evening, though, so I dunno if this counts as a V/LA, but just in case you don't hear from me til late Saturday, that's why.

Also, Guybrush, I used the preview button this time ._."

And thank you Haylen for fixing my tags <3

[MichelSableheart]

@Guybrush: The accusation is strong in the sense that it uses stronger language and is more serious then would be justified by the facts. The accusation is weak in the sense that it is not very convincing because it isn't justified by the facts. Apologies for the confusing language.

@2003: the number of active posts has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not someone is active lurking, and inactivity is not a scumtell.

[2003041]

@Michel: I never said that inactivity OR lurking was a scum-tell, so I don't know what forced you to say that.
@AV: Yes, I didn't make any accusations, but that doesn't mean I wasn't scum-hunting. Also, in that same post, I found something interesting;

But what about Aurorus? He did post a couple of things at the beginning, but he did not accuse anyone. But after Michel's vote, he had his own breakdown and started to (intensely) suspect 2k3.

I know all 4 can't be scum, so I think the 2 who are most likely scum are both you and zauper. I think zauper's vote gave it away more than anything else. Why else would someone just BW like zauper did, especially when we're still questioning each other? My guess is he was trying to protect his scum-buddy, AV.

[AurorusVox]

Okay, you may say that "not accusing" is not the same as "not scumhunting" but has Akira also said this earlier;

Regarding your vote, I must say that I agree that 2k3's style of play is very cautious, silent, and not particularly contributing to the scumhunt.

(and he also said in

that

post too that he thought I was scum, but I'm only focussing on the parts where he says you haven't been scumhunting because that's my reason for suspecting you)

Also, I think for you to say that Zauper jumped on the BW without considering the argument for it is ignoring what zauper actually did. In ISO1 he questioned my vote for you; in ISO2 he asked why I had voted for you, again; in ISO3 he paraphrased my argument and said he thought it was reasonable. In ISO4 he said he had read through the arguments (proven by ISOs 1-3) and then placed his vote. So you can't say he blindly jumped onto a 2k3 vote without considering it first.

[2003041]

Can you put the post numbers so I can re-read those?

[AurorusVox]

If you go to the bottom of the topic, where it says "Display posts by user: All Users" - click the drop down arrow and select "Zauper", then click "Go".

It will bring up only posts by Zauper, and then you can read through his posts 1-4 (it starts at zero, so skip the first one lol). This is known as "ISO'ing" (as in, Isolating)

I would go back and find the actual post numbers for you, but ISO'ing him will be easier and you'll want to be using that feature it in the future, guaranteed.

[2003041]

Thanks for that tip. Going back I can see a BW on me. No, it wasn't immediate, but as soon as I was claiming to be scum-hunting, everyone got on my case, but only you 2 voted for me. That's the BW trying to roll down the hill and trying to get everyone to jump on. So, after re-reading zauper's posts, this is my following action.

Vote: zauper

[ooBAZZoo]

In response to Aumorus’s questions.

1) Do you think that scum are more likely to cover their ground and justify what they say than town?

I believe that no player wishes to provide statements/accusations that are unjustified. However I also believe that, because they have something to hide, mafia players are more likely to over-justify what they say, or waffle. (This is my attempt to gain information from a psychological tell, rather than a tactical one, or a slip up on words).

2) Do you think that regular, vanilla townies should ever hide information from the rest of town?

I’d say that on the whole no, because information a town player has will be valuable for the rest of the townies, which gives the town a stronger base of knowledge that they will all benefit from. I’m sure some exceptions exist, but unfortunately I lack the experience to know when exactly these exceptions exist. (A good question, although I fail to see how this is related to my issue with 2k3 – I never said he was giving too much information, only that his writing style was suspicious)

Later, you said that;
“ooBAZZoo wrote:Firstly, his response did not totally alliviate my suspicion, but I thought it was sufficient for me not to persue it further at this time.”

3) Could you expand on this please? If you had suspicions that were not alleviated, does this mean that you found his post (or rather, writing style) suspicious, but not scummy?

I believed that

perhaps

his writing style was an indication of scumminess, however his revelation that he has Aspergers syndrome did provide an alternative explanation (as I said, I was trying to read him on a psychological level [a bit ambitious for a newbie I know]). I am, however, still suspicious of him.

4) If you still were/are suspicious of him, why did you think there was no need to pursue it further?

I was (and am) still suspicious, but felt that the train of inquisition (primarily regarding writing style) has provided all the information that (at this time) it can. To further accuse him without more evidence really would be ‘clutching at straws’. I feel that, although being actively probing is important to a player’s scumhunting (and to the flow of the game), so is observation. Because of my initial suspicion I have been watching 2k3 closely and will resume questioning him if there are developments that mean it is necessary.

5) Now for a killer question: do you think you've done more scumhunting than 2k3?

I believe that I have. Talking from inexperience of course, I presume that scumhunting is about a combination of accusations and probing, but also careful observation (of course how much I have been closely observing other people’s posts can’t be proved, but it is still a form of scumhunting that I feel I’ve been conducting).
That being said, I have also been active: My early inquiry about 2k3 came before most other players had conducted any sumhunting. I also got involved in the examination of valk (post #72). I raised some points that I found suspicious and hoped that these would be expanded upon by other players - scumhunting is, after all, a team effort. (again, I shall follow these up when I see a development; valk has been inactive recently).
Aside from this, I have been busy for the past 24hrs, which explains my more recent inactivity.
I also believe that, whilst 2k3 has made numerous posts, many of them have been in answer to others, or in defensive rather than moving his scumhunting forward.

Some questions for you: what was your reasoning behind asking this last question?
Do you feel that how much a player gets involved in scumhunting in directly related to their scumminess?
Is this why you have been so active in accusing others, so that you appear to be town because of the amount of scumhunting you do? (this last one is semi-rhetorical).

Do my answers satisfy you, or do you still have reason to maintain a vote against me?

P.s. Sorry if this was a bit long and/or I used too many brackets and commas
P.p.s @ Aumorus – unrelated to the game, I had my own graduation last Friday, and was attending my twin brother’s in Canterbury today (hence the inactivity). Hope you have a good day and congrats.
P.p.p.s @ Aumorus – don’t trip up!

[ooBAZZoo]

EBWOP: - I just realised I'd been calling you Aumorus when it's Aurorus, my appologies.

But also, after reading 2k3 most recent post I'd just like to say I too am suspicious of zauper, shall post my reasons shortly.

[AurorusVox]

I'll intersperse my responses with your responses below...

In response to Aumorus’s questions.

1) Do you think that scum are more likely to cover their ground and justify what they say than town?

I believe that no player wishes to provide statements/accusations that are unjustified. However I also believe that, because they have something to hide, mafia players are more likely to over-justify what they say, or waffle. (This is my attempt to gain information from a psychological tell, rather than a tactical one, or a slip up on words).

I like the distinction you make between justification and over-justification. However, would you say that your own justifying of yourself through the (bracketed statements) is justification, or rather clarification, on the same scale as what 2k3 did in the post of his you first picked up on?

2) Do you think that regular, vanilla townies should ever hide information from the rest of town?

I’d say that on the whole no, because information a town player has will be valuable for the rest of the townies, which gives the town a stronger base of knowledge that they will all benefit from. I’m sure some exceptions exist, but unfortunately I lack the experience to know when exactly these exceptions exist. (A good question, although I fail to see how this is related to my issue with 2k3 – I never said he was giving too much information, only that his writing style was suspicious)

I wasn't suggesting that you thought that 2k3 was giving too much information away. The relation comes in the issue of "hiding" things; your concern was initially that 2k3's writing style indicated that he was predisposed to covering his tracks, to, perhaps, hiding his true motives. I was wondering whether you thought it could have been a townie move on his part to hide information/intentions. Ironically, I wasn't letting on about the biggest reason behind asking this question, but I will do now;

In your ISO8, you say that you have things that you are thinking, but which you are withholding until a certain discussion is finished. Directly after this post (the one of yours that I am quoting), you have said you suspect someone but will comment on it later. I wanted to see if you thought that holding back information in general (in this case, your own concerns), could be a townie move. I believe it can be, because if VTs are completely open about their intentions, it can be hard to trap scum. However, you said that you don't know when it is a good idea to withhold information - despite doing this yourself.

Later, you said that;
“ooBAZZoo wrote:Firstly, his response did not totally alliviate my suspicion, but I thought it was sufficient for me not to persue it further at this time.”

3) Could you expand on this please? If you had suspicions that were not alleviated, does this mean that you found his post (or rather, writing style) suspicious, but not scummy?

I believed that

perhaps

his writing style was an indication of scumminess, however his revelation that he has Aspergers syndrome did provide an alternative explanation (as I said, I was trying to read him on a psychological level [a bit ambitious for a newbie I know]). I am, however, still suspicious of him.

I am satisfied with this clarification.

4) If you still were/are suspicious of him, why did you think there was no need to pursue it further?

I was (and am) still suspicious, but felt that the train of inquisition (primarily regarding writing style) has provided all the information that (at this time) it can. To further accuse him without more evidence really would be ‘clutching at straws’. I feel that, although being actively probing is important to a player’s scumhunting (and to the flow of the game), so is observation. Because of my initial suspicion I have been watching 2k3 closely and will resume questioning him if there are developments that mean it is necessary.

I am also satisfied with your reasons for dropping the case as relating to the writing style. However, as regards to what has followed since, of course I can't see your observations unless you share your findings. So; what do you make of the developments since your last post regarding 2k3? If you have been watching him closely, do you have any insights that might assist the town?

5) Now for a killer question: do you think you've done more scumhunting than 2k3?

I believe that I have. Talking from inexperience of course, I presume that scumhunting is about a combination of accusations and probing, but also careful observation (of course how much I have been closely observing other people’s posts can’t be proved, but it is still a form of scumhunting that I feel I’ve been conducting).
That being said, I have also been active: My early inquiry about 2k3 came before most other players had conducted any sumhunting. I also got involved in the examination of valk (post #72). I raised some points that I found suspicious and hoped that these would be expanded upon by other players - scumhunting is, after all, a team effort. (again, I shall follow these up when I see a development; valk has been inactive recently).

Do you feel that the points you raised against Valk were expanded upon by other players? Do you feel that it is other players' responsibility to follow up on your suspicions, or do you think that you should be asking further questions to develop that line of inquiry yourself?

I also believe that, whilst 2k3 has made numerous posts, many of them have been in answer to others, or in defensive rather than moving his scumhunting forward.

Some questions for you: what was your reasoning behind asking this last question?

There were a few reasons behind it. I will openly admit that it was quite a sneaky, cheeky question to ask, because it asks you to relate your own behaviour to another player's (and therefore forces you to decide whether you have done "more" than someone else). By asking this, I got to see your opinion on your own behaviour, and your opinion on someone else's; if I had simply asked "How much scumhunting do you think you have done?" you wouldn't have had to consider it as much as if I'd asked "in comparison to this other player".

I had the added naughty intention of wanting to show 2k3 that it's not a misreading (wilful or otherwise) of his posts on my part to criticise him for not scumhunting.

But other than that, I wanted to see how you would justify your play so far. Because I'm increasingly unsure of my read on you, I wanted to hear you describe your own play (from your perspective) before deciding on whether to leave my vote where it was or move it before I go V/LA.

Do you feel that how much a player gets involved in scumhunting in directly related to their scumminess?
Is this why you have been so active in accusing others, so that you appear to be town because of the amount of scumhunting you do? (this last one is semi-rhetorical).

I think that if a player is coasting by without getting involved, then they have a lot to answer for. It isn't as simple as "The more you scumhunt the more townie you are" - it's about the quality of the posts. For example, Michel hasn't posted much (quantity wise) but he's posted more (quality wise) than someone who has posted more than him in terms of post count. I think I can sum it up with: lots of scumhunting does not equal town; but lack of scumhunting could indicate scum.

As for the second of your questions, I've been so active because I've found myself with a lot of free time after finishing with Uni. Most of the players here all seem very active and prompt at replying (especially 2k3 who has been my main conversational partner before now), and so when I get that little email notification that a reply has been posted, I have been responding quite quickly myself. And since I have had questions and concerns to raise each time something new is posted, I have voiced them. If you look at my other games, you'll see that I'm quite active and post-heavy, even in slower games than this.

Do my answers satisfy you, or do you still have reason to maintain a vote against me?

They did, until I read this. I was all ready to unvote, but now that you're asking, it makes me wanna keep my vote xD

---

P.s. Sorry if this was a bit long and/or I used too many brackets and commas
P.p.s @ Aumorus – unrelated to the game, I had my own graduation last Friday, and was attending my twin brother’s in Canterbury today (hence the inactivity). Hope you have a good day and congrats.
P.p.p.s @ Aumorus – don’t trip up!

P.S. Personally I wouldn't worry about posting long responses if it's all relevant. It wasn't a wall-o-text (which

are

bad) and the brackets and commas (though I had a little dig at them earlier) is just your playing style.
P.P.S. Thank you very much
P.P.P.S. Thanks, now I'm going to trip up. Eep.

---

Oh, and

/unvote

. I'm satisfied...for now

[Guybrush]

*I have a feeling Valk went on a vacation because of me.

@2003

(1)
2003, you do understand that Aurorous unvoted you in his #96 because of his promise in #67? So he had his reason.
And you unvoted out of what ... honor?
Sorry, but that's a terrible reason, and it shows that you were just voting for him in hope he'll get off your back.
(and that you needed your weapon ready for the next guy who already voted for you at that point)

(2)
And your #94 is very interesting.
You proudly show your "66-67 78 80 82" as your scumhunting efforts.
Aurorus voted for you because you're not scumhunting back in his #50.
All the "scumhunting" you mentioned happened after #50.
By that you are admitting that Aurorus was right - that you didn't scumhunt prior to #50.
He explained it to you in his #80.
And not to mention you basically agreed with everything Aurorus said in your #84.
So the problem I have is - why do you still find Aurorus suspicious?
You keep mentioning Aurorus + Zauper as scum-team, so I'm wondering what's your case on Aurorus.

(3)
Up until now, you've been doing FoS+vote combo on people who voted for you.
I think I know what would happen if I voted for you as well.
So, let's test it:

Vote: 2003

(So, there's your 3rd scum member.)

[ooBAZZoo]

@ Aurorus – I was just composing my post regarding my further suspicions, so shall post that first before answering your questions

I believe that Zauper is guilty of backtracking and trying to appear pro-town by agreeing with others.
I use the following example:
Quote 1

I bet Guybrush is scum. He's all pirate-y

Quote 2

Random voting (you'll note I didn't vote) doesn't get anywhere anyway.

Although in quote 2 he clarified that quote 1 wasn’t

technically

a random vote, it was clearly said in the style of the ‘random voting stage’ i.e. he still made a statement that was meant to be accusative but in a pointless and funny way, which is surely advocating the start of a RVS. When he therefore stated in quote 2 that RVS “doesn’t get anywhere anyway” he was going back on the initial intentions of quote 1. This backtracking came after others said how much they were against RVS, and I believe this contradiction indicates an eagerness to appear aligned with other players because he knows that he is infact against them (i.e. trying to appear aligned with town because he is not).
(to clarify: I’m not bringing up the value [or lack of value] in an RVS again, only using this as an example of his backtracking)

From this, I had the suspicion that he is trying too hard to align himself with others, and after re-reading his posts, found that much of what he says (including BWing 2k3) shows this same desire to align with town players.

I do agree that all liars are lynched.

I suppose that's reasonable.

After reading through the arguments, I have to admit that I'm persuaded by AurorusVox [... ] Vote: 2003041 (2k3)

@Akira: That's a valid point.

This recurring desire to show that he supports others views, I believe, is a scum-tell; he is worried about alienating himself and wants to look as if he supports the majority.

FoS: Zauper

(I will wait for his response before deciding whether to vote)

[2003041]

@GuyBrush: No, you're not the 3rd member. You're the fifth person to doubt me, but you're just voting to test me. You are not on my FoS list just because you are voting for me because the 2 I do have on my list are the 2 that I feel very confident about being scum. Plus, why did the other two think I'm scummy and not jump on that obv. BW? because they're not a team, like I think AV and zauper are. I already explained why I haven't done much questioning before post 50 in that said post 84. I still find him suspicious because he's been reading very early posts that I did. I've already explained this is my 3rd game, but except for the second game, this is the second one I've started from the beginning. The first game I played was live, which meant the questions went fast and there wasn't time for thinking about what to say, which was part of my problem. I don't know what questions to ask and I don't know how to properly defend myself, so I'm trying to make sure I catch up on all conversations and try to get my stance on who's what. I really think you're townie, though I can't say for sure, but you haven't made yourself look scummy to me in any way, that's why you're not joining the list.

[AurorusVox]

@200341:

Do you think that my vote for you was justified,

when I first made it?

[Guybrush]

I asked you why you find Aurorus suspicious, and out of all text this seems to answer my question:

Plus, why did the other two think I'm scummy and not jump on that obv. BW? because they're not a team, like I think AV and zauper are.

You say they're scum because they voted. Others didn't so they're not scum.
I understand you. (Even though I find that logic pretty bad.)

I still find him suspicious because he's been reading very early posts that I did.

This one I unfortunately don't understand.
Could you rephrase it, please?
(I apologize if it's obvious. English is not my native language.)

[ooBAZZoo]

In response to Aurorus:

Perhaps I am as garrulous as 2k3 in my justifications. In my first post regarding writing styles I acknowledged the possibility that it’s simple how somebody writes, and still regard this as one potential explanation. However, I would say that I try to include my justifications (my brackets and extra clauses [like this for example]) in order to aid other people’s understanding, yet felt that in contrast 2k3’s justifications were either excessive/unnecessary at times. You too have admitted to posting a lot, and this issue surrounding writing styles could be applied to you [more of a speculation than an accusation].

In response to your inquiries regarding me concealing information/not being active, I hope my previous post has somewhat alleviated this. Since returning from my bro’s graduation I’ve been focused on responding to you and my suspicions of Zauper. In terms of following up my suspicion of 2k3 and Valk, I shall be doing this eventually, but I’ll try to wait until Zauper responds to my accusations before following another tangent (we have plenty of time after all). I don’t think I’m ‘concealing information’ regarding 2k3 and Valk, because my suspicions are fairly vague until I can re-read their posts properly, and with 2k3, I’m not sure that I could add to the accusations that are currently being made of him anyway.

[Just a note on concealing ‘information’, which is more me speculating than anything else: All players are reading the same thread, and as a result we all have the same ‘information’ to work with. What differs is a) our interpretation of that information and b) the knowledge we have of our own role. The b) side of this is complicated, but when I have said ‘concealing information’, what’s more applicable is saying ‘concealing my interpretation of the information we all see’...... ok, I’ll shut up now.]

@ 2k3

because they're not a team, like I think AV and zauper are.

I really think you're townie, though I can't say for sure

You clearly have strong suspicions of these individual’s roles. So that there is no ‘concealing of interpretation’ that I’ve mentioned above, could you please break down your suspicions more simply, as it will benefit both the town in their investigations and those who wish to respond to these accusations. I’m aware this may take some time, but think it will be useful so we can clarify your opinions. x