Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[Battousai]

I don't get you Mac. You say you see a connection between me and Riot right? You also say you see Netlava as scummy (you at one time at least, had a vote on him). Now there is a possibility that ALL 3 of us is scum, but wouldn't it be stupid for me and Riot to try and get Netlava lynched, as to me it's not worth the risk to lose a scum partner day 1. So what I conclude from this is that the feeling of a pairing that you see between me and Riot is STRONGER than the feeling of scumminess coming from Netlava, no?

Also, I'm a little surprised that people think me and Riot could be paired, as I don't see it. I would see a much stronger pair between me and LG instead (I defended his SK allegations early, and LG sees some of my moves concerning Netlava as protown.

Netlava: Could you give me the post where Riot says that we shouldn't lynch BB and the post where he includes a possible bb/walnut scumpair?

[camn]

@LG

It's "Paranoid Gun Enthusiast"

And re: Tunnel vision... it's not that. I just like to concentrate on one thing at a TIME.
Like your post.... it is VERY content-rich... but WAY too much info for me! Like.. should I go read all those posts and address ALL these suspicions?
I think this kind of play is useful... and gives a lot of people stuff to chew on.... but I like focused conversation.
Given... I come from playing this game in real-life. So I lean toward discussions that are more real-life-esque.


@Mac.. I thought for a REALLY long time how to use this role... with the intent of trying to draw scum attention.
But in my mind... it seemed that anything I did to draw scum would also draw a Doc.. if there is one. And My life AND the Doc in exchange for one scum seems no good.

Plus, I have no Idea what all roles there are. . so I decided a Claim would be better. Also.. I tend to draw Cop attention. I'm trying to play better.. but I take a lot of heat as town.

But it should change the mathematics of the endgame.. if I get there! As long as I don't earn a lynch.. it is almost like we have One Less Scum.
Of course.. for Balance.. we might have more scum than we usually would???

hmm.

[Walnut]

Walnut
Post 92: Puts hadhfang at L-2 with very little explanation. I don’t like how he doesn’t seem to be aware that his vote is L-2, or possibly ignoring it.

The thing I suspect him for first and foremost is how noncommittal he is.

My general tendency is to want long days to slowly build up a body of knowledge to make a decision from. Yes, on Day 1 in particular it will still be at best an educated guess, but better that than a quick lynch and not much learned from it. It is common scum play to shorten the day, and I am not going to rush in and contribute to a hurried lynch. It takes being pretty confident to vote, and I was (and am) pretty confident that Hadhfang is scum, so I voted for him.

CF Riot wrote:

...Walnut could be some kind of rival role of Camn...


Walnut, what do you think of this?

I think it is absurd. I think that CFRiot has decided that I am scum, so therefore he is looking for a theory that can fit my posts into his vision that I am scum. If people feel like I should explain why it is an invalid argument I am happy to, but even its author is still doubting whether it makes any sense, so in the meantime I won't clutter up the page.

Walnut, you keep raising small points about individual posts in defense, but it's not an isolated problem. Your entire posting pattern this game has been basically worthless. Looking at your early posts:

confirm

random joke about last game

pointless discussion about whether theory discussion is scummy, along with talk about last game's setup

link may have been mildly useful for ShadowGirl's longterm mafia education, but didn't advance this game at all

More random setup speculation that goes nowhere

Echoes my opinion on hadhfang being suspicious, adds nothing

Encourages blackberry to replace out

Bandwagon jump ahoy! hadhfang to L-2. You've still basically said nothing about this game by now, and you vote to put someone on L-2.

Sort of contributes opinions on Netlava and Battousai, but is mostly just WIFOM

And now we suspect both claimed or semi-claimed roles, blackberry for no real reason I can see other than his claim (didn't you say you read mini 578? You should know that's pretty sketchy after reading that...) This is the first time you've taken your own, original stance on something all game, midway through page 6

speculating on berry's role, and defending against questions raised by Riot and I

waffly on berry's claim

hey, contributes an idea about blackberry!

useless theory discussion about prods, lurking and replacement

excited that berry replaced, little talk about last game, nothing really about this one

Ok I'm going to quit here, because we're up to page 8 now, and I think I've made my point - you posted a lot in the early pages, but basically contributed nothing of any substance to this particular game, while hopping on a bandwagon and encouraging people to speculate on and/or lynch claimed power roles. This is worse than lurking, it's active lurking, with a bit of bandwagon jumping and possible fishing thrown in for good measure.

Past this point you start to sort of contribute a little bit more - though with 8 pages of material to draw on, it'd be hard not to. A lot of mini games have a lynch by the point you start giving any substance. Despite starting to trend towards being a little more useful, you've still never really taken a very firm stance on anything - you talk about theory, you waffle about claims, you waffle about joing netlava's wagon. You're not really doing any of your own scumhunting, just talking about other peoples', which is a huge red flag. Not all of your posts are necessarily bad, per se, but taken as a whole it's an extremely scummy pattern.

If I had not given specific examples people would say I had no evidence- when I do give specific examples, you ignore them and say that they are not representing the bigger picture! Mac, may I refer you back to read post #284, where I explain why the role setup conversation was valuable. I have been too polite I guess- take a look at post #304 where you are simply wrong and I am right. I was not going to bother pointing it out, as everyone could see it, but if you are going to keep accusing me I can see that I have to be more explicit.

In terms of your general argument, at risk of going over the same old ground, we had a similar conversation in the last game regarding responsibility for mislynches. You consider me overcautious, waffling, noncommittal, and irrelevant. I consider you impetuous, overeager to persuade people to follow weak arguments, and over confident in your read of the game. Both of us are inclined to find the other scummy due to playstyle- but, being more reserved ("waffly") I don't necessarily vote for you because of it.

Currently, I am trying to keep an open view of everyone, but top of my list are:

1) Hadhfang- not going to be lynched today, but still most suspicious to me)
2) Netlava- as indicated earlier, I am trying to get my head around what is scummy and what is Netlava's default behaviour, but my tendency is getting stronger, so

In a few other points:

Macavenger- despite our differences in style, I think he is a good player, and on re-reading, we have been in agreement more than disagreement this game, so I am surprised by his current line of thinking.

Shadowgirl- how many games are you currently in? I know you dropped out of one to concentrate on the others, but to be honest, whether it is because of time pressure or something else, it feels like you are struggling to keep up.

Camn- As I said earlier, I had written off BB's claim as the workings of a deranged mind. Your claim, as unprovable (without great cost) as it is, will have to be judged on the basis of the rest of your play.

[CF Riot]

Netlava tunnel vision is bad in general because it can cause the player to miss reads or clues based on the context of the game coming from players other than his/her main suspect. Tunnel vision is usually used to describe the play of someone who is town aligned and unintentionally zeroing in on a specific target because they are getting carried away. It is worse in your situation because I don't think you actually are a tunnel visioned townie, I think you were intentionally focusing on me to try to entice a wagon against me. The way you focus on me without voting me, and the way you voice suspicion of other people (like Charter) without actually questioning them or commenting on their tells appears to me like trying to get someone else to start the wagon so later you could jump on without taking the heat for a mislynch tomorrow.

I did comment on the hounding theory here(paragraph 13). I think the theory would write off your play this game as bad play caused by emotion from last game. I don't think that is what's going on, so I disagree with the theory. I don't think it was impossible or lacking logic, I just think you're scum.

Mac, I don't know what the "something after" you're referring to is, but the reason I questioned Batt was because he gave a reason for voting Farside, which to me didn't look like a joke at all, then after you said that reason was crap he claimed, "It was a random vote." That looked to me like he was going to build a false case, but once someone saw it as flawed he tried to cover that up to drop suspicion. I think I had 3 posts related to this incident, and it would've been less but I had to repeat my question because Batt didn't answer it right away. How does that constitute a "huge" length of time?

Netlava again, I explained why I didn't want to lynch BB

today

. I thought BB's actions were scummy, but if he was scum he put himself in a tough spot for the following days if he couldn't prove his role claim. If he was town, he put himself in the position of a possible clear. Either way we'd gain a lot of evidence by D2 to go on, so lynching/not-lynching him would be a much clearer decision.

I know I have voiced my opinion of people answering other's questions, but Batt since you are asking for a specific post rather than an opinion, the post where I don't want to lynch BB is here. I never suggest a Walnut/BB scum pair, but I mention Walnut being a possible scum role to balance Camn(BB)'s role here(longest paragraph, near bottom).

Walnut, being not rushing a lynch isn't the same as being non-committal. A vote won't immediately cause a lynch or end a discussion. And if it is in regards to someone close to being lynched, it's still possible to voice your opinion of them or other suspects. You don't do any of this the entire game. When you do say something about a suspect (Netlava for example) you say things like "While I increasingly think it may be justified, as I said earlier, it seemed to me a foregone conclusion that if we focused on Netlava it would most likely end in him being lynched."

[Tinsley]

Post 183:

Maybe it’s me, but ShadowGirl, especially up to this point, was the town lurker, not Battousai.

In ShadowGirl's defense, I just finished Newbie 610 with her where she posted infrequently as well. She turned up town in that game. For right now I believe that it's just a matter of time constraints.

Tinsley

Post 61:

Seems unwilling to vote.

It was still early in the game, and I felt that neither of the people I FoS'd (you and Riot) were deserving of a vote at the time.

Post 179:

Seems to suggest that Netlava is unlynchable, this is bad, and nobody is unlynchable.

I said in post 285 that I don't think Netlava is unlynchable, but I don't think we should lynch him today. Even if Netlava is scum, he's got scumbuddies we can hunt. We can revisit Netlava later in the game based on what we find out about others and his posting history. If you have time LG, I think you should go back and skim the trainwrecked game. I really think it would make an easy D1 for scum to target Netlava because he has an aggressive playstyle, and tends to make arguments based on minute details that others overlook.

For right now, I would refrain from lynching the following people:
1)Camn - As others have pointed out, BB's semi-claim goes a long way proving her actual claim. Since I think most of us trust her at the moment, I'd like to see a list of suspicion from her.
2)Hadhfang - I don't think much explanation is needed here.
3)Netlava - I've explained this.

I don't think anyone is unlynchable though.

Walnut - What do you think of the proposed CF Riot/Battousai relationship? What do you think of Battousai's lurking strategy and the fact that he took it from a scum player?

[charter]

About to do my Netlava read as I have time during work today, I'll be looking for this as well and point it out when I see it.

The way you focus on me without voting me, and the way you voice suspicion of other people (like Charter) without actually questioning them or commenting on their tells appears to me like trying to get someone else to start the wagon so later you could jump on without taking the heat for a mislynch tomorrow.

Bah, was going to ask a question regarding eventually lynching Camn, but realized it would cause pointless talk today to explode, so remind me D2 if I forget.

[charter]

I know this is about netlava, but Walnut's post 92 contradicts his being hesitant to vote for someone that he's pulling now.
Read Riot's post 99. Had, if you investigate a good town power role tonight (aka doctor) please just say they're a normal townie.

Finally get to some Netlava stuff worthy of comment.
113, I actually think he picked out a non-connection between Batt and Riot. I however, don't understand the way Riot talks to Batt in those two. It's like they're both on the same team, but I can't see Riot doing something like that if he's scum.
144, Netlava says he's not sure whether Had is scum. A few posts earlier he said he thinks he is still, and throws out the idea of lynching him anyway.
150, I really don't like Batt's "What if" here. It seems like an opportunistic way to attack Netlava and make himself seem useful. (after this I'm going to look more closely at Batt, and particularly a Batt-Walnut connection). I commented on it before, but going back, Riot had already said it wasn't a breadcrumb, and Netlava had said before that that it's entirely pointless to breadcrumb as a doc. I agree with Netlava, the doctor is only good if they are completely hidden, so dropping ANY clue that you're the doc, is idiotic.
173, Riot sums up everything about Netlava. Honestly I think he's got it set in his mind Netlava is scum at this point and trying to get him lynched.
175, Netlava accuses LG. I think the putting LG at number two scum is very OMGUS, but I think his point is valid. I also agree with the rest of his post too. Plus, farside doesn't question LG like she did to me (in respect to the not answering questions. She didn't pioneer the ones on LG like she did with me though...)
176, Bad post by LG
193, Very odd that he didn't post this earlier, or at least didn't give a reason for not like "I'll respond to Riot's post when I get more free time" or something in his post 175. Not a stellar defense, but adequate.
195, I actually think Netlava has a case on LG. LG does change around the reasons he's voting Netlava from tunnel vision to flip flopping.
204, I think Mac's bit at the end of his post about netlava (about 'tempt') is true.
211, Walnut defends me, no reason for this. Think I already pointed this out though.
214, I agree with Netlava.
225, Bad post by Netlava, should have said it differently.
228, Farside agrees that Netlava did not OMGUS vote LG, I agree
276, Batt questions my remaining vote on walnut
277, LG FINALLY answers the SK speculation questions when no one even remembers them anymore
293, Netlava jumps on the walnut wagon.
312, Had flips on me AGAIN. Now I'm aggressive town, whereas before I was scum. I'm honestly about willing to lynch Had regardless of his claim... Also Had, there's nothing we can question you on your claim with until tomorrow.
325, Dont know what to make of his suggestions. I actually had him at number 3, but this post with its absurd amount of speculating puts him at 2.

Anyways, my top three scum picks
1 - Walnut
2 - Batt
3 - LG

Walnut I've explained.
Batt - A LARGE number of his posts serve no purpose but speculation.
LG - I think Netlava's case against him was justified, plus LG has been wagon hopping whenever it seems like someone new is coming under fire. His entire play this game has been extremely opportunistic.

Netlava - I don't think he's scum. I think Walnut is the best lynch for today.
Now to see if there's any Batt - LG - Walnut connections

[farside22]

I'm just starting my reread. I'm on page 5 and I'm a bit busy so I just wanted to ask a couple of questioned that crossed my mind on the read. I appologized if they were asked and answered already.
Battousai - Quickly votes farside after she votes Lord Gurgi, but says it was a random vote with a bit of information. Was it because you disagreed with her? Was she too quick to change her vote? Do you think she's scum, or was it a truly random vote?

Charters states:
It IS misleading. If someone wasn't good at statistics and just read over it and didn't think about it, they would assume there's a tiny (~5%) chance that Had is scum again, based on your statement. You failed to mention me in there which makes me think there's a reason for that.
(this makes no sense. Why would it matter that he didn't bring you up, but brings up hadh. Are you thinking about scum distancing from each other this early in the game?)
tinsley state:
Mac - Seeing as everyone had the same chance of drawing a scum role in this game, do you find CF Riot's statistic misleading?
(even though this was not directed at me. I could see this as misleading. I'm curious to know why Mac thought Hadh or even Charter had less chance of being scum then others. Most Mod's just do random even with what happened. There is no reason to not make a person scum again just because of a fubar from another game)
CF state:
I don't joke vote, so voting for him based on that goes against my game morals. The stat wasn't meant to change anyone's minds once real voting started, I just thought of all the people you could random, I wouldn't choose someone who was mafia last game.
"I wouldn't random vote for someone that got Mafia last game because I don't think they'd get it twice in a row."
(why did you bring it up if it was more a joke then anything. Why would you think the Mod wouldn't random the mafia choices?)
Walnut: Post 86 how is it that CF didn't explain himself? Post 92 how the heck did you come to this conclusion?
I will be back later today with more.

[ShadowGirl]

I'm currently in four games, including this one. I may or may not get to my reread today - but it will come tommorow.

[Netlava]

Netlava: Could you give me the post where Riot says that we shouldn't lynch BB and the post where he includes a possible bb/walnut scumpair?

Post 139 & post 173

It is worse in your situation because I don't think you actually are a tunnel visioned townie, I think you were intentionally focusing on me to try to entice a wagon against me.

I don't think I'm tunnel-visioned, but either way I don't think tunnel-vision is more indicative of scum. I suppose scum are more opportunistic than anything.

[Battousai]

Netlava: Ok, I went back and looked at those posts and I see what you are saying. Riot says it is bad to LYNCH BB as IF he has a protown role he should be able to use it. Then later says what BB did was scummy (softclaim). I see it as a very minor issue. I really don't see Riot as contradicting himself too much there as lynching someone and thinking they are scummy are related, but in this circumstance I see them as different.

Farside: If your asking me to answer this question, "Battousai - Quickly votes farside after she votes Lord Gurgi, but says it was a random vote with a bit of information. Was it because you disagreed with her? Was she too quick to change her vote? Do you think she's scum, or was it a truly random vote?"

Then my answer would be because it was a random vote, and the reason I voted Farside over anyone else was because I disagreed with her vote of LG. At the time I really didn't think she was scum.

[farside22]

Netlava: Ok, I went back and looked at those posts and I see what you are saying. Riot says it is bad to LYNCH BB as IF he has a protown role he should be able to use it. Then later says what BB did was scummy (softclaim). I see it as a very minor issue. I really don't see Riot as contradicting himself too much there as lynching someone and thinking they are scummy are related, but in this circumstance I see them as different.

Farside: If your asking me to answer this question, "Battousai - Quickly votes farside after she votes Lord Gurgi, but says it was a random vote with a bit of information. Was it because you disagreed with her? Was she too quick to change her vote? Do you think she's scum, or was it a truly random vote?"

Then my answer would be because it was a random vote, and the reason I voted Farside over anyone else was because I disagreed with her vote of LG. At the time I really didn't think she was scum.

Have you been in a game were people who talk about SK Day 1 without a reason does not look scummy?

[Macavenger]

I don't get you Mac. You say you see a connection between me and Riot right? You also say you see Netlava as scummy (you at one time at least, had a vote on him). Now there is a possibility that ALL 3 of us is scum, but wouldn't it be stupid for me and Riot to try and get Netlava lynched, as to me it's not worth the risk to lose a scum partner day 1. So what I conclude from this is that the feeling of a pairing that you see between me and Riot is STRONGER than the feeling of scumminess coming from Netlava, no?

Not exactly. How I'm seeing things right now is that Walnut and Netlava are both scummy. Those cases, to me, are independent and relatively equal. I see no particular indicators of them being scum together or not, and both look like decent wagons.

Since I'm seeing possible scumlike connections between you and CF Riot, and both of you are pushing the Netlava wagon right now, that makes me a little uncomfortable about that wagon for the moment. Thus, in the presence of an alternative, equally good wagon (Walnut) I choose that one.

So your connection isn't stronger than Netlava's scumminess, but it's enough to tip the balance between two otherwise rougly equally good wagons.

It takes being pretty confident to vote, and I was (and am) pretty confident that Hadhfang is scum, so I voted for him.

Claiming a high level of confidence necessary for a vote (a playstyle I firmly disagree with generally, but accept as a simple difference) seems a bit counter to being certain enough for a vote on someone who hasn't posted a ton on page 4.

If I had not given specific examples people would say I had no evidence- when I do give specific examples, you ignore them and say that they are not representing the bigger picture! Mac, may I refer you back to read post #284, where I explain why the role setup conversation was valuable. I have been too polite I guess- take a look at post #304 where you are simply wrong and I am right. I was not going to bother pointing it out, as everyone could see it, but if you are going to keep accusing me I can see that I have to be more explicit.

You saying you're right doesn't make it so. Camn's claim doesn't validate what you did as useful. Had there been two kills after night 1, we could have started talking about whether or not an SK or something else caused the extra death(s) then. Day 1, it gains us nothing.

All of your setup speculation has been a distraction at best. Note that we still have no basis to judge whether there really is an SK in this game or not, despite wasting a bunch of effort talking about it. All it has done is make you look like you're contributing while you aren't actually helping find the scum. This is the big point; in all your early posts I cited, you don't do any scumhunting. You just agreed with a case on hadhfang and WIFOM'd about berry's claim; you made no effort to actually work out who the scum in this game are. Ultimately, that is the strong tell I'm working with here.

I consider you impetuous, overeager to persuade people to follow weak arguments, and over confident in your read of the game.

Why does this get me off your scumlist, but not Netlava? I find that an excellent description of his play.

Mac, I don't know what the "something after" you're referring to is, but the reason I questioned Batt was because he gave a reason for voting Farside, which to me didn't look like a joke at all, then after you said that reason was crap he claimed, "It was a random vote." That looked to me like he was going to build a false case, but once someone saw it as flawed he tried to cover that up to drop suspicion. I think I had 3 posts related to this incident, and it would've been less but I had to repeat my question because Batt didn't answer it right away. How does that constitute a "huge" length of time?

It's my first real post in the game so I made it into into a random with a bit of information.

Doesn't look random to me. There you go being shifty again Batt.

You quoted his statement after the random vote. I didn't really see what was shifty about the response.

The huge length of time comes from the fact that this mess started around post 40, and you were still bringing it up somewhere around 120 (I tossed my notes from creating that post, but I had a series of post numbers listed). That's over 3 pages later, you're still hassling him over a relatively minor comment.

I don't think I'm tunnel-visioned, but either way I don't think tunnel-vision is more indicative of scum. I suppose scum are more opportunistic than anything.

Basically correct. Tunnel vision can be both good and bad in some aspects, but tends to be a mild town tell, as scum prefer to keep their options open to lynching multiple players if the opportunity presents itself.

[camn]

SO.. I work 12s On monday and Tuesday . . so I will try and get a LOS together mid week!

PS.. I love this game.

[Mizzy]

Vote Count:

Walnut 3 (charter, Macavenger, Netlava)
Netlava 3 (CF Riot, Lord Gurgi, Battousai)
charter 2 (farside22, ShadowGirl)
camn 1 (charter)
CF Riot 1 (Hadhfang)

Not Voting:

Walnut, camn

12 alive = 7 to lynch!

[Mizzy]

Day one has been very long (Friday makes it 4 weeks) and it does not appear that a lynch is being neared. Discussion is wonderful, and I am very glad that posting frequency has stayed high, but a conclusion for the day must be reached eventually.

I'm going to place a

deadline

for

Midnight EST on July 25th

to get you guys a-movin'.

In future vote counts, I will bold the person who would die at deadline so that everyone is aware of what is going on.

As always, PM or IM me with questions, comments or concerns.

[Walnut]

I know this is about netlava, but Walnut's post 92 contradicts his being hesitant to vote for someone that he's pulling now

I explained that, just a few posts earlier:

My general tendency is to want long days to slowly build up a body of knowledge to make a decision from. Yes, on Day 1 in particular it will still be at best an educated guess, but better that than a quick lynch and not much learned from it. It is common scum play to shorten the day, and I am not going to rush in and contribute to a hurried lynch. It takes being pretty confident to vote, and I was (and am) pretty confident that Hadhfang is scum, so I voted for him.

Walnut: Post 86 how is it that CF didn't explain himself? Post 92 how the heck did you come to this conclusion?
I will be back later today with more.

Post #86 is by Netlava, not me. I came to the conclusion regarding Hadhfang in post #92 as his previous post had been defending CFRiot's statistic. I thought that he had really stretched to make the defense, as not only did he say that it was accurate (which it wasn't) but he also said that it was not misleading, which was hard to say immediately after several people had been confused by it.

Walnut - What do you think of the proposed CF Riot/Battousai relationship? What do you think of Battousai's lurking strategy and the fact that he took it from a scum player?

I can see someone might think that it could work as a town player, but you run the huge risk of people suspecting you for what is seen as a conventional scumtell, as to some extent has happened here. The other thing is- what does it gain? If someone calls you out for lurking, that is neither a scumtell or a towntell. Yes, it is scummy to lurk and town players should call them out, but it is also an easy way for a scum player to look like they are contributing to the game.

You saying you're right doesn't make it so. Camn's claim doesn't validate what you did as useful. Had there been two kills after night 1, we could have started talking about whether or not an SK or something else caused the extra death(s) then. Day 1, it gains us nothing.

Other than in recent games I have a 100% success rate at being a mafia target on night one- my ghost will mouth it silently

Alright, the mod has spoken.

Vote Netlava.

As stated before, he is my top candidate for today.

[charter]

I have no problem voting LG, Batt, or Walnut today to make sure one of them gets lynched at deadline.

[Tinsley]

Walnut - You didn't address my question about the Riot/Batt relationship.

[Battousai]

Farside, you made me have to go back to the Very beginning didn't you

I'm just going to throw it out there that in a 12 player game, there are usually either 3 scum or 3 scum and 1 SK, depending on how powerful the town is.

As a result I am going to

Unvote: ShadowGirl, Vote: Charter

for not only triple posting, but flipping between ideas between posts, also we can't be sure how many anti-town we've got, so it's probably best to play it conservative and assume we have 4.

Also:

Mod: Can you clarify about a rule:

6. Deadlines may be implemented if I feel that discussion is lagging. At deadline, the person with the most votes will be lynched. In the case of a tie, the person who was voted for first is lynched.

Does this make the determining vote the last vote placed against a person, or the first vote placed against them?

This seems like a big leap voting someone for not being sure about anti-town. Yes typically 3 scum is the norm. If charter is talking to just bring things up it is better then laying low.

unvote:
vote: LG

Bringing up the idea there could be a SK first is bad, mmky

In this game, I didn't see him as actually saying there is a SK, but rather he talked about the COMMON setup in a 12 player game. He didn't say which was more likely or which one he felt was the case. Therefore I disagreed with you and decided to make you my random vote.

Mac: Ok, I understand what you are saying right now with why you do not want to vote Netlava.

[charter]

Batt, why are you defending LG?

[Lord Gurgi]

Batt, why are you defending LG?

Second.

[charter]

LG, why did you not either 1- reiterate what Batt said (as in he defended you correctly) or 2- set everyone straight? You STILL manage to dodge answering while 1- shifting blame elsewhere and 2- Looking like you're concerned (I say looking because I'm pretty sure you're scum by now)

My new list is LG then Walnut then Batt. Still willing to lynch any for the deadline.

[Mizzy]

farside22 has requested replacement. I'm looking for someone now.

[Lord Gurgi]

I didn't see the need to say again what I have already said.

Concerning the SK thing, I only brought it up because everyone was assuming that there were 3 mafia. I specifically said that in a 12 player game there is usually 3 mafia or 2 mafia and an SK. I wasn't trying to stir paranoia. I was just saying that there are other possibilities.