Mini 611 - Troy, Meet Helen (Game Over)

[Farkshinsoup]

Jeez, I suck.

I'm just going to shut up for a while.

[Macavenger]

Everyone is voting either Tinsley or myself at this point except me.

I've pretty much accepted at this point that Walnut is not going to be the lynch for today. Unfortunately, since I disagree with both of the wagons currently, I don't see anything more productive to be doing with my vote at this point.

I'll try to do some rereading of Tinsley an analysis of the wagons soon, but it probably won't be until the weekend. I have some essays I need to be writing for school at the moment.

[charter]

Why are you in such a rush here Fark?

[Lord Gurgi]

Why are you in such a rush here Fark?

He should just request a deadline

[Thesp]

I've been pondering whom I'm next most suspicious of, and the more it's insisted that I should declare who else I'm suspicious of, the more I think I should probably wait until after tonight before divulging more.

I think it's more worthwhile for me to be tightlipped at this point, lest I give the scum any indication as to whom I might investigate. (This is especially true if they have a framer or some such role.)

I'm ready for Tinsley to die.

[charter]

Why are you in such a rush here Fark?

He should just request a deadline

That's the reason I wanted to know. He jumped all over you for requesting a deadline, and now he's trying to quicklynch.

[Thesp]

Why are you in such a rush here Fark?

He should just request a deadline

That's the reason I wanted to know. He jumped all over you for requesting a deadline, and now he's trying to quicklynch.

It's not pursuing farkshinsoup at this time. Seriously.

Also:

Are you saying you would vote Fark to keep him from endgame?

If he's still around and there are 5 people left, we should definitely be asking questions. Let's see if that happens.

[Farkshinsoup]

quicklynch

Your use of that word on this day makes me laugh. I just want scum to die now - what's wrong with that?

[Walnut]

I don't buy the whole, "he's been targetting the people that it's so easy to pin scum on" argument. One of those people was Net. As far as I'm concerned, pushing for his lynch is a bit of a nulltell, since he was acting so scummy.

While I am not voting for Macavenger at the moment, I do buy it this argument to an extent. Mac's style has been to say "x is a standard scumtell, and person y is doing x". It gives you a way of not having to look at context or plausible reasons why player y might be doing x. In most games there seem to be people (case in point being Netlava) who will not conform to the normal patterns of behaviour, so you get a non-scummy looking lynch and a dead townie. This is why I found his table of the day's suspects so suspicious- it continues that trend of "it's only reasonable to lynch these people".

[Mizzy]

Vote Count:

Tinsley 5 (camn, Walnut, Thesp, Farkshinsoup, charter)
Macavenger 4 (Lord Gurgi, Tinsley, CF Riot, ShadowGirl)
Walnut 1 (Macavenger)

Not Voting:

None.

10 Alive = 6 to lynch!

[ShadowGirl]

Mizzy, I'm voting for Mac not Walnut, I believe.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy, I'm voting for Mac not Walnut, I believe.

Sorry, I'm not getting much rest at the moment so my brain isn't working well.

[Tinsley]

Since I still have a little time before I get lynched, I'm going to put together some cases on the others I'd like to see targeted tomorrow. They may be coming in pieces as I have time. I'm starting with charter, then either LG or Riot.

[charter]

Rich

[Tinsley]

Charter analysis - First 10 pages. I'll work on the rest as I have time. I'm hoping to finish my charter analysis later this afternoon.

Posts 20-22: I think we all know about this series. Assumes 3 scum, then calls CF Riot out for making the same assumption in his stat about Had.

There could be cult leaders or survivers though, that's not above possibility. Tbh, speculation on 3rd party roles offers us no help at all, until someone makes a hint at their role if they are pro-town. Having said that Lord Guri's post was that there are likely to be either 3 scum or 3 scum and a SK, it was Charter that brought up the speculation about it.

Fishing for pro-town roles to drop hints that you can pick up? Makes me wonder, why do you care who the pro town roles are?

Post 67 questions Had for flip-flopping on charter’s posts 20-22. The quote above is another example of charter twisting someone’s word against them. How was Had fishing for pro town roles? He doesn’t vote Had here, but waits until post 82 after Netlava and Walnut have expressed suspicion, and Mac voted Had.

I will be interested in seeing who the next person to vote for Had is (assuming someone does.

Post 94 – This is a nice vague comment. He may have been setting himself up to trust/accuse someone here.

Post 101 – Everyone knows about this post too (Let Had live, if he isn’t NK’d we lynch him tomorrow). Votes BB for his semi-claim.

I think you trying to pin this on me is scummy. What does everyone else think?

Post 117 – Reacts to Farside’s reaction to post 101 by thinking she’s scummy for pinning it on him. Fark (I think) nailed this, it’s an appeal to everyone else.

Post 154 – Calls out Batt for his “What if Riot turns up dead as Doc?” question to Netlava regarding Riot’s “Breadcrumb”. I actually thought it was a good question, but I’m noticing that charter has definitely trying to spread suspicion among nearly everyone. I think someone mentioned that as a scumtell in this game. The only people I don’t think he has cast suspicion toward were Netlava (whom many here thought was the scummiest D1), Mac, and I think Shadow Girl (but I’m not certain on that one).

Post 156 – Further defends Netlava on Batt’s question “hesitating to say loaded question”

If you now say that I'm further directing people, I'm going to explode. I'm not telling anyone to do anything, just explaining what I assumed obvious and that everyone thought.

Post 172 - The first case of charter becoming aggressive towards others when they accuse him in this game. You shouldn’t play this game if you can’t handle answering questions.

I didn’t catch this in my Mac analysis but he defends charter in post 182 when Farside is questioning him.

Post 235 – Had questions charter on his “I’ll be interested in seeing who the next person to vote Had is” comment. Charter replies with “It wouldn't have given me any more than everyone else. I simply would have found it interesting.” So why ask the question?

Rich

Don't worry, you're safe today. I'm not so sure about D3 though.

[Thesp]

I'm going to MiniMoMeet tonight, I may or may not be able to post substantively while there. I will be able to make my nightchoice. I'll be back on Monday. Thanks!

[Tinsley]

A little more on charter (up to page 15):

Regarding Netlava:

I won't lie, I've been biased towards him this game because he helped me out the most last game, but I'll do a reread without this bias.

Post 250 – Trying to justify why he hasn’t been suspecting Netlava, and a horrible justification at that.

Post 264 – The results of his “unbiased reread on Netlava.” Strangely enough returns nothing on Netlava. Instead he admittedly stopped reading all posts but Walnut’s at 137. Note that at this point Walnut has been taking some heat for sitting on the fence regarding Netlava. Charter votes Walnut.

Regarding LG’s questioning of his reread:

I'm not saying anything about how scummy Netlava is or isn't. I actually commented on five players, and formed opinions on others, however, me revealing them now will NOT help lynch scum, so don't ask for them.

Why not?

Here’s something very interesting:

Charter I haven't dropped suspicion of Walnut. I pointed out that I still find him scummy in 252. I think Netlava is far scummier. You said in 250 that you've been too biased in favor of Netlava this game and are going to reread intending to be more neutral. Did that happen? You don't mention Netlava in your recap of the game anywhere.

Charter responds with this:

I haven't done that reread yet, I doubt I can today, hopefully this weekend. I didn't mention Netlava, but I didnt mention a lot of others either.

Was this an example of one scumbuddy nudging another on a mistake he made?

Post 289 – Suggests camn claim when we’re at L-3…for Walnut.

Do you know if the mafia's kill would still go through on you? AKA a one for one trade? (not that I would mind that)

Post 294 – Asks camn if a mafia kill would still go through if they targeted her. Interesting question for a townie.

Post 331 – The long awaited “unbiased Netlava reread” contains the following statement

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.

How did charter not catch any crap for this?

His analysis of Netlava basically amounts to: Some good posts, some bad posts, I don’t think he’s scum. Great analysis.

Regarding LG speaking up about Batt defending him:

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.

Post 347 – Charter loves to do this. Passing off his interpretation of comments/actions as facts.

I have explained my stance on BB previously. He needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly, or he was scum. I am not sure how I am responsible for whether other people post about him or not- if I attack him and no one else does it is not deliberately fruitless and therefore scummy, as you seem to be saying here.

You've decided from two posts that BB is scum? Pretty bold statement there.

Post 357 – Another example of charter twisting someone’s words.

I thought this was very interesting too:

Batt regarding charter twisting Walnut’s words:

Wait, what? Two things wrong with your statement here Charter.

1) You seem to ignore the fact Walnut stated "[BB] needed to ask to be replaced or modify his style greatly..." It seems you are trying to make Walnut look scummy instead of finding scummy things Walnut has done.

I don't agree with this. First, regardless of his disclaimer, he still made the statement "you are scum" after BB had made two posts which I feel he shouldn't be able to make. Second, I'm not making him look scummy in that post, you're saying that for me. I first questioned his assertation, then said that was a bold statement considering BB made two posts.
Way to go on defending Walnut...

I went back and looked, and I didn’t see where Walnut said “you are scum” unless you were referring to the quote above in which case you’re still twisting his words.

[CF Riot]

Here’s something very interesting:

Charter I haven't dropped suspicion of Walnut. I pointed out that I still find him scummy in 252. I think Netlava is far scummier. You said in 250 that you've been too biased in favor of Netlava this game and are going to reread intending to be more neutral. Did that happen? You don't mention Netlava in your recap of the game anywhere.

Was this an example of one scumbuddy nudging another on a mistake he made?

No. Calling him out for making promises and never following through. Brought it up again here and here. First one is in the middle, second near the end.

[Tinsley]

Sorry I'm nowhere near finishing my charter reread (I've had a busy afternoon). I'll try to get more tonight but can't promise anything. If I can convince more people to lynch charter, I'll switch my vote to him.

[Tinsley]

Riot - I hate to sound like Netlava here, but the way you brought it up sounded like you didn't find it suspicious. Charter said he was going to do a reread and remove any bias on Netlava, then returned with nothing on Netlava, which seems pretty suspicious to me. But thanks for reading all that. I've put a lot of work into this and it kind of sucks I'm not getting any response at all.

Anyways I could only get through page 20 tonight I'll try again tomorrow.

@Thesp, your reason for suspecting farside/Fark is lack of scumhunting (396). What are your thoughts on Walnut and his lack of scumhunting?

This was in post 409, based on the logic in his post 856, charter was trying to get Thesp to vote Walnut.

Fark in Post 411

I think had is scum, judging by the way he claimed. Maybe we should lynch him today anyway. Besides, the worst case scenario is losing an unknown sanity cop, which isn't that bad, is it? I'm sure my excellent scum hunting abilities will make up for it.

Can't believe we were not going to lynch the guy who suggested lynching a claimed cop. A claimed cop with no counter-claim.

Charter’s response in 412:

Fark, just because there's no counterclaim only means the real cop might not be an idiot. It certainly doesn't mean Had is town. However, I agree that that post by Netlava is terrible.

Now’s a good time to look at charter's quote in post 331 (“The Unbiased Netlava Reread”) How can the post by Netlava be horrible when you said almost the exact same thing?

Post 415 – Criticizes ShadowGirl for not contributing anything new, comparing her to Walnut. He’s done this a few times to SG to this point, which falls in line with my theory that scum came into the game targeting Netlava, Walnut, and ShadowGirl for lynches.

Start of D2

Post 464 – I’ve already covered this, but he asks Thesp who he investigated and why we shouldn’t lynch him, but Walnut is scum because of this quote:

Thesp, you are both a claimed cop and my number one scum suspect on Day 1. What do you have to say for yourself at this moment?

Post 467 – This has been covered as well. I asked for ideas on why Batt was NK’d. Charter wanted to shut up all discussion on it. Now’s a good time to look back on the exchange between Batt and charter that I posted above.

Post 476 – Also been covered – Fark asks for the case on Walnut and charter just posts a huge block of quotes.

I really think it was the mafia’s plan all along to make Netlava the target on D1 because of his play style. While all members of the scum team may not have voted Netlava, I feel confident that one or two did.

Tinsley, if you aren't scum, you need to stop talking. How can a townie possibly know the mafia's plan? What makes you so confident that one or two did?

I can somewhat see your point on speculating on the NK, but what is wrong with my statement here?

Walnut's question of "What do you have to say for yourself at this moment?" I interpreted as "You were wrong about Netlava being scum and you're my number one scum suspect, what do you have to say for yourself at this moment?" Going back, I can see how what I said created confusion.

Post 479 – This is the defense of his comment about Walnut in post 464. I still don’t see how Walnut's comment was a scumtell.

[charter]

If anyone but Tinsley wants me to answer anything specific in his posts, quote for me what you want me to answer and I'll do it.

[Walnut]

(But keep your eye on Charter- he is still the top of my list)

I am still happy to vote Charter. Tinsley has picked up some items in there that I had not put together myself.

However- Tinsley, most of the examples you have used there that related to Charter attacking me are things that I pointed out earlier. Why did you not agree with them at that stage, but instead were voting with Charter against me as recently as post #808? None of the examples you mention are based on things Charter has done since his wagon disbanded, so if they are good reasons now, why were you not his wagon then?

[charter]

However- Tinsley, most of the examples you have used there that related to Charter attacking me are things that I pointed out earlier. Why did you not agree with them at that stage, but instead were voting with Charter against me as recently as post #808? None of the examples you mention are based on things Charter has done since his wagon disbanded, so if they are good reasons now, why were you not his wagon then?

Because Tinsleyscum doesn't actually believe them.

[Tinsley]

Sorry Walnut, all I can say is that I overlooked it before. I know it's a poor excuse, but it's all I've got. Honestly, having played in the trainwrecked game with Mac and Riot, I think I had a bit a bias towards them because I like the way they play the game. So I believed their arguments towards you being scum, and charter being townie.

If it will help convince people to vote charter now instead of D3, I'll go ahead and do it.

Unvote: Macavenger

Vote: charter

[Tinsley]

Everything up to page 26:

Now, why does fark get singled out when SG has done NOTHING this entire game. Why are you not suspicious of Walnut who has done zero scumhunting the entire game?

The reason why I didn't answer these questions before... He singles out Fark when they apply to half the people here. Why do you all jump on me for trying to figure out why he's singling out Fark? Why don't you ask him why he singles people out?

Post 503 - Another case of charter setting up an SG lynch and getting irritated when being interrogated.

Thesp, what makes you so sure SG is town. Comment on the rest of my questions.

Post 510 - Again singling out SG.

Post 540 – This is camn’s post. She calls out charter for being wishy-washy using a one of charter’s quotes about not liking one of Netlava’s posts (he made several posts like this) and then another where he stated he had his suspicions that Netlava was town. I thought this was the key to the wishy-washy comment. She also used a charter quote saying it is painfully obvious Walnut is scum. Camn makes another good point about charter making small pointless comments (All Aboard!) while calling out others when they do it.

Ok, so I wasn't sure about Netlava yesterday, and I am about Walnut. How is that wishy washy? I wasn't positive Netlava was town yesterday (like I am with Walnut) so I'm not going to make assertions that he is. You are trying to take your being wrong about him and twist it to make me look bad.

Fark's big reason for voting me was that I quoted some of my posts. Other reasons are all like "I don't like how charter does this" or "charter said something scummy on page 5".

Post 548 – Here he completely avoids the keys to camn’s and Fark’s arguments. How can you find so many bad posts by Netlava, but have suspicions he’s town? “I don’t like how charter does this” was actually the fact that said if Had lived to D2 we lynch him. “Charter said something scummy on page 5” was actually charter’s appeal to the majority when Farside called him out.

Post 552 – Mac FOS’s the entire charter bandwagon. I agreed at the time due to how quickly it filled up. Now I think this could be evidence of a charter/Mac pair.

This is exactly what I wanted to say, but I couldn't cause two more people would jump on me for OMGUSing.

Post 553 – If you’re town, shouldn’t you be more concerned with pointing out scum than getting lynched? You’ve made a few comments like this that make me think you’re worried about being lynched.

Walnut is scum because he misdirects the town

rather than scumhunting.

Post 555 – Oh the irony!

Yes, you've found a buddy of the town, Mac.

Post 559 – Another post suggesting a possible Mac/charter relationship.

Yeah, Fark seems scummier with each post he makes. Why would rereading the Walnut case make me less scummy? He gets called out for putting up a crap case against me, so he moves on to the person he thinks is the next easiest to get lynched (that isn't his scumbuddy known as walnut), Tinsley. There's plenty of stuff you could have brought up against me, but you just gave up. Not to mention your latest contradiction you use as evidence agaisnt Tinsley

Post 567 – This post makes nearly the same case that I made on Fark. Yet I’m the one about to be lynched for making a crappy case. This also falls in line with what I think Mac and Riot have been doing, buddying up to me.

Post 569 – Charter again defending me.

charter, you suspect a lot of people. Can I ask you who your top townie is and why?

Looking for someone to kill off tonight? There is absolutely no reason you need to know this, but I know that I have no choice but to answer all questions directed at me. It's been Riot for quite some time. I only suspect three people, I think I made that pretty clear in my post 567, not the "lot of people" you put in my mouth.

Post 592 – This is an incredibly scummy post, it’s got a couple charterisms. We have another example of charter being aggressive when someone asks him a question. Also for those of you that never read the trainwrecked game, charter brought a lot of suspicion on himself as scum by not answering a question. It looks like he’s trying to point out that he’s answering the question, even though he doesn’t like it, just so people won’t lynch him. Claims Fark put the “lot of people” statement in his mouth, when at this point he’s cast suspicion on: Walnut, Fark, LG, Thesp, Tinsley, camn, and SG.

Ehh, I'm leaning towards Fark being horribly wrong in his assessment of things, but wrong as town now. He's definately not out of the woods yet, but I'd prefer a Walnut or LG lynch today now. I don't have proof of this, just my feelings.

Post 608 – So what made you change your mind on Fark? By the way this is Wishy-Washy.

Tinsley might actually BE town, which is why he took a stand, allbeit on a lost cause.

Post 611 – This is camn’s quote about my case on Fark, but I thought I’d bring it up again, I like it even though it has nothing to do with charter.

Post 644 – Votes LG. LG predicted this in the post prior to charter’s vote, made a couple hours earlier. Yet charter didn’t even see the comment.

As with your reread knowing Netlava was town, would you consider his "very scummy" play sinister if I was lynched and came up town? Out of curiosity, how do you defend yourself unjustly?

Are you sure that's directed at me? I don't think I said I was going to do a reread today. Also, I know for a fact I never said he was very scummy. I don't even understand that last question.

Post 651 – Charter once again twisting people’s words. How many examples is that now? Is 3 right?

Post 653 – LG has called charter out for not reading his post before voting. Charter says that’s not enough evidence to build a case on him. Do we have enough now? Charter also admits he voted before reading LG’s post, but got excited when he saw Fark had voted for him and decided to vote for LG too. He says he had a big speech questioning Fark on his vote, then he goes on to call Fark’s vote horrible.

Post 655 – I tell charter I’d still like to see that speech, but he deleted it. Isn’t that convenient? You can’t retype it?