Ok, what with the deadline coming up, and seeing more from rabbit in particular and others, I'll go through what I've seen lately, and where my suspicions lie.
I wanted to wait with this for a while to give me more opportunity to have posts from magic after the first couple posts that I saw that made me think he was acting scummy, while also trying to wait for CR to .. "come back" or whatever so that GIEFF can explain his vote and case more fully.
Going through MR's posts, starting with 606 on page 25: Already he's crossing his own path. He doesn't want to be a psychologist for people he's never met, but then he goes on to analyze them a bit anyways. He knows why we were suspicious of him/them, and doesn't do a very good job of casting off any scumminess I believe. The quick summary, and lack of concern for our questioning of WOU/inf's play and their lack of appropriate responses is disregarded in my eyes.
I think a lot of what concerns me that I'll bring up is MR's overstatement of cases. 607: first summary of GIEFF, and his "minor manipulation attempt" quote. Seems rather extreme for something a lot of us either didn't catch or thought was harmless, or not manipulative in any way.
Also in 607, I don't like the way that he attacks GIEFF (who he states is really pro-town) and then kinda tries to explain gieff's behavior. Isn't it better to just ask the questions, make it at least look like you care about the question, and then not give him an easy out to answer the question? This comes up a decent amount too, and I think that's part of the reason's for xtoxm's
in 608.
I like GIEFF's defense in 609, basically pointing out that MR overreacts to other people's playstyles. I like the logic shown, and definitely still remains in my more pro-town side of the list.
610: MR rescinds anything conviction he might've had to the questioning of GIEFF's manipulation. I personally think you should try to just bring up points you think are strong, and try to hammer those instead of devoting more time to questions you didn't seem to care too much about. Then, you say that hindsight helps, but then go on to say that you saw the same thing first read through in the right order. Seems conflicting in the same sentence. I also don't like the "voting pro-scum" talk against GIEFF after knowing the outcome of the vote, and realizing that the others are already dead. Then again with the criticizing of GIEFF's vote when he stated that he probably would've been in the same position. I'm still not a fan of this apparent duality.
Again, GIEFF coming up with the same reasons I have for deflecting the attacks, but apparently not as convinced that MR is scum as I am. GIEFF again finding the holes in MR's argument, but not becoming suspicious. Perhaps trying to avoid a OMGUS appearance? Knowing where it looks like GIEFF's suspicions are at the moment though doesn't lead me to believe that the faulty arguments are that scummy to him.
Back and forth, and my defense of myself. Still seems like trying to make cases more extreme than they are.
As for against ham: this time it looks more reasonable and based on decent reasons based on ham's posting. There's some extremism here, but good points as well. As ham states, there's still some differences in understanding the wording. Some of which I agree with, some of which I don't. Moot point. Not much actual information is posted by ham in 629 I feel. There's a fair amount of theory talk, which at this point doesn't seem right. Why talk about theory rather than defending yourself with your own actions, unless you don't think you can?
O.o at xtoxm asking about the self lynch. I don't know what this is about, and I was wondering why he felt he was the number one candidate on enough people's list to be a lynch. I thought I understood xtoxm somewhat decently up to this point, but then something like this comes out and I get a "bwuh?" moment.
@ xtoxm: Who are you referring to in 652 when you said: "Yeh, i'd happily lynch him today. " Are you talking about MR (who your vote is on) or CC after your suspicions of him and Ham's post pointing out CC's lurking?
I haven't really looked at CC's posting patterns before, but I think it's cause he hasn't really been posting anything that made me think. I didn't notice this, but ham's post about it, and my looking back to confirm what he said, is extremely suspicious. There seem to be real life complications for CC, but obviously in mafia you can lie about anything. I'm not sure where I stand on CC's innocence, but nothing recently has helped his case.
In any case, my point from the beginning of the post about my feeling that MR consistently overstates cases against people, and then (right now) voting for xtoxm while not waiting for his post analyzing his play (just making side comments in his analysis of other people) like he's done before makes me think he's trying to build a wagon with the stated suspicions of everyone else without backing it up, yet. Especially with the deadline, and his referring to having a full case against xtoxm but not posting it yet makes me suspicious of his motivations.
Therefore, I renew my
Vote: magicrabbit
