Sushi Mafia! Game Over

[Microphone_Kirby]

What I think of the other cases

by

Microphone_Kirby

Chapter 1: The case on Pear Bear: Lurking, hesitant to post, and "assessed what everyone else was thinking" to keep or remove the (apparently) "random" vote on M_K. (Hey! That's ME!!!)

My opinion: "Trying to find the right words" is one thing, but there's no reason to hesitate to post if you're a Townie. Arguments are welcome, but trying to merely "go with the flow", especially with pressure on you, is suspicious to me. And then, in response to the accusations you say:

I understand that I'm looking realllllly scummy right now. My half-baked plan has basically blown up in my face. I was hoping that if I had kept my vote on MK he would be lynched and turn out to be scum

, but towards the end of that process I began to doubt his scumminess. That combined with pressure to act in someway caused me to remove my vote. However, I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess.

Ive made a newb mistake that could potentially end up killing me, and hurting the town.

Fail.

It makes me think about this "half-baked plan" a little deeper... if I was lynched and if I flip scum, you'd be less suspicious in the eyes of the Town... all because of a (apparently) random vote.
But when (that right; I said

when

) I would flip Town... what then? Would your defense be "it was a random vote"? Would you be more forgiven because it was one of the first votes?
Something in my head says that this plan was to lynch me and use the "random vote" excuse to cover your tracks.
And something about the bolded statement rubs me and my gut the wrong way...

FoS: Pear Bear

And an obligatory

FoS: OhGodMyLife

Still with the smarmy comments and no real help or answers?

(Working on other suspects later; posting this now for comments)

[Narsis]

put your vote where your mouth is MK. fos does nothing.

now then, I understand the cases against Pear Bear, but posts like this:

EBWOP:

Stupid question:

Does scum know the identity of other scum in this game?

make me think he could just be a poor old townie.

now OGML I definitely do see as scummy based on his play yesterday.

Vote: OGML

[Microphone_Kirby]

put your vote where your mouth is MK. fos does nothing.

If all I did was vote for whomever I merely felt was scummy, I would be moving it around like a Queen on a chess board. FoS's are fine for me; they're like bookmarks, or maybe contestants on

American Idol

, waiting to be judged...

Now, moving on:

Chapter 2: Dousing the Flameaxe

The Case: All I found that basically, Flameaxe weakly defended Santos and gut feelings...

My opinion: I can't peg a thing on Flameaxe. The weak defense on Santos is exactly that; it doesn't mean much to me. I'd want Flameaxe to post more, and something that we can use; most of his posts are useless so far for info gathering.

Chapter 3:
... For now, there is no chapter three.
I will say this: when hp[leaves] comes back, he needs to talk about DGB's argument against him (#320). I'm starting to see her point.

FoS: hp[leaves]

Here, finishing up re-read.

Are you done yet? *crosses arms*

[Farkshinsoup]

now then, I understand the cases against Pear Bear, but posts like this:

EBWOP:

Stupid question:

Does scum know the identity of other scum in this game?

make me think he could just be a poor old townie.

now OGML I definitely do see as scummy based on his play yesterday.

Vote: OGML

Whenever I hear someone say something like, "based on his play yesterday" accompanied by a bandwagon vote, my ears twitch. No analysis, no real reason for your vote, and no real explanation for why that quote makes you think Pear Bear is townie. You mention both wagons, but your reasons for choosing one and rejecting the other seem arbitrary.

Also, this, the first post on Day 2:

those death scenes are making me hungry...

anyway...Day 2 now. what do you guys want to do?

Seems like now that you've figured out what everyone wants to do, you're happy to go along.

FoS Narsis

[Pear Bear]

Hypothetical question for a pro-town mafia vet:

If someone (town or scum) were to do something really obvious and scummy, and another player takes the bait, believes the lie and thinks the person who did the scummy thing is obviously pro-town (or so they say) should that player be looked at as suspicious? or just stupid?

This may or may not pertain to this specific game.

[Riceballtail]

Hypothetical question for a pro-town mafia vet:

If someone (town or scum) were to do something really obvious and scummy, and another player takes the bait, believes the lie and thinks the person who did the scummy thing is obviously pro-town (or so they say) should that player be looked at as suspicious? or just stupid?

This may or may not pertain to this specific game.

IMO, stupid. Both town and scum set traps, and both town and scum fall for them. It makes you stupid, and possibly an alignment tell from that, but always stupid.

[Plum]

Yeah, hi. Plum is very likely town. I'm working out which of the rest of the lot of you gibbering maniacs out for my blood is scum, and I'll tell you tomorrow.

Yeah, hi, that's nice. You find me 'very likely town'. Quantify that? Because for once this sort of thing

isn't

working as flattery and buttering me up. It's actually pinging my gut on the scummy side a bit.

Off to Pear Bear, an original suspect of mine. To analyze posts with relevence:

Just lurking over here as my random vote on MK seems to have been a bit more than just random...

I called this out originally. Staying on a bandwagon and lurking to see what comes of it, it seems. His response to my questions:

Sorry for not addressing you, Plum, but I hadnt noticed that you voted me.
I was hesitant to post because my random vote for MK seemed to have been a decent pick in the first place, and I was assessing what everyone else was thinking to determine if I wanted to keep my vote on MK or not.
I realize, now, that random voting and then lurking when everyone else jumps aboard is really sketchy and I don't plan on doing it again. As for MK and his alleged role fishing, In some cases role fishing can be pro-town, and I think that this may be one of those cases.

Unvote MK

As Farkshinsoup pointed out, there is a problem here, mostly in that PB says he was assesing what everyone else was thinking when it came to him deciding whether to keep his vote on MK, not, say, MK's behavior and various tells. I didn't catch that as clearly the first time around (and meanwhile Santos was scummily lurking without even bothering to give the appearance of making something of an actual response). He realizes it's sketchy and doesn't plan on doing it again, nulltell. He thinks MK's rolefishing might have been protown. WTH, I said before, and I'll ask PB now:

Pear Bear, please clarify what you meant when you said MK's rolefishing might have been

pro-town

.

I was hoping that if I had kept my vote on MK he would be lynched and turn out to be scum, but towards the end of that process I began to doubt his scumminess. That combined with pressure to act in someway caused me to remove my vote. However, I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess.

The problem

here

is that PB's motivations seem to be more related to scum's primary goal (looking pro-town and thus not getting lynched) than town's primary goal (lynching scum). Of course, scum's primary goal is town's important secondary goal as well, and sometimes priorities do get mixed up. "I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess," says PB. Well and good if he didn't want to vote Santos because he actually thought he was town (and explained his position well, of course). Less well and good if he didn't vote Santos because he merely wanted to look townie. Basically, in my completed games I've been scum once; first time I was ever scum, and that was the sort of mindset I had: always trying to gage whether the wagon was worth banding and how I'd look if the gut flipped town and I'd stayed off the wagon (due to a comedy of errors, this ended up with me accidentially not bussing my scumbuddy hard enough when he was really scummy, because I was fully convinced he was actually town [/ramble]).

I was also extremely surprised that I wasnt on Plums list of suspects as he was the only person to vote me yesterday and now I look 1000x scummier than then.

First of all, I'm a girl and prefer to be referred to with femenine pronouns . Second, my list noted people I most suspected on the count of being Santos' scumbuddy, and due to the way I compiled it, had some flaws. Maybe I should check and see whether you're a likely Santos buddy again, just in case I missed something in my micro-analysis ? As to my hasty Flameaxe voting: it was the start of Day 2. There are lots of potential suspects and plenty of ways to start off. Why not jump right in, even if Flameaxe doesn't end up being my final vote for today?

If someone (town or scum) were to do something really obvious and scummy, and another player takes the bait, believes the lie and thinks the person who did the scummy thing is obviously pro-town (or so they say) should that player be looked at as suspicious? or just stupid?

So, should a person who applies the 'too scummy to be scum' fallacy be seen as having committed a scumtell? Depends completely on the circumstances, the relationship and other connections between the two players in question, other tells and level of suspicion of both players, etc. I've done it as scum, but in the same situation might have done it as town as well. Can't be sure. Didn't know he was actually my scumbuddy, though.

All in all,

Unvote; Vote: Pear Bear

. Not huge suspicions, but my best lead so far. OGML reread etc. hopefully coming tomorrow (got home late tonight).

[Pear Bear]

Off to Pear Bear, an original suspect of mine. To analyze posts with relevence:

Just lurking over here as my random vote on MK seems to have been a bit more than just random...

I called this out originally. Staying on a bandwagon and lurking to see what comes of it, it seems. His response to my questions:

It was my first game in which I had been present for the first day.
I had/still have absolutely no way of personally analyzing people on the first day, and, I won't lie, my mindset during that entire day was to keep informed and follow the majority because most of you know much better than me what youre doing.

Sorry for not addressing you, Plum, but I hadnt noticed that you voted me.
I was hesitant to post because my random vote for MK seemed to have been a decent pick in the first place, and I was assessing what everyone else was thinking to determine if I wanted to keep my vote on MK or not.
I realize, now, that random voting and then lurking when everyone else jumps aboard is really sketchy and I don't plan on doing it again. As for MK and his alleged role fishing, In some cases role fishing can be pro-town, and I think that this may be one of those cases.

Unvote MK

As Farkshinsoup pointed out, there is a problem here, mostly in that PB says he was assesing what everyone else was thinking when it came to him deciding whether to keep his vote on MK, not, say, MK's behavior and various tells. I didn't catch that as clearly the first time around (and meanwhile Santos was scummily lurking without even bothering to give the appearance of making something of an actual response). He realizes it's sketchy and doesn't plan on doing it again, nulltell. He thinks MK's rolefishing might have been protown. WTH, I said before, and I'll ask PB now:

Pear Bear, please clarify what you meant when you said MK's rolefishing might have been

pro-town

.

Well if a townie was rolefishing to determine if someone had a pro-town role then that townie would be able to defend and cooperate with that player, right?
That was my thought process.

I was hoping that if I had kept my vote on MK he would be lynched and turn out to be scum, but towards the end of that process I began to doubt his scumminess. That combined with pressure to act in someway caused me to remove my vote. However, I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess.

The problem

here

is that PB's motivations seem to be more related to scum's primary goal (looking pro-town and thus not getting lynched) than town's primary goal (lynching scum). Of course, scum's primary goal is town's important secondary goal as well, and sometimes priorities do get mixed up. "I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess," says PB. Well and good if he didn't want to vote Santos because he actually thought he was town (and explained his position well, of course). Less well and good if he didn't vote Santos because he merely wanted to look townie. Basically, in my completed games I've been scum once; first time I was ever scum, and that was the sort of mindset I had: always trying to gage whether the wagon was worth banding and how I'd look if the gut flipped town and I'd stayed off the wagon (due to a comedy of errors, this ended up with me accidentially not bussing my scumbuddy hard enough when he was really scummy, because I was fully convinced he was actually town [/ramble]).

Like I mentioned before, my mindset on day 1 was to trust the more experienced majority, as I at no point, that day, was ever fully convinced that anyone was scum.

I was also extremely surprised that I wasnt on Plums list of suspects as he was the only person to vote me yesterday and now I look 1000x scummier than then.

First of all, I'm a girl and prefer to be referred to with femenine pronouns . Second, my list noted people I most suspected on the count of being Santos' scumbuddy, and due to the way I compiled it, had some flaws. Maybe I should check and see whether you're a likely Santos buddy again, just in case I missed something in my micro-analysis ? As to my hasty Flameaxe voting: it was the start of Day 2. There are lots of potential suspects and plenty of ways to start off. Why not jump right in, even if Flameaxe doesn't end up being my final vote for today?

I had suspected you were female, but I figured the chances of finding a female on the internet werent in my favour, and decided to stick with the more likely pronouns. Thanks for clearing that up ^_^

And I still feel that if you had suspected me, and noticed that I didnt vote for Santos I should have at least been mentioned if even with a (less suspicious) disclaimer. That was the first thing that attracted my FoS in your direction.

If someone (town or scum) were to do something really obvious and scummy, and another player takes the bait, believes the lie and thinks the person who did the scummy thing is obviously pro-town (or so they say) should that player be looked at as suspicious? or just stupid?

So, should a person who applies the 'too scummy to be scum' fallacy be seen as having committed a scumtell? Depends completely on the circumstances, the relationship and other connections between the two players in question, other tells and level of suspicion of both players, etc. I've done it as scum, but in the same situation might have done it as town as well. Can't be sure. Didn't know he was actually my scumbuddy, though.

I guess if the majority of the responses to my question were for stupid rather than scummy, I won't think much of it for now.

[Plum]

Off to Pear Bear, an original suspect of mine. To analyze posts with relevence:

Just lurking over here as my random vote on MK seems to have been a bit more than just random...

I called this out originally. Staying on a bandwagon and lurking to see what comes of it, it seems. His response to my questions:

It was my first game in which I had been present for the first day.
I had/still have absolutely no way of personally analyzing people on the first day, and, I won't lie, my mindset during that entire day was to keep informed and follow the majority because most of you know much better than me what youre doing.

Yeah, but if you're town it's your job to express your own opinions. There are scum mixed in the players here, and

they

sure as heck aren't trying to get scum lynched. Expressing your own opinion and thinking for yourself is the pro-town thing to do and reduces scum's overall influence, percentage-wise. Even Day 1, though it's not always easy.

Sorry for not addressing you, Plum, but I hadnt noticed that you voted me.
I was hesitant to post because my random vote for MK seemed to have been a decent pick in the first place, and I was assessing what everyone else was thinking to determine if I wanted to keep my vote on MK or not.
I realize, now, that random voting and then lurking when everyone else jumps aboard is really sketchy and I don't plan on doing it again. As for MK and his alleged role fishing, In some cases role fishing can be pro-town, and I think that this may be one of those cases.

Unvote MK

As Farkshinsoup pointed out, there is a problem here, mostly in that PB says he was assesing what everyone else was thinking when it came to him deciding whether to keep his vote on MK, not, say, MK's behavior and various tells. I didn't catch that as clearly the first time around (and meanwhile Santos was scummily lurking without even bothering to give the appearance of making something of an actual response). He realizes it's sketchy and doesn't plan on doing it again, nulltell. He thinks MK's rolefishing might have been protown. WTH, I said before, and I'll ask PB now:

Pear Bear, please clarify what you meant when you said MK's rolefishing might have been

pro-town

.

Well if a townie was rolefishing to determine if someone had a pro-town role then that townie would be able to defend and cooperate with that player, right?
That was my thought process.

Your thought process is awfully scummy. Rolefishing is bad because it can out powerroles. Powerroles help town win the game; outing them lets the scum get a good shot at killing them. Rolefishing is never good. Plus, WTH, MK's mild not-fully-rolefishing was really speculation about Lynchers and Jesters, two

anti-town

roles. Do you even pay attention???

I was hoping that if I had kept my vote on MK he would be lynched and turn out to be scum, but towards the end of that process I began to doubt his scumminess. That combined with pressure to act in someway caused me to remove my vote. However, I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess.

The problem

here

is that PB's motivations seem to be more related to scum's primary goal (looking pro-town and thus not getting lynched) than town's primary goal (lynching scum). Of course, scum's primary goal is town's important secondary goal as well, and sometimes priorities do get mixed up. "I didn't think that Santos was scum either, and that by being one of the few to not vote him I would assure my nonscumminess," says PB. Well and good if he didn't want to vote Santos because he actually thought he was town (and explained his position well, of course). Less well and good if he didn't vote Santos because he merely wanted to look townie. Basically, in my completed games I've been scum once; first time I was ever scum, and that was the sort of mindset I had: always trying to gage whether the wagon was worth banding and how I'd look if the gut flipped town and I'd stayed off the wagon (due to a comedy of errors, this ended up with me accidentially not bussing my scumbuddy hard enough when he was really scummy, because I was fully convinced he was actually town [/ramble]).

Like I mentioned before, my mindset on day 1 was to trust the more experienced majority, as I at no point, that day, was ever fully convinced that anyone was scum.

As I mentioned before, that's bad and an anti-town idea. Also, not being fully convinced that anyone was scum isn't reason not to vote someone. Someone's going to get lynched, and it might as well be the player you have the strngest scum-reading on, even if you're not fully convinced. Pro-tip: you'll rarely be fully convinced that someone is scum barring Sane Cops. Attempts at lynching scum need to be made despite this.

I was also extremely surprised that I wasnt on Plums list of suspects as he was the only person to vote me yesterday and now I look 1000x scummier than then.

First of all, I'm a girl and prefer to be referred to with femenine pronouns . Second, my list noted people I most suspected on the count of being Santos' scumbuddy, and due to the way I compiled it, had some flaws. Maybe I should check and see whether you're a likely Santos buddy again, just in case I missed something in my micro-analysis ? As to my hasty Flameaxe voting: it was the start of Day 2. There are lots of potential suspects and plenty of ways to start off. Why not jump right in, even if Flameaxe doesn't end up being my final vote for today?

I had suspected you were female, but I figured the chances of finding a female on the internet werent in my favour, and decided to stick with the more likely pronouns. Thanks for clearing that up ^_^

And I still feel that if you had suspected me, and noticed that I didnt vote for Santos I should have at least been mentioned if even with a (less suspicious) disclaimer. That was the first thing that attracted my FoS in your direction.

There's a little gender sign below my avatar . Funny that I actually do give a 'potentially female' sort of impression.

As above, list wasn't perfect. However, checking why I didn't list you, I find that you didn't seem to check in at all as the Santos wagon really took off, so I had little info to go on about you in relation to Santos. Also, you didn't actually FOS me, and I thought that you were more surprised about me than actually suspicious of me. You were? Good to know, I suppose.

[Narsis]

now then, I understand the cases against Pear Bear, but posts like this:

EBWOP:

Stupid question:

Does scum know the identity of other scum in this game?

make me think he could just be a poor old townie.

now OGML I definitely do see as scummy based on his play yesterday.

Vote: OGML

Whenever I hear someone say something like, "based on his play yesterday" accompanied by a bandwagon vote, my ears twitch. No analysis, no real reason for your vote, and no real explanation for why that quote makes you think Pear Bear is townie. You mention both wagons, but your reasons for choosing one and rejecting the other seem arbitrary.

Also, this, the first post on Day 2:

those death scenes are making me hungry...

anyway...Day 2 now. what do you guys want to do?

Seems like now that you've figured out what everyone wants to do, you're happy to go along.

FoS Narsis

a) the case against OGML was already stated and i agree with thoughts on his play yesterday, and b) i would have thought that the reasoning behind the post making PB look more town would have been obvious. i would think that scum would know whether they know who the other scum are or aren't.

as for my first post...i hadn't really read over the game yet since replacing in.

[Simenon]

I am here and will update shortly. Sorry all.

[Hybris]

I am here and will update shortly. Sorry all.

Uh... I don't get it. Why do people make posts like this? Its decently scummy and doesn't actually throw any content in. Also, its followed about 90% of the time by them not actually putting the said review up. *Getting it out of my system*

[Plum]

I am here and will update shortly. Sorry all.

Uh... I don't get it. Why do people make posts like this? Its decently scummy and doesn't actually throw any content in. Also, its followed about 90% of the time by them not actually putting the said review up. *Getting it out of my system*

Uh, dude . . . Simenon is the Mod .

[Hybris]

Oh. *headdesk* And that makes four horrible screwups today...

[Jebus]

Here's my super-long readup post.


4. Santos, Precooked Mafia Goon (Anago), Lynched day one
13. GreenCrayons, Townie (Maguro), stabbed night one

For my reference ^

Post 1-27 - Confirmations
Post 28-34 - puns
Post 35 - game starts, first random vote

Post 42 - Plum uses RVS logic for defense.
Post 57 - Hybris notes how player numbers may = scum.
Post 62 - Seraphim asks for more votes on the RBT wagon.
Post 73 - More Seraphim on RBT wagon.

I'm assuming it's 13 to lynch?

Actually, no. Its twelve due to the secret role in the game that makes all lynches to need one less vote while alive.

lolumwot?
Post 77 - RBT self-votes.
Post 78 - Sirdanilot votes Hybris for Post 74.
Post 79 - Azhrei makes note of RBT but does nothing.
Post 81 - GreenCrayons votes RBT becuase he hates D1 self voters.
Post 85 - More Seraphim pushing wagon on RBT
Post 88 - MK's note of Seraphim being a lyncher or something. Probably nothing.
Post 92 - Seraphim saying it's only been one long RVS. I disagree, but meh. Noted, anyway.
Post 100 - OGML votes MK, with no other text.
Post 103 - Read yourself, OGML explains his vote. Good points, but why didn't he post that in 100?
Post 112 - RBT unvotes self, and justifies it as a sushi pun.
Post 115 - Read yourself. Raider seems a little too serious, though made me laugh at the same time.
Post 116 - Sirdanilot makes mini-case on Seraphim (with a vote), followed by an FoS on RBT for being surprised at the reaction to her self-vote.
Post 117 - Read yourself. Setenta (scum) makes minor connection to Seraphim, Sirdanilot, and RBT.
Post 118 - OGML pushes MK wagon.
Post 119 - Slicey agrees with Sirdanilot, and votes Seraphim.
Post 122 - MK responds to OGML's vote/wagon on him, though inadequately imo. (read yourself).
Post 123 - OGML speculates Raider as scumpartner to MK.
Post 126 - More of MK's inadequate defense. (Read)
Post 128 - Seraphim makes a case on three - MK, Slicey, and Sirdanilot.
Post 131 - MK's. Not sure what to say.
Post 136-138 - Ort's puts minor reason for unvoting MK.
Post 139 - Sirdanilot is displeased with Seraphim's 128.
Post 140 - Goes against Ort's reasoning for unvoting MK.
Post 142 - DGB makes a guess at some scum in this game. Nothing to really further the game, though.
Post 149 - DGB comes in to pressure Slicey. Legitimate, imo.
Post 150 - More OGML pushing for MK wagon.
Post 160 - MK responding to DGB's 142. Seems sure DGB is wrong, sort of.
Post 162 - Plum recap. Not bad.
Post 165 - Slicey says not voting for lack of scummyness to vote for. Wha?
Post 166 - OGML asks Slicey what he thinks about MK.
Post 172 - A few things here. Says for some reason posts 161-2 (made by plum) scream anti-town (I disagree). Also says can back the RBT wagon (and does), but can't be confident about it (?)
Post 175-177 - Talitha defends Slicey and votes MK for OGML's reasoning.
Post 178 - Sirdanilot reinforces vote on Seraphim (read this one, strong post imo)
Post 182 - More OGML against MK.
Post 183 - RBT votes Seraphim (read this)
Post 184 - Seraphim calls 183 an OMGUS.
Post 188 - OGML strongly pushing MK lynch.
Post 190 - Hybris comes in, and doesn't see any of the three main cases (and requests a repost of such info).
Post 215 - Seraphim picks out a random lurker, who happens to be Santos, confirmed scum. Coincidence? Probably.
Post 223 - Santos saying he had nothing to say. Why did nobody say something?
Post 225 - HP[leaves] with a solid post on MK.
Post 226 - Among many other things, is first person to jump on (and vote) Santos for his post 223.
Post 230 - DGB says scum is caught (with post 223 (santos) quoted).
Post 234-240 - Wagon on Santos finally starts. People include (Seraphim, sirdanilot, DrippingGoofball, Hybris, Sentata, Slicey ).
Post 249 - MK posts something very interesting:

Hmm, missed the next page. The 'I already did' was directed at Setanta.

Catching up on the next page I notice a

lot of people would rather vote for me being honest

as opposed to posting some BS excuse that I can't read a forum thread of a few pages and will do so in several days from now. Pathetic.

*sigh* Join the club.

Post 258 - OGML more pushing for MK lynch (and throws in Raider as a possible scumpartner).
Post 262 -

I like the pressure on Santos; but I don't think he's that scummy to have another vote on.

Wha...?
Post 269 - More OGML pushing MK lynch.
Post 273 - Read this yourself. MK = scummy here?
Post 278 - OGML switches to the Santos wagon in lieu of his wonderful claim.
Post 285 - Azrhei hesitant, but votes Santos (L-1).
Post 294 - hp[leaves]: "You have a

safeclaim

?" - reeks to me, though second opinion appreciated.
Post 300 - Setenta hesitant, but against Santos.
Post 305 - Ort hammers Santos (finally).
Post 309 - Day Two Starts

And that's as far as I've gotten with my read. Will get Day two sometime tomorrow, hopefully.


My scumlist thus far (with scum-o-meter, 100 being definite, 30 being nuetral):

MK - 90/100
OGML - 90/100
hp[Leaves] 60/100
Seraphim 55/100
Setenta 40/100
DGB 35/100
Slicey 35/100
RBT 35/100
Ortolan 35/100

So I'm caught on who to vote for, though I'll probably vote OGML. Checking votecount...


Conclusions:
-OGML is strongly against MK, though doesn't say much about it. Suddenly switches to Santos at the last second.
-MK - somewhat contradictory, suggesting lynchers/jesters
-hp[leaves] - some odd posts.
-Seraphim - I don't actually remember why he was here, but he was at the top of my rolling scumlist at the end of post 166, where I cut off my read a little while ago.
-Setenta - mainly the hesitance to vote Santos.
-Ort - the beating around the bush with Santos. See below.
-The rest are general vibes.

Seriously, on the Santos wagon - his claim especially was BS. I'd have called him on it immediately and lynched. Obvscum, if I've ever seen it.

Votecount checked, this isn't a hammer -

Vote: OGML

Will expand on request.

[Hybris]

Why is M_K so high up? That lyncher/jester thing was in the random stage, and I'm honestly seeing that as a random comment. I really don't see why that part is getting brought back again and again.

[Farkshinsoup]

I am here and will update shortly. Sorry all.

FOS Simenon

. obvscum.

[DrippingGoofball]

I am here and will update shortly. Sorry all.

Uh... I don't get it. Why do people make posts like this? Its decently scummy and doesn't actually throw any content in. Also, its followed about 90% of the time by them not actually putting the said review up. *Getting it out of my system*

Hey Hybris, just for my curiosity. Who is the mod in this game?

[Microphone_Kirby]

Post 249 - MK posts something very interesting:

Hmm, missed the next page. The 'I already did' was directed at Setanta.

Catching up on the next page I notice a

lot of people would rather vote for me being honest

as opposed to posting some BS excuse that I can't read a forum thread of a few pages and will do so in several days from now. Pathetic.

*sigh* Join the club.

--------------
My scumlist thus far (with scum-o-meter, 100 being definite, 30 being nuetral):

MK - 90/100
--------------
Conclusions:
-MK - somewhat contradictory, suggesting lynchers/jesters

Will expand on request.

All right.

First, I request an expansion on #249. What about that post made it interesting?

Second, I want to know how your conclusions (on me) correlates with the scumlist and a possible expansion on that if the conclusions don't directly correlate... but a definite expansion on "somewhat contradictory" is necessary.

Maybe I'll respond strongly to your post after that.

[Hybris]

Oh. *headdesk* And that makes four horrible screwups today...

*points to the quoted message*

[Setanta]

Setenta - mainly the hesitance to vote Santos

Please note that I was already voting him for his scummy active lurking, as for the claim being bs, well it's a role I've seen used before and it's on the flash site. It was also easily testable, by getting him to vote. His answer directly contradicted the mod, so obviously he was scum.

Also does your points thingy, is that working on a % scale? Like for example are you 90% sure of OGML being mafia, or does it work differently?

Other than that for a catch up post, it's good as it's not information w/o analysis.

[Farkshinsoup]

So after investigating further, I see that Sirdanilot posted in the V/LA thread that he also would be gone until the 8th (same as hp[leaves]).

That leaves Alvinz95, Counselwolf, and Flameaxe who have been active on this site but have not posted in here since day 1.

Mod, did you prod those 3 players yet, and if you haven't, could you now?

[DrippingGoofball]

OGML's strategic lurking, when in jeopardy, confirms that he is scum.

vote: OGML

[OhGodMyLife]

We're almost at the threshhold where I'll be able to nail all the scum just based on my wagon. Hint: DGB is not one of them.

Plum, of all of those scrambling to find the right/easiest lynch in the wake of the Santos lynch, you're the only one who seemed to actually be trying to do so in a way diagnostic of alignment based on yesterday's play. Everyone else just seems to be putting people into a scumputer equation: x player said y (or didn't say y) about santos and voted at z time on the santos wagon = scum! This is why I think you're very likely town.

[Microphone_Kirby]

Plum, of all of those scrambling to find the right/easiest lynch in the wake of the Santos lynch, you're the only one who seemed to actually be trying to do so

in a way diagnostic of alignment

based on yesterday's play.

Um...... you lost me here. Can you explain that in

simpler

terms?