Alright. Let's goddamn do this.
In Jazzmyn's first content-ful post (367), she fingers ZEEnon, me, Light-kun, and Howard.
Jazzmyn wrote:ZEEnon later, after having said that he was not going to quit the game, did just that without any notice in the thread at all. He just disappeared. The overall impression of ZEEnon that I am left with is that he was most likely scum who just couldn’t take the heat of having a wagon on him.
Drake:
His first 14 posts were ostensibly all joke posts. That's a lot of joke posts. Mind you, they led to ZEEnon's meltdown and if ZEEnon is scum, as I suspect he is, that's not a bad result. But still, something seems not quite right here. Very soon after his lengthy series of joke posts, Drake moved quickly to DDD, and seemed to focus on DDD pretty much exclusively from that point forward, but the suspicions that he levelled at DDD seem somewhat contrived to me. Then in his post 23, Drake says that DDD still thinking that ZEEnon is scum is suspicious. That seems off to me because it sounds like Drake saying that he KNOWS that ZEEnon is town, which he couldn't know unless he is scum.
Then Drake tells DDD that he "despises" softclaims by townies saying that they 'win with the town', accuses DDD of being 'schizophrenic' for accusing ZEEnon of tunnelling, (pretty strong language there - "despises" and "schizophrenic" - in circumstances that do not call for such extremes) and says that DDD was "buddying up" to Drake and Light. (again, what makes Drake so sure that Light is town, which he couldn't know unless he is scum?) In other posts to DDD, Drake also utilizes the false dilemma fallacy and offers another soft defence of Light-Kun before turning his sights to freeko eventually when it appears inevitable that that's the way the wind is blowing.
Light-Kun:
Another one who seemed to make rather disingenuous accusations against DDD on Day 1, without backing them up. Then there was that weird and unduly hostile post he made to na85 that just seemed to come out of left field. Subsequently, he seemed to side with freeko for a while before eventually voting for him, even though freeko was the scummiest player by far (despite having ultimately flipped town). Something definitely seems "off" about Light's Day 1 play but I'm not getting a "Omg, he's scum, lynch him immediately" feel from it at present. ZEEnon and Drake are pinging slightly louder.
Howard:
Not enough to go on yet, due to his predecessor, so I have to keep him in the top tier of my suspect list at present, by default.
Most of this feels fair to me. There are individual points in the case against me that I don't like, but her point about my 14 joke posts (which I counted upon her notation of them, much to my chagrin) is solid and there's nothing horribly out of line. What I don't like is her treatment of Howard, and what she says about him the player could apply to a smattering of different players in the game at this point. But that's pretty minor, too.
Her next post, 407:
Jazzmyn wrote:Regarding Light-Kun's vigilante claim, it's plausible and it is certainly testable, so we should be able to ascertain soon enough whether he really is town aligned or not. But I think that we should test LK to ensure that he will follow town consensus, whether that consensus is to take out a particular target tonight or to no-kill tonight, rather than have him act alone.
I don't know what a "prisoner's dilemma" is so I'm going to have to look that up before I'll be able to understand the post that referred to that scenario.
Regarding the paired wagons, from my review, the "shift" appears to have begun at post 271.
As of post 270, the votes were 4 on DDD (Drake, freeko, Jere, Fishy)and 3 on freeko (DDD, Howard, Light).
In post 271, Fishy switched from DDD to freeko, making it 4-3 in the opposite direction.
Then Drake and Jere both unvoted DDD.
Then, Nuwen, Drake and Jere voted freeko (with Howard unvoting and re-voting freeko in between Drake's and Jere's votes)
So, those who switched from the DDD wagon to the freeko wagon were Fishy, Drake and Jere.
Nary a comment on L-k's conduct at the beginning of the day - which I still find completely contrary to the idea that L-k is a pro-town vig - coupled with acceptance of the claim. The rest is just a basic re-hash of the detailed analysis that Nuwen posted of the wagons yesterday, boiling it down to just the vote-switches that, conveniently, finger Fishy, me, and Jere.
At the end of her 418:
Jazzmyn wrote:There is overlap among Fishy, Drake and Jere on the early DDD wagon and the late freeko wagon. On the early DDD wagon were 1, Drake; 2, freeko; 3, Jere; and Fishy came later at #4. On the late freeko wagon were 4, Fishy; 5 Nuwen; 6, Drake; 7 Jere. I think it most likely that there is scum among the overlap.
In her next post she chides Hohum (now Netlava) for his lack of contribution and welcomes Looker.
In the post following she agrees with most of what L-k said about Fishy but says she needs to re-read me and Jere. She pokes Hohum and Looker again.
In her 477:
Jazzmyn wrote:I find the case against Fishy more compelling than the case against Drake, although I get a scum-vibe from both of them. Yet, they are currently voting against each other. Pretty bold bussing if they are both scum.
I plan to do a re-read today in order to firm up my thoughts, update my game notes, and cast a vote.
@Looker, you have yet to contribute anything to the game since replacing. Please give us your thoughts and input on the game so far.
Still stuck on two players, even as she chides the lurkers and admits that voting for each other would be "bold."
Her 515:
Jazzmyn wrote:Upon re-reading, I still think that there is scum among Fishythefish, DraketheFake and JereIC, largely due to the vote analysis. Of the three, I find Fishy the most suspicious, not only for the voting pattern and his role in steering the wagons, but also for being so quick to accept Light_Kun's Vig claim and for being so against the idea of having the town direct LK's night kill or no-kill, purporting to prefer to let him choose independently, despite the fact that we need to test Light-Kun's claim since he could just as easily be a SK as a Vig. (And then a couple of weeks later Fishy posted, apropos of nothing and only after the hot light of suspicion had been directed to himself, that 'incidentally', he is no longer in favour of letting LK choose his own kill. That looks to me like Fishy realizing that he needed to backtrack in order to attempt to look more like a townie.)
Netlava's 'case' on JereIC is about a weak a case as I have ever read. While I do find Jere's "kill em' all" idea to be rather bizarre, the rest of Netlava's case is based upon her personal bugaboos about the choice of wording that Jere uses, and I just don't see his word choices as scumtells. As noted above, I do think that there is scum among Fishy, Drake and Jere,
but the rationale put forward by Netlava is strange and possibly indicative of scum just trying to manufacture a case on a player who has suspicion directed at him by others.
Looker comes across as useless, and potentially scummy. Why replace into a game if you have no intention of participating meaningfully in the game?
It's very annoying and in my (admittedly somewhat limited) experience, it more often turns out that the lurking replacement is scum than town.
In the result, at present I am inclined to vote for Fishy today.
First, however, I would like LK to confirm that he is still in agreement with taking direction from the town as to his night action, including whether or not to take any such action.
This is where I begin to get really interested. Jazz here is still pretty sure that there is scum to be found between Fishy and Jere and I (back up to three), but actually mentions some scummy behavior by other players in the game. I bolded those sections. I don't think her section on Fishy's response to L-k's claim makes a ton of sense, and this here is also the first time she directs even a modicum of suspicion at L-k since her first post: which looks like the same sort of backtracking of which she is trying to accuse Fishy.
In 530 she has a detailed back-and-forth with Fishy, which you can read if you're interested. She declares her intent to vote for Fishy pending a votecount, then posts to say she realized that Fishy has only one vote, but will wait until he returns from V/LA to do so, which seems overly cautious to me.
Her 592:
Jazzmyn wrote:I still think there is scum among Fishy, Drake and JereIC. As I said previously, Fishy is most suspicious to me. He went V/LA for a bit, which is the only reason I didn't vote him sooner (see prior posts) but nothing he has posted since his return has changed my mind.
Fishythefish wrote:DDD was shot. This is a pretty strong flavour argument- killer whales simply do not shoot people. I suppose it is possible that the mod decided the mafia kill method would be in keeping with the situation, but the vig's would not. However, it seems fairly unlikely.
It seems equally unlikely that townies would not all be penguins, and bizarrely unlikely that some of them would be krill. And yet freeko flipped townie krill - not only un-penguin, but the main staple of Antarctic penguins' diet.
Your insistence that the flavour makes LK's claim "very likely false" is very odd in these circumstances. Same goes for Drake.
Vote: Fishythefish
FoS: Drake
I agree with those who think that we should direct LK to not kill tonight.
Welcome aboard, Tubby.
Also, this thread needs more Netlava and more Looker.
Still most suspicious of the same three players? Check. Still calling out lurkers? Check. I won't begrudge her her interpretation of the flavor argument, but I think her heavy insistence that other interpretations of the argument are scummy is scummy in and of itself.
In her 608 she takes issue with Looker for - of all things - changing a meaningless section of a quote and inserting mild swearing into both my and Fishy's names. She's continued to find Looker's play suspect recently, like the rest of us, but as I pointed out RE: her most recent post, she tried to make it out that Fishy was still scum because only a scum with a "less powerful role" would act the way Looker does.
So the accumulated crimes:
1. Tunneling.
2. Tunneling.
3. Tunneling.
(Har.)
I actually might find this sort of replace-in conduct okay if she hadn't essentially been parroting what Nuwen first set forth all day, with minor asides to lurkers who - once they finally began to attract attention - were dealt with my incorporating their actions into the case against her current squeeze. It's her initial suspicions that make me suspicious: the fact that she never again mentions ZEEnon's many replacements' conduct specifically in context of continuing to be suspicious of that player chain, and the fact that she seems so ready to accept L-k at his word, and especially that she felt the need to feebly finger Howard at the beginning of the day.
People seem to have forgotten, however, that there are non-flavor based reasons as to why Light-kun was deemed suspicious and even ever had to claim. I'm going to bring those back to the forefront in a minute. And then there's still the problem of Looker.
You know who the convincing mafia players are despite their alignments (Because let's face it, some people are just good at playing mafia no matter what their role) and so you're trying to get close to them and get on their side, i.e. Light-Kun
