Mini 857 Disney Movie Mafia 2 - The Classics (Roll Credits)

[semioldguy]

I like beginning with fewer points at a time. It makes it more difficult and obvious for players to ignore as they can't just selectively answer some of your points while bypassing others.

Yes, there are further things I have for a case. No, I am not bringing those forth immediately.

[Starbuck]

FOS: Semioldguy

For voting and not providing a full case

[LlamaFluff]

Vote Count

YankCane151 (2) - Gorrad, semioldguy
Gorrad (1) - StrangerCoug
StrangerCoug (1) - Crazy
Brandi (1) - Starbuck

Not Voting (4) - Brandi, Jazzmyn, YankCane151

[semioldguy]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

[YankCane151]

@YankCane151
You've been asking questions but doing nothing with the answers you get.

Vote: YankCane151

I find YankCane151 and Brandi to be the scummiest players today. I see Jazzmyn as the most likely to be town.

Define "doing nothing with the answers you get". I make a mental note of them. Do you expect me to Vote or FoS someone everytime I get an answer?

[Crazy]

I'll post tomorrow; I'm too sick right now.

[StrangerCoug]

Mod: I swore I voted Gorrad a little while ago.

So you did... so you did...

No use just sitting there, so I'm going to ask everybody some questions: Of those not really participating much, who do you think is scummiest? Is it related to the activity level? If not, why?

I feel ignored at my attempt to generate discussion.

[semioldguy]

@YankCane151
You've been asking questions but doing nothing with the answers you get.

Vote: YankCane151

I find YankCane151 and Brandi to be the scummiest players today. I see Jazzmyn as the most likely to be town.

Define "doing nothing with the answers you get". I make a mental note of them. Do you expect me to Vote or FoS someone everytime I get an answer?

What have people's answers to your various questions told you about their possible alignment? What were you expecting them to respond with and how did they meet or not meet your expectations in their responses? What were you seeking to obtain by asking your questions? Take the answers you get and say something about them. Sharing your findings is often a pro-town thing to do that generates discussion and the dissection of suspects. Otherwise you give off the appearance of trying to be helpful without really being helpful.

[semioldguy]

No use just sitting there, so I'm going to ask everybody some questions: Of those not really participating much, who do you think is scummiest? Is it related to the activity level? If not, why?

I feel ignored at my attempt to generate discussion.

My vote should speak for my suspicions. I recommend others do the same. My reasoning given so far should indicate that it isn't because of activity level, but rather a gauge on interaction/content (or lack thereof).

[Gorrad]

I'm about halfway through the thread. Should be done with it tomorrow : D

[StrangerCoug]

No use just sitting there, so I'm going to ask everybody some questions: Of those not really participating much, who do you think is scummiest? Is it related to the activity level? If not, why?

I feel ignored at my attempt to generate discussion.

My vote should speak for my suspicions. I recommend others do the same. My reasoning given so far should indicate that it isn't because of activity level, but rather a gauge on interaction/content (or lack thereof).

Your vote does looks like it answers my question. Thanks for bringing that up.

[Jazzmyn]

@Jazz - Am I seriously the only one you find suspicious?

Not by a long shot. I am suspicious of almost everyone, frankly. It's just that you're the

most

suspicious to me. I set out much of my reasoning for that on Day 1, and my suspicion of you has grown, not waned, on Day 2.

My suspicions on most others are much less well-defined and not cohesive enough for me to make an actual case of. For the most part, they are more like little pieces here and there that do not yet add up to a sufficient enough whole for me to decide whether they are truly scummy or not. That said, I will set them all out in due course, right or wrong.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

No use just sitting there, so I'm going to ask everybody some questions: Of those not really participating much, who do you think is scummiest? Is it related to the activity level? If not, why?

Semioldguy, for reasons related to Day 1 and the Monkey lynch, not related to activity level. (Although he might not now be considered part of "those not participating much" since he's answered his prod today).

Brandi hasn't contributed a lot overall, but I haven't seen anything from her that strikes me as inherently scummy. (Therefore, suspicion related to activity level).

Similarly, YankCane hasn't contributed a lot overall, but I haven't seen anything from him that strikes me as inherently scummy. Although his recent comment about not posting until others chime in does set off an alarm bell. (Therefore, suspicion related mostly but not solely to activity level).

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

And, SC, why ask only about those who are not among the most active? Scum is found among the most active just as often as among the least active, at least in my experience.

Regards,
Jazz

[Starbuck]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

Because scum don't provide full cases. They just vote because they really don't care who dies, as long as it isn't them.

[Crazy]

Yank, you still need to explain this:

I'll abstain from posting until everyone returns.

And my brief thoughts:

Starbuck is still likely town because of her claim.

I don't think Gorrad is scum. I'm thinking his "mystique" is more likely to come from town, actually. Think what you will (WIFOM, etc.), but I don't see scum motivation for acting that way.

I still find SC scummy for his interaction with the Neopi wagon.

I have a relatively null-leaning-town read on both SOG and Jazzmyn.

Yank's posts are unimpressive; I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was scum.

Brandi's only posts Day 2 have been to defend herself, which is quite scummy.

[StrangerCoug]

And, SC, why ask only about those who are not among the most active? Scum is found among the most active just as often as among the least active, at least in my experience.

Regards,
Jazz

It got to the point where the active players were in the minority in my mindset and I wanted to gauge if anybody was suspicious for their activity level. I don't like Gorrad right now and he was among those inactive.

[semioldguy]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

Because scum don't provide full cases. They just vote because they really don't care who dies, as long as it isn't them.

There are plenty of good reasons for town to vote without providing cases. That doesn't make those votes automatically scummy.

[StrangerCoug]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

Because scum don't provide full cases. They just vote because they really don't care who dies, as long as it isn't them.

There are plenty of good reasons for town to vote without providing cases. That doesn't make those votes automatically scummy.

You should add that there have always been times that scum have posted a full case on somebody. They can't just pick people out of the blue if they want to win.

[Starbuck]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

Because scum don't provide full cases. They just vote because they really don't care who dies, as long as it isn't them.

There are plenty of good reasons for town to vote without providing cases. That doesn't make those votes automatically scummy.

I am asking you to provide a full case, and you are refusing. To me, that means, you really don't have much of one.

[semioldguy]

I am asking you to provide a full case, and you are refusing. To me, that means, you really don't have much of one.

You don't need a full case to vote someone and you don't need a full case for a vote to be pro-town.

[Jazzmyn]

It got to the point where the active players were in the minority in my mindset and I wanted to gauge if anybody was suspicious for their activity level. I don't like Gorrad right now and he was among those inactive.

Fair enough, I suppose. But I don't think that Gorrad is scum and, as I said previously, scum is just as often found among the most active players as among the least active players so I'm not convinced that this was a valid reason for you to sow suspicion

solely

upon the less active players while ignoring the more active players, who are just as likely to be scum.

Regards,
Jazz

[Starbuck]

I'm still waiting for a case from you, Jazz.

[LlamaFluff]

Brandi has been prodded

[StrangerCoug]

It got to the point where the active players were in the minority in my mindset and I wanted to gauge if anybody was suspicious for their activity level. I don't like Gorrad right now and he was among those inactive.

Fair enough, I suppose. But I don't think that Gorrad is scum and, as I said previously, scum is just as often found among the most active players as among the least active players so I'm not convinced that this was a valid reason for you to sow suspicion

solely

upon the less active players while ignoring the more active players, who are just as likely to be scum.

Where did I discount the possibility that there are scum in the active players?