Mini 880 - Mini Quick and Dirty - Game Over

[ODDin]

crypto, do you even stop to think about what you're saying?
Let's say that S1 is number of scum on first day mislynch, SN1 is number of scum not on first day mislynch, A1 and AN1 are all people on / not on first day mislynch.
You simply say that SN1 > 0 most of the time - which tells you that there is some chance that scum are not on first day mislynch (no shit). What you're supposed to check is whether (SN1/AN1) > (S1/A1), that is, whether the chance of finding scum not on the mislynch is larger than finding scum on the mislynch.

Right now I'm leaning towards Zorblag and crypto with my vote. I want to hear more from them before I decide anything, though.

[VP Baltar]

Why are you leaning one of those two ODDin? What do you want to hear from them?

[ODDin]

Regarding Zorblag: I don't like it that he's fence sitting still. It bothered me at the end of D1, but then I reread what he wrote and it made more sense to me, and also I thought that I've never seen Zorblag actually starting a game (I played 2 games with him but he replaced in). Plus, he said that he's aware of the impression he's creating and that it's not true. So I decided to let the issue drop and see how he behaves D2. It hasn't changed much, we're very close to the deadline and he's silent, which doesn't sit right with how I remember him playing town (and I've seen him play town D2, and I saw him pushing arguments which weren't really great).
However, he's promised more content, so I want to wait a bit and see whether he actually comes up with something, and what.

Regarding crypto: there are the things you said on Raskol, and I agree with you on them. I admit to not seeing it myself, but when you pointed it out, you have a point.
Another issue is crypto's crap argument on the Sando wagon. I want to hear more from him to try to decide whether he was completely clueless or whether he was actually attempting to fabricate weird ass arguments.

[Papa Zito]

PZ, what are your thoughts on the Raskol case I put forth? I think it's better than "fencesitting" against Troll.

I still owe this game a reread. If I weren't sick I'd have done it by now. I'll look at your case in context while I'm reading.

Also, what are your suspicions on Scien? He's bothering me a bit, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

I can't either, and last time I couldn't he was scum. He's good at playing the logical/clueless townie game.

Please expand.

*blows into thumb*

What AGar said.

One of {AGar, ODDin, VP Baltar} should be lynched today for not being on the Sando wagon.

lolwut

[Zorblag]

I've got time while I'm proctoring an exam now to post that I've been grabbing time now and then at home to get my reads done. I'll have that this evening. This is just to let you know that I'm still here to some degree. I see some comments directed at me but they're going to be third priority behind giving opinions on people and thoughts on the state of the game. Fortunately I think that addresses much of what people have asked but after I've finished the first two priorities I hope to have time for that this evening.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[crypto]

You guys are missing the point. It's easier (for me) to find one mafioso out of three than to find one or two or three out of six or seven.

Regarding crypto: there are the things you said on Raskol, and I agree with you on them. I admit to not seeing it myself, but when you pointed it out, you have a point.
Another issue is crypto's crap argument on the Sando wagon. I want to hear more from him to try to decide whether he was completely clueless or whether he was actually attempting to fabricate weird ass arguments.

Hmm, okay, I typically make it more than four posts before resorting to the usual methods, but whatever: You're an idiot. Stop being an idiot.

[crypto]

*blows into thumb*

What AGar said.

That's not good enough. Do you just get vague gut reads on AGar, or what?

[crypto]

ODDin, you're voting for me because you think I'm "fabricat[ing] weird[-]ass arguments." Are you sure it isn't because suspicions of you? What are my weird-ass arguments?

[crypto]

EBWOP: because I voted suspicion of you

[crypto]

Fuck damn it, I am truly retarded. Voiced, not voted.

[charlatan]

Welcome to the game, crypto. I read a game of yours before and hoped to play with you sometime (though honestly that's mostly because I like players who use the word "fuck" with some regularity.)

VP has made some interesting points on Raskol, and Raskol replacing out without even addresing it is annoying in the extreme.

Is Raskol replacing out without addressing them only annoying, or also scummy?

I didn't vote for AGar solely because of the scum-off-the-mislynch-wagon theory. I think he's scummy on an individual level.

What specifically about AGar is scummy on an individual level?

Having read the most recent posts first before skipping back a page to catch up on what I'm missed, I got a bit of amusement out 532:

That's not good enough. Do you just get vague gut reads on AGar, or what?

You're calling PZ out for not explaining reads, but apparently not expounding on them yourself, either.

Also, what are your suspicions on Scien? He's bothering me a bit, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

I can't either, and last time I couldn't he was scum. He's good at playing the logical/clueless townie game.

I find this pretty interesting, because I'm having a hard time getting a handle on Scien this game, too, and I find this comment surprising. The only game I've played with him was that newbie game I was only in for a day or two (PZ was in it, too). The one difference I've noticed is that Scien was worlds more intense in that game, very much up to speed and making arguments. However, I did not find him clueless at all then and was rather impressed with him overall. Do I misunderstand what you're saying here?

[ODDin]

ODDin, you're voting for me because you think I'm "fabricat[ing] weird[-]ass arguments." Are you sure it isn't because suspicions of you? What are my weird-ass arguments?

I am not voting you. Actually, scratch that, I am as of the end of this post. But we'll get to that.

Your weird[-]ass argument is quite clear - it's the one about the value of looking for scum among those not being on a townie wagon D1. It has no mathematical basis (the chances to hit scum randomly in each group are equal at best), and it contradicts the logic of the game - not being on a towie wagon is not a scum tell, and if anything, it's a town tell.

The game isn't large. Currently you only have to keep track of 8 people - even this isn't so hard. And even if it is difficult for you (seeing that you replaced in pretty close to the deadline), there are MUCH better ways to choose a group of people to focus on.
Instead, you're making a really lame excuse as to why you're choosing a specific group of players to focus on.

So, yes, I think you're making up bullshit reasons to vote and suspect people, which is scummy.

Is my coming vote OMGUS? I'll let everybody else be the judge of that.

Is Raskol replacing out without addressing them only annoying, or also scummy?

Only annoying. I don't think replacing out of the game means something about the player's role, especially when a specific reason is provided which says the opposite. So, no, I don't think it's scummy, since I see no reason for Raskol-scum to be more likely to replace out than for Raskol-town.

And as promised

vote: crypto

[crypto]

ODDin, what are your reads on AGar and VP Baltar?

It has no mathematical basis (the chances to hit scum randomly in each group are equal at best)

It's not about that. I trust my ability to hit one goon out of a pool of three players a lot more than my ability to hit one or two goons out of a pool of six or seven players.

it contradicts the logic of the game - not being on a towie wagon is not a scum tell, and if anything, it's a town tell

FOS: ODDin.

You know that's wrong. Oh, and I didn't call it a scum tell. I'm saying I find it very likely that there's scum among the three of you.

The game isn't large. Currently you only have to keep track of 8 people - even this isn't so hard.

I didn't say it was hard to keep track of eight people. I'm saying that typically it's easier to pick scum out of a small group than it is to pick scum out of a big group.

And even if it is difficult for you (seeing that you replaced in pretty close to the deadline), there are MUCH better ways to choose a group of people to focus on.

Wanna reveal those ways, O Mighty One?

Instead, you're making a really lame excuse as to why you're choosing a specific group of players to focus on.

You're still being moronic.

So, yes, I think you're making up bullshit reasons to vote and suspect people, which is scummy.

You just said that. Also, you're still being moronic. Also-also, I already said that wasn't the primary reason for my vote for AGar. Also-also-also, I didn't say I suspected any of those three players. I already told you "accusing" was too strong a word. Stop misrepresenting my posts and/or stop being a terrible reader.

Is my coming vote OMGUS? I'll let everybody else be the judge of that.

Why can't

I

be the judge of it? Anyway, yes, hopping off your super-awesome Troll/PZ soapbox to vote for me because you think I'm mathematically deficient and scum-hunting illogically is 100% OMGUS. It's especially delicious when you ignore Raskol all game and then suddenly claim to have had an epiphany about Baltar's points versus him.

I think this needs more emphasis. You go from finding my math/method flawed and stating indecision about whether or not I'm just a bad player to voting for me ... because you find my math/method flawed. And then you essentially admit that what you're doing may look like OMGUS, but you don't even bother arguing to the contrary. Wait a second. You didn't actually bring up any new info to support your vote, other than the fact that I'm adamant in my stance. ODDin, you've built a truly rock-solid case against me. I'm ashamed for having ever challenged you; you are clearly the superior scum hunter.

---

You're calling PZ out for not explaining reads, but apparently not expounding on them yourself, either.

Meh, I just want to know what he's seeing in AGar that makes him think AGar's town, and what sorts of things he's noticed AGar-scum do that AGar hasn't done here. I'm more interested in AGar than PZ at the moment.

[ODDin]

ODDin, what are your reads on AGar and VP Baltar?

My read on AGar is slightly scummy, because I don't entirely trust that he simply skimmed D1 and not deliberately stayed under the radar.

My read on VP is slightly pro-town. He hasn't done anything I find scummy. He's fairly active, he pushes things but doesn't tunnel, looks like he's actively scumhunting and looking for new stuff.

it contradicts the logic of the game - not being on a towie wagon is not a scum tell, and if anything, it's a town tell

FOS: ODDin.

You know that's wrong. Oh, and I didn't call it a scum tell. I'm saying I find it very likely that there's scum among the three of you.

No, I don't know it's wrong. Also, I said it isn't a scum tell, and you apparently aren't saying it's a scum tell either. So how is this wrong, exactly? Notice that I didn't say it's a town tell - though it might be under certain circumstances.

The game isn't large. Currently you only have to keep track of 8 people - even this isn't so hard.

I didn't say it was hard to keep track of eight people. I'm saying that typically it's easier to pick scum out of a small group than it is to pick scum out of a big group.

There's a thing called tunneling. There's a reason it's bad.
First of all, you shouldn't only be looking for one scum at a time. You should be looking for all scum all the time. Other than that, the narrow focus doesn't allow others to properly understand your relations to people. Suppose somebody flips scum. One goes back to reread how other people were treating him, what were they saying about him, could they be his scumbuddies. But oh, well, crypto didn't even bother looking at him, so zero info from here.
This is bad.

And even if it is difficult for you (seeing that you replaced in pretty close to the deadline), there are MUCH better ways to choose a group of people to focus on.

Wanna reveal those ways, O Mighty One?

Well, for starters, you can go with those who have a vote on them already. Since there are townies around who actually read the game, it'd make sense to assume that they found at least some reasons to vote for people, and that there aren't extremely scummy things they've missed. So, if I really had to limit the group of people I choose from, I'd probably go for those who have a vote on them.

So, yes, I think you're making up bullshit reasons to vote and suspect people, which is scummy.

You just said that. Also, you're still being moronic. Also-also, I already said that wasn't the primary reason for my vote for AGar. Also-also-also, I didn't say I suspected any of those three players. I already told you "accusing" was too strong a word. Stop misrepresenting my posts and/or stop being a terrible reader.

I see that calling me a moron / idiot is a favourite defence tactic of yours. This is gonna get you places.
Now, I can agree that you aren't accusing them. The fact that you limit your search to 3 people you aren't even accusing or calling scummy makes this all the worse, you know. People around here are being asked for top 3 SUSPECTS, and you're giving 3 people who are the only people you're looking at at all.

Is my coming vote OMGUS? I'll let everybody else be the judge of that.

Why can't

I

be the judge of it? Anyway, yes, hopping off your super-awesome Troll/PZ soapbox to vote for me because you think I'm mathematically deficient and scum-hunting illogically is 100% OMGUS. It's especially delicious when you ignore Raskol all game and then suddenly claim to have had an epiphany about Baltar's points versus him.

Way to go.
1) I unvoted PZ for reasons which had nothing to do with you. There was miscommunication between us, I didn't understand some of the things he was saying, the issue was clarified (thanks to OJ), I realised that in light of the clarification my vote on him as very weak, I unvoted.

2) I was never strongly accusing Zorblag. I was suspicios of him, yes. I still don't like his play and think it's scummy, but I don't think I said that I super suspect him.

3) Worst, however, is the fact that you weren't even voting for me. OMGUS as a scum tactic is meant to nullify the attack against you by instead attacking the one behind the attack - if you convince people that your attacker is scummy, then you sort of defend yourself. How exactly is OMGUSing you supposed to help me if I'm scum? You were barely attacking me at all.

4) It does feel like you're OMGUSing me, however. Very much so.

5) That being said, I can agree to the issue about Raskol. Yes, I didn't notice the points against him until VP posted it. If you think I lied and just hopped on the opportunity to vote you, you're free to think so.

6) Still, it escapes me how voting you would help me if I were scum. For crying out loud, I'm the only one voting for you. I have more votes than you.

And then you essentially admit that what you're doing may look like OMGUS, but you don't even bother arguing to the contrary.

Anytime X accuses Y and Y accuses X it can be called an OMGUS. To say your vote isn't OMGUS means, essentially, to say "no, I'm not lying". If you think I'm, saying "no I'm not" won't change your mind. That's why I don't find much sense in defending against OMGUS accusations - not now and not ever. The only "defence" I can provide is what I said above - to say that I don't see how my actions benefit scum. But this is bordering on WIFOM.

[crypto]

No, I don't know it's wrong. Also, I said it isn't a scum tell, and you apparently aren't saying it's a scum tell either. So how is this wrong, exactly? Notice that I didn't say it's a town tell - though it might be under certain circumstances.

"If anything, it's a town tell" is

vastly

different from it's a town tell "under certain circumstances." (Yes, "If anything, it's a town tell" was my issue with what you said.)

I see that calling me a moron / idiot is a favourite defence tactic of yours. This is gonna get you places.

Well, I'm trying very hard not to actually call you a moron or an idiot and rely instead on adjectives, but yes. I know from experience.

The fact that you limit your search to 3 people

False. You're either (a) misconstructing what I said, (b) really bad at reading, or (c) unaware of what the word

search

means.

you aren't even accusing or calling scummy

False. Pretty clear I'm calling AGar scummy. I could have worded that better.

3 people who are the only people you're looking at at all.

False.

1) I unvoted PZ for reasons which had nothing to do with you. There was miscommunication between us, I didn't understand some of the things he was saying, the issue was clarified (thanks to OJ), I realised that in light of the clarification my vote on him as very weak, I unvoted.

Oh. When I entered the game you were just completely limbo and had no decent scum reads. My mistake. I understand now.

4) It does feel like you're OMGUSing me, however. Very much so.

Then you are chronologically challenged.

6) Still, it escapes me how voting you would help me if I were scum. For crying out loud, I'm the only one voting for you. I have more votes than you.

To discredit me? *shrug* I don't really care. I'm not interested in pursuing a case on you at the moment. If I did I assure you my case against you would be much more ... existent.

---

If you expect me to take you seriously, stop attacking my apparent inexperience (which is stupid anyway since I seem to have played more games than you have, Mr. Math Genius, and since experience doesn't matter one bit in the first place) and start attacking my apparent scumminess. Stop pulling stuff out of your ass while your at it.

[Papa Zito]

Is my coming vote OMGUS? I'll let everybody else be the judge of that.

That's the second time you've done that this game. Is this normal for you?

That's not good enough. Do you just get vague gut reads on AGar, or what?

Or what. I've played in back-to-back games with him, one in which he was scum and one in which he was town. Unless he's drastically altered his behavioral patterns (possible!) he's not playing to his scum meta.

[Papa Zito]

Oh, and moar Troll votes. TIA.

[crypto]

And AGar's playing to his town meta?

[Zorblag]

AGar

: Some attention to ekiM, pass for Papa Zito, some attention to VP Baltar. Responds to Amished, Ojanen but not thoughts on them. Conversation with Ojanen. Vote for ODDin on day two seems to be his first mention of him at all in the game and he continues to push that. The first mention of Sando seems to come day two. He says that he would have been on the lynch if he were around. ODDin's behavior is rubbing him the same way but mostly he's just saying he doesn't like the cases without giving any details. My post in which I spent the bulk of the typing addressing Papa Zito moved me off AGar's number two spot but he doesn't have someone to go there now?

With ekiM gone he seems to have dropped any attention on the player spot which is probably fine except that he hasn't mentioned Charlatan at all except to respond to him. There are just too many players that he seems not to have said anything about at all and his case seems to be just following the general mood.

Amished - Albert B. Rampage

: I did have an issue with how Amished reacted to Papa Zito's initial vote. The fear of claiming doesn't do it for me and it does look like there was an attempt to build a case out of nothing (though I expected Papa Zito's efforts to be directed towards starting a wagon for the sake of starting a wagon so I'm a bit biased.) The rest of Amished's play felt a bit off but not so much as Sando's did on day one. Albert B. Rampage isn't playing how I'm used to for him but this is a different game setting than I've seen before. If I take out the lack of agitating that wouldn't be an alignment tell anyhow I'm more or less indifferent to what he's done and there's not a whole lot of it.

ekiM - Charlatan

: On the whole I liked ekiM's play at the start of the game which I've said before. The activity levels started to be a concern but then he replaced out which counters that nicely. Charlatan seems to be doing a good job of questioning and paying attention. His reasons for acting have yet to strike me as contrived. At this point I'm not worried about this player spot.

ODDin

: I've only ever seen him play as scum. Both times that happened I ended my part of the game thinking that he was probably town. Actually I'd say that he's playing this game a bit worse than those games on the whole but other than a few cases where he's pushing something harder than I might like I think that he's following what he finds to be the best lead. I don't think that he would stay on things as hard as he has if he were scum.

Ojanen

: I think that I come away from the game thinking that Ojanen is making a bigger impact than she is for some reason; I can't really think of anytime throughout the game where anyone has voiced any sort of legitimate suspicion of her which I seem to think is unique in this game at this time. Having said that I also tend to like what she's doing so she's not high on my list of priorities at this time; I'm apparently not going to buck that trend.

Papa Zito

: If I'd been able to be around more this game (to address the latest acusation that I'm trying to lurk through the game I can only say that I wish that were it as I'd feel much better about that; I just haven't had the time to do justice to any of the games I'm in or moderating right now) I might take more issue with his current push to get me lynched. As it is I don't find it overly unreasonable for him to focus on me now for that reason. I do have problems which I've already expressed with how he used his vote the towards the end of day one. I'm not impressed with the cases he's been making (though I have a bias here) and he seems quicker to dismiss anything he's perceiving as criticism than I'd love but I'm still trying to decide how much of that can be attributed to burn-out (I think that it's likely a fair amount.)

Raskol - Crypto

: Crypto hasn't been around long at all but he's certainly making an impression. I agree that it's likely at least one scum wasn't on the Sando wagon yesterday but I agree with others that it's not significant enough to be a reason to be restricting our attention for the lynch today. Crypto's play mostly feels right for what I've seen in the past and I don't have enough connections from him to work with yet. I did change my views a couple times yesterday about Raskol's play yesterday think was a matter of developing the correct expectaions for his play. In the end I decided that they were a null tell. Despite him replacing out the lack of information overall after the initial play is a slight scum tell for me.

Scien

: There is some tangling with people in the early game over issues that I think aren't important that based on my experience is a bit of a town tell for Scien. I don't really like how he's treating me with kid gloves and playing up expectations about me. I also expect him to be more engaged in the game than he is but that's certainly not something that's unique to him. He seems to have expressed strong enough opinions here that his lack of a vote now surprises me.

VP Baltar

: Somehow VP Baltar is someone else who I think of as having been more involved than I think he actually has for some stretches of the game but in this case other than at the very start of the game he's let us know when to expect that. I'm a bit uncomfortable with his overall interactions with Papa Zito. There's a fair amount of pressure for various things throughout the game but the times seem a bit unexpected. I'll have to look at that again at a later point I think. For now I'm happy enough with what he's doing.

My current list of suspicions then would be, from scum to town and with the ones in the middle be somewhat arbitrary:

AGar
Albert B. Rampage
Crypto
Papa Zito
Scien
VP Baltar
ODDin
Charlatan
Ojanen

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

Vote: Agar

[Albert B. Rampage]

In recent developments, I'm suddenly less inclined to vote for Odd.

crypto's FOS really seems misplaced. I don't agree with it.

539 is good posting. I don't like 537 before that, because I think AGar still deserves to be lynched.

[ODDin]

crypto - you're full of shit and you're contradicting yourself. If you're NOT limiting the scope of your scumhunting to only 3 people, then the whole thing with "it's easier to search for scum among 3 people than 6" loses its point.
When I talked about you accusing people / calling them scummy, I obviously referred to the 3 people you mentioned as a group. You mentioned AGar separately, yes, but you included myself and VP in those who should be lynched. You only "accusation" of VP remains to this point that he wasn't on a townie wagon D1, and yet he's one of 3 people you believe should be lynched today.

Regarding chronology, you've begun accusing me much more severely and actively AFTER I expressed a desire to vote for you.

Also,

I'm not interested in pursuing a case on you at the moment. If I did I assure you my case against you would be much more ... existent.

So, you FoS me based on a nonexistent case?

Lastly, I AM attacking you based on your apparent scuminess. I'm attacking you for tunneling and inventing lame excuses for tunneling.
While we're at it, have you read the game at all? You've barely said anything of substance regarding the entire game. Are you, perhaps, just happy to argue with me with idiotic one liners that go nowhere hoping it'll make you look very active and then we'll forget you didn't bother with actually reading the game or commenting on real stuff?

That's the second time you've done that this game. Is this normal for you?

This time, you will notice that crypto has actually accused me of OMGUS himself before I said this. What I said was a reply to a direct accusation.
However, as I've said, I don't tend to "defend" myself against arguments which are, in their core, "I think you're lying" - simply because I don't think there's much point in defending against them. I can't prove I didn't lie. I've already explained the reason behind my vote - if one thinks the stated reason is a fabrication and the actual reason is different, there's nothing much I can do. Any attempt at defending against such accusations is bound to be WIFOM.


Also, I like 544 by Zorblag.

[ODDin]

crypto - you're full of shit and you're contradicting yourself. If you're NOT limiting the scope of your scumhunting to only 3 people, then the whole thing with "it's easier to search for scum among 3 people than 6" loses its point.
When I talked about you accusing people / calling them scummy, I obviously referred to the 3 people you mentioned as a group. You mentioned AGar separately, yes, but you included myself and VP in those who should be lynched. You only "accusation" of VP remains to this point that he wasn't on a townie wagon D1, and yet he's one of 3 people you believe should be lynched today.

Regarding chronology, you've begun accusing me much more severely and actively AFTER I expressed a desire to vote for you.

Also,

I'm not interested in pursuing a case on you at the moment. If I did I assure you my case against you would be much more ... existent.

So, you FoS me based on a nonexistent case?

Lastly, I AM attacking you based on your apparent scuminess. I'm attacking you for tunneling and inventing lame excuses for tunneling.
While we're at it, have you read the game at all? You've barely said anything of substance regarding the entire game. Are you, perhaps, just happy to argue with me with idiotic one liners that go nowhere hoping it'll make you look very active and then we'll forget you didn't bother with actually reading the game or commenting on real stuff?

That's the second time you've done that this game. Is this normal for you?

This time, you will notice that crypto has actually accused me of OMGUS himself before I said this. What I said was a reply to a direct accusation.
However, as I've said, I don't tend to "defend" myself against arguments which are, in their core, "I think you're lying" - simply because I don't think there's much point in defending against them. I can't prove I didn't lie. I've already explained the reason behind my vote - if one thinks the stated reason is a fabrication and the actual reason is different, there's nothing much I can do. Any attempt at defending against such accusations is bound to be WIFOM.


Also, I like 544 by Zorblag.

[VP Baltar]

Tomorrow is deadline folks....more lynching AGar needs to be happening today.

[crypto]

crypto - you're full of shit and you're contradicting yourself. If you're NOT limiting the scope of your scumhunting to only 3 people, then the whole thing with "it's easier to search for scum among 3 people than 6" loses its point.

I can examine all players and still focus on a small group. I'll certainly give a little more focus to that group when I'm short on time.

When I talked about you accusing people / calling them scummy, I obviously referred to the 3 people you mentioned as a group. You mentioned AGar separately, yes, but you included myself and VP in those who should be lynched.

No, I said

one

of you should be lynched. There's a significant difference. Again, stop twisting my words.

You only "accusation" of VP remains to this point that he wasn't on a townie wagon D1, and yet he's one of 3 people you believe should be lynched today.

It wasn't an accusation. And ... oh, copypasta. You just don't get it, do you? No, I said

one

of you should be lynched. There's a significant difference. Again, stop twisting my words.

Regarding chronology, you've begun accusing me much more severely and actively AFTER I expressed a desire to vote for you.

Sure. I accused you before and then voiced a stronger accusation after. Whatever floats your boat, ODDin.

Also,

I'm not interested in pursuing a case on you at the moment. If I did I assure you my case against you would be much more ... existent.

So, you FoS me based on a nonexistent case?

I was unaware I need a case for a suspicion.

I'm attacking you for tunneling and inventing lame excuses for tunneling.

I'm not tunneling and I'm not inventing lame excuses. If this is all you still have to say then shut your fucking mouth because you're wasting your time and my energy.

While we're at it, have you read the game at all? You've barely said anything of substance regarding the entire game.

Yes, actually, I read/skimmed twenty-one pages in one night to replace into your precious fucking game, which you weren't even fucking participating in a week ago, with four days to your precious fucking deadline. I had zero reason to build a case on AGar when (a) he was already a popular lynch choice and (b) I wanted to walk the line between him and Zorblag as my top suspect before Zorblag posted his long-awaited analysis. If you really feel the need to make me, crypto, build a case on AGar, then I will, but I see zero motivation to do so.

Also, refer to my first post. No, wait, don't. You'll probably insist that I just flipped to a random page and quoted some random line to make it look like I was actively participating, despite my evident interest in AGar.

Are you, perhaps, just happy to argue with me with idiotic one liners that go nowhere hoping it'll make you look very active and then we'll forget you didn't bother with actually reading the game or commenting on real stuff?

See above. Also, ease up on the rhetoric. It makes my eyes bleed.

Also, I like 544 by Zorblag.

What about it?

[Ojanen]

Ugh, traveling hassle access trouble, I'll be here tonight if I don't get stranded in Copenhagen or full force tomorrow if I do