926 A Game of Thrones Mafia - Over.

[Locke Lamora]

Inq hasn't bothered to address anything he missed that was directed towards him, as far as I can tell. Hopefully he's working on that right now.

I'm not moving my vote from Percy unless we get some serious content, some solid stances and a general sense that we're better off not lynching his player slot, none of which I got from Bogre.

As for Mina vs Mac, I get the feeling that it's not going anywhere fast. I agree that Mac's refusal to vote is now a distraction and I also agree that his stubbornness not a tell either way. I personally think his reluctance to vote is causing a problem for Mina more than for the rest of us. If he continues throughout the game to refuse to put his vote down then I'm sure it'll become a problem and I'm sure it'll get him lynched. For now, I think it's just turning into a nasty argument that isn't helping us find scum.

[Faraday]

Day 2.10 vote-count. The

"

Happy Birthday to me'

votecount.

Seacore (1) [The Inquisition]
Bogre (4) [Mina, Raivann, Locke Lamora, Seacore]
Flutter (1) [Kinetic]
MacavityLock (1) [TheButtonMen
Not voting: (3) [Bogre, MacavityLock, Flutter,]

Deadline: March 24th @ 6pm GMT (atm)

[TheButtonmen]

@Mod: V / LA

This weekend. I may or may not have stable internet.

[Faraday]

can the mod durnk post? lol your limited access has been noted in my modly book[/colour]

[Seacore]

Lol, Faraday, Happy Birthday.

As my Grandfather said to me on my 21st. "Enjoy it, you'll only have one. You might have plenty of weddings, but only one 21st." [/true story]

[Mina]

I know this debate is starting to frustrate people. And I feel as though I'm repeating myself over and over again. So I'm forcing myself to keep this short:

Also, you didn't answer what would change in your read of me if I did decide to vote.

Don't make me repeat that quote in size 18 again.

It might change my read of the player you voted/didn't vote for. But why don't you just concern yourself with which player you think is most deserving of a vote, rather than with my read of you?

I've explained several times just why your lack of vote deserved a little poke. (Since you attacked Buttonmen for not voting his suspect, you clearly felt the same way.) But now I'm much more intrigued by your reactions, which seem wildly disproportionate to your motives for holding your vote.

I think there's something else going on here. Is it because one of Bogre/TheButtonmen/The Inquisition is your scumbuddy, and you don't want people to realize that your distancing was hot air? Is it because you've afraid to antagonize the other scum faction with a vote? Is it because you've taken such a hard stance that you're flustered and afraid voting now would look like you're backtracking? Do you just like annoying me? I don't know.

Now I'd like to ask a favour of you. If you respond to me again, could it please be about something--ANYTHING--other than whether cautious voting is a scumtell?

By the way, I like the way you try to disparage my answer before I even give it. I don't want to distract with mafia theory, and haven't done that this entire game, so why your intro?

To be honest, I do think you've been guilty of wasting time on theory. Case in point: the voting-vs.-not-voting debacle. And even you've admitted that much of your scumhunting has been based on the roles and set-up. But I won't deny that my comment was a bit barbed. I've discovered that snarkiness is a valuable

excuse to entertain myself

scumhunting tool. It gets reactions.

But this leads into something else that's been bugging me about you. Why does the bite in your post turn on and off? I'd feel much better about you if you were consistently a jerk. But while you get very snarky when fighting a case on you, you're quite dispassionate when attacking the players you believe are scum. I find that to be a HUGE red flag.

[Mina]

I'll restate that I can see the case on Mac and agree that it goes further than his not voting, although I still find that to be a scum tell. I don't tend to vote people for a single scum tell, so that shouldn't be too big a problem.

Just noticed this.

Not sure if I understand you. Are you saying you

would

or

wouldn't

vote for MacavityLock based on the evidence (i.e., more than one scumtell)? What do you mean by "shouldn't be too big a problem"? I'd like you to go on the record with an opinion.

Inq hasn't bothered to address anything he missed that was directed towards him, as far as I can tell. Hopefully he's working on that right now.

I'm not moving my vote from Percy unless we get some serious content, some solid stances and a general sense that we're better off not lynching his player slot, none of which I got from Bogre.

I agree with both these points. I've been getting so frustrated with Bogre because there are players I'd like to pressure and attack and vote...and yet I can't, because his slot has given us nothing. I'd be rewarding lurking.

As for Mina vs Mac, I get the feeling that it's not going anywhere fast. I agree that Mac's refusal to vote is now a distraction and I also agree that his stubbornness not a tell either way. I personally think his reluctance to vote is causing a problem for Mina more than for the rest of us. If he continues throughout the game to refuse to put his vote down then I'm sure it'll become a problem and I'm sure it'll get him lynched. For now, I think it's just turning into a nasty argument that isn't helping us find scum.

I think some of this can be laid on my head. I can be a bit...relentless sometimes. I apologize if this is turning into a distraction.

I disagree that this exchange hasn't helped us find scum. To let you in on a little secret...no, I'm usually not a crazy vote Nazi (which is why I haven't got around to pressuring all the late or non-voters). I'm not offended by the mere thought of ML not having placed a vote yet. I'd become increasingly uneasy about MacavityLock, found his lack of a vote mildly suspicious, and decided it was a good place to apply pressure. I know that I've gotten a much better read on MacLock as a result of our interaction...and not because he still refuses to place his vote, but because of the

way

he's refusing to place it.

I think his reluctance to vote is so silly that I feel like there has to be

something

there. And I really feel as though he's moving the goalposts in our interaction and turning the argument into a question of voting theory. I notice that he doesn't respond to all my points--yeah, it's understandable given the length of my posts, but the one or two sentences he tends to quote are usually the ones less relevant to the meat of my argument. But I'm making a conscious effort not to bury him in text (for me, this is actually restraint!).

Would anyone be interested in me writing an organized case on MacavityLock, based on his behaviour all game (outside the voting debacle)? I don't want to oversaturate the thread.

Question for Locke and those who don't see the case on ML: do you notice a marked difference in MacavityLock's posting style between when he's scumhunting and when he's defending himself? Raivann agreed with me, but I'd like hear the opposing viewpoint.

Another question, for people who've played with MacavityLock before: does he tend to get very stubborn and prickly as town (or as scum) the moment he's attacked? Some players are overdefensive and emotional regardless of alignment. But he was coming across as very reasonable and cool-headed before. I'd like to know if this is in character for him.

[Percy]

Day 1

Kinetic proposes mass name claim because he "has a suspicion". Also "I have plans" etc..

To add to that, the sheer fact that you propose this idea, softly support it and say you don't care if it doesn't go through, but would like to see it go through anyway makes me very suspicious of your intentions. Fence sitting on your own proposal is quite strange (suspicious) to me.

Agreement, goodposting.

I'm more inclined to believe Raivann misrepped Mina than that Raivann caused Mina to back down from some scumtell or whatever. My read on both these slots is pretty null atm, though.

xvart is super townie. The fact that he got NKed is no surprise to me. He lied in his nameclaim, though, which is surprising.

I'm pro name claim I've decided, which is a complete flip I know.
...
I will honestly be very suspicious of people I consider to be the "bad guys" in the books.

Scum alert! I liked what The Inquisition said about how easy it would be to make anyone the mafia team within the book series. I've also seen games where the "good guys" are actually the Mafia - the one that comes to mind is Harry Potter mafia, where Harry, Ron and Hermione were a scumteam. If I was scum with a good-sounding name, this is the plan I would back. The backflip, also, is worth noting.

I don't understand how anyone could vote for a nameclaim, given that Seacore (one of the advocates) was arguing against a link between names and PR levels, but hoping for a connection between names and scum. When designing theme games, the former (not linking names to PRs) helps the town, whilst the latter (not linking names to alignment) helps the scum. The mod's first thought (well, it would be my first thought) would be to help the scum in a nameclaim scenario, not the town.

Also, let it be known that one confirmed townie voted against nameclaiming, so I find it far more likely that either the scum split down the middle for the vote or all voted for the idea.

Also also, it seems to me like the town was persuaded into wasting D1 on discussing a name claim instead of scumhunting, and settled for a lurker lynch at the last minute. Then Kinetic uses these claims and flavours to make sweeping assumptions. I have a sneaking suspicion that Faraday is laughing at the town right now.

My impression right now is that Seacore and Kinetic have both been "town leaders" throughout D1, and neither of then managed to accomplish a single thing that helped the town. Scumvibes from both.

Wow, the end of the day devolved into "who is the biggest lurker/best policy lynch". Scum paradise.

Persons of interest leaving D1: TheButtonmen, Seacore, Kinetic.

Day 2

TheButtonmen gets no result. Scum RB or scum Button.

Blergh, D2 is just a mess. Lurkers didn't help, especially my predecessor, but I feel there hasn't been any concerted effort in building character profiles on all but a few players. This may be because the town's focus is far too much on names, on claims, and other crap. I found reading wall after wall after fucking wall just mind-numbing. I'll do an ISO of each of the players, and explain my reads on each of them.

Locke Lamora

Locke Lamora votes Bogre for lurking; he voted Heilograph for being a newbie. The only other contribution has been to throw some suspicion at TheButtonmen, and he's happy to say (in high dudgeon) that my slot is the one that needs to take strong stances. I'll also reference this post of TheButtonmen's to show his attitude towards my slot seems more one of convenience than a genuine interest in finding scum. I also find the "I think this is a scumtell, I used it successfully in game X" is indicative of scum as well; trying to align your meta with your townmeta seems pre-emptively defensive, and I don't like it. I would be completely OK with a LL lynch.

Seacore

D1 play is terrible, as outlined above.
Halfway through the day, his suspects are a lurker and the claimed cop. *facepalm*
But...
I am very ambivalent about Seacore. I think he has been an anti-town force (I was throwing my keyboard around my room with fits of "WHAT ARE YOU DOING" while reading D1) and has turned the town's focus away from the more prominent players, instead encouraging a "post=town, not post=scum" and objective-nameclaim-analysis atmosphere, which I think makes it much harder for town in a theme game to progress. HOWEVER, I have a sneaking suspicion that these mistakes are made honestly and made in a misguided attempt to help the town.
The scumread just isn't there, which is surprising given how anti-town I think he's been. Seacore is probably town.

Kinetic

Many of the same points I addressed regarding Seacore and his anti-town stances apply here. "I AM A SETUP BREAKING CHAMPION" cries are not new to me, and they have screwed every game I've been in where I've heard one, whether the player is scum or town. I've been unimpressed with his analysis and his scumhunting. He voted The Inquisition, but unvoted and couldn't explain due to modkillfear, and now is voting someone "at a high maybe, leaning towards scum."
Personally, Kinetic is mostly null, leaning towards scum.

Mina

I find her lack of succinctness difficult to read. I think her tunneling on ML gives her a few town points, even though I disagree with most of her arguments.

Raivann

His Unvote on Seacore gives him a few points, but his vote on my predecessor sits really oddly, as though he's content to let another VI lurker get lynched without following up on any of the other players in the game. Mild scumread.

TheButtonmen

I'm unsure of this slot. Claiming cop is interesting, so we'll have to see how this pans out. I find TheButtonmen quite difficult to read in general, but I like the fact that he put pressure on ML.

The Inquisition

First I assumed that he was telling the complete truth. However, whilst I can understand BP townie claiming to have soaked a kill, to alert the town to a second killing faction, I can't understand claiming that you still had a shot of armour. Surely you would want to try and draw the kill again and say you were 1-shot, and if the SK shot you again you could laugh in their face.
So, I assumed The Inquisition was lying. If he is SK and got his by the mafia, he may have wanted the mafia to try not shooting him tonight, as his 1-shot BP has been soaked, and so said he had a second piece of armour. If he is scum and their kill was blocked somehow, he may want to alert the town to a second kill and dissasociate himself from killing factions. I find both of these explanations more plausible.

His only defence so far has been "honesty is the best policy", but I don't buy it.

Also, from Seacore:

2) His flip over the nameclaim. He was samwell with bulletproof and he thought that name claiming would reveal roles? I don't buy his explanation of this.

I think this is rather indicative of some shenanigans. Even though I originally agreed with The Inquisition on the nameclaim plan, I can understand why The Inquisition would oppose a nameclaim and then double back on it if he had a suspicious character name. This is all slotting together...

His play so far was: D1 "I don't want a nameclaim" and D2 "Claim and attack Seacore". Not only that, but in his attack on Seacore, he says:

Finally, take note that when Seacore places his vote on helio that he does so saying that it will either be a scum or a VI lynched, good for the town. He's already setting up the mitigating circumstances for his vote.

...and later on, says on a Seacore lynch:

Still, lynching him isn't nearly as valuable as lynching Seacore. Seacore has already claimed VT, so we 99% wouldn't be lynching a power role already, Seacore is scummy as all-get-out, and I think we'll gain some further insight into the game otherwise.

Hypocrisy + a claim I find very difficult to believe + suspicious circumstances surrounding the nameclaim =

Vote: The Inquisition

.

MacavityLock

I've played with MacavityLock before, his town to my scum. His prickliness and stance towards voting in that game were identical to this one. I have a mild townread.

Flutter

Not enough content for a strong read. Needs moar posting.


tl;dr: The Inquisition's claim is probably BS, and I don't like his contributions, so I'm voting him.
Second suspect is Locke. I have very mild scumreads on Kinetic and Raivann.
There are many players I would like to see post more than just opinions on one or two players between setup/name speculation. I think the focus on this game should be to get content out of each player, and just leaving your vote on a lurker/flaker isn't going to get anything done.

*collapses*

[Seacore]

Also, let it be known that one confirmed townie voted against nameclaiming, so I find it far more likely that either the scum split down the middle for the vote or all voted for the idea.

This doesn't hold true. A town (vanila townie at that) has no way of knowing whether a name claim benefits town or scum or neither. So to say that because a townie was on one side of the argument means that all the scum can't be on the same side, that doesn't hold water.

TheButtonmen gets no result. Scum RB or scum Button.

Or Limited Button, which is what his case is.

I mega agree with your vote on Inq, since obviously you aren't going to vote yourself.

I find myself with some difficulty. Most of the bogre case is lurking and really poor contributions. Percy has stopped both of these things. But Percy is also better scum than Bogre (assuming bogre was scum) so I wouldn't expect these things of bogre.

I'm going to go back to Inq.
a) Because I think he's scum
b) Because a bit of pressure on him to answer those questions would be good

unvote. Vot inq

[Faraday]

Day 2.11 vote-count. The

"

Mod is back!'

votecount.

Seacore (1) [The Inquisition,]
Percy (3) [Mina, Raivann, Locke Lamora]
Flutter (1) [Kinetic]
MacavityLock (1) [TheButtonMen]
The Inquistion (2) [Percy, Seacore ]
Not voting: (2) [MacavityLock, Flutter]

Deadline: March 24th @ 6pm GMT (atm)
Still no word on a flutter replacement, but I'm trying.

[Locke Lamora]

Percy: actually, I think I made it quite clear that I voted Bogre because when he did bother to post in the game, he wasn't making any effort towards scumhunting. Where did you get the impression I was voting him for lurking?

Inq: I am still waiting for you to respond to my question about your original motivation for saying what you did about the nameclaim.

Mina: Mac's posts seem a lot lengthier and a lot more frustrated since you got him on the defensive. I don't see anything in that change that's indicative of him being scum. I've only played with Mac once, very briefly and I wasn't very active at all in that game (British Comedy Mafia, I was replaced D1), but from what I remember I don't notice any significant different playstyle change.

[Percy]

This doesn't hold true. A town (vanila townie at that) has no way of knowing whether a name claim benefits town or scum or neither. So to say that because a townie was on one side of the argument means that all the scum can't be on the same side, that doesn't hold water.

Sorry, but it does.
The no votes were:
Macavity
Raivann
Xvart
The Inquisition

xvart was a townie who voted no. I find it extremely unlikely that the scum also

all

voted no. Don't you? If not, what do you think of Raivann's and ML's "no" votes?

I mega agree with your vote on Inq, since obviously you aren't going to vote yourself.

What? Are you implying that the only two people worth voting in this game are myself and The Inquisition? That's a very big false dichotomy right there.

Percy: actually, I think I made it quite clear that I voted Bogre because when he did bother to post in the game, he wasn't making any effort towards scumhunting. Where did you get the impression I was voting him for lurking?

OK, should have been more specific. Your charge was more along the lines of "active lurking" than simply lurking:

It's nice of Bogre to give Seacore some advice on how to be a better townie but I think this might be filler in place of scumhunting. Scumhunting itself seems to have been absent since we started the nameclaim.

Seems a bit odd that you would say "no-one is scumhunting, but I'm going to vote Bogre for not scumhunting". Still, the bulk of your case seems to be not posting, and/or not posting good content. I think this is a pretty weak line of attack; even though you're not the only one who's doing it, I think the "kill the one who is scumhunting the least" approach is what makes things like the Heilograph mislynch and the cop claim happen. I understand pressuring people for content, I really do; however, I think that this shouldn't stop people from hunting scum elsewhere.
Speaking of which,

I'm not moving my vote from Percy unless we get some serious content, some solid stances and a general sense that we're better off not lynching his player slot, none of which I got from Bogre.

How's that coming? I think I'm good with at least the first two.

[Raivann]

unvote

[Percy]

I appreciate it, Raivann, but is that all you've got? Seriously?

It's a few days before deadline, and your lurker vote didn't pan out, and you've said things like this:

The Inq. brought the pressure on himself by saying he was targeted by scum and that he was semi BP.

I'm kinda suspicious of the players who are voting him actually.

...and no comment?

I say we lynch The Inq, and if he flips scum, we lynch his buddy Raivann.

[TheButtonmen]

The case against Mac wasn't about his unwilliningness to vote; that was just one symptom of it. It was about his unwillingness to say concrete things about what was happening in game and his constant metaing and set up / role

analysis

speculation rather then scum hunting. He defended himself by linking his past games and by turning it into an argument about voting theory; you can see why this doesn't relieve my suspicions.

@Percy:

Glad to be playing with you again!

@Seacore:

No my limiting factor(s) didn't effect me getting No Result. Scum has a RB.

@Mina:

No my night action is unaffected by what people do during the day; no way to game the system.

Note:

I can now confirm my internet access will be creative until Monday, so I may or may not be able to post anything for the next 48ish.

[Seacore]

xvart was a townie who voted no. I find it extremely unlikely that the scum also all voted no. Don't you? If not, what do you think of Raivann's and ML's "no" votes?

Unlikely? Maybe. But certain? No. I don't think Mina and Raivann are ruled out as a scum team. I made a small case against Mina on Day 1 that wasn't pure rubbish and even you have found Raivann less than amazing. So I don't think we've proven anything about the name claim vote. Are either of them my top suspects? No. But still, nothing certain.

What? Are you implying that the only two people worth voting in this game are myself and The Inquisition? That's a very big false dichotomy right there.

It's a current personal dichotomy. You and Inq are my top two suspects (well Bogre and Inq was).

Basically, I feel that Inq is scummy, for the points I've raised previously.
I feel that Bogre was scummy because of heavy active lurking.
Bogre's particular brand of active lurking felt scummy. (Side note, do you agree with this read of him?)
However you have posted some cases and some reads, which was a good step away from active lurking. But I'd expect that of scum Percy.
What I'm happier about is that you've found my other top scum suspect to be scummy.
Are there other people who I've been finding scummy? Yes. But none are currently at that point where I want them lynched. I'm actually suspicious of everybody, there are no confirmed townies in my eyes.

This also brings me to Mina's question that I forgot to answer.

Not sure if I understand you. Are you saying you would or wouldn't vote for MacavityLock based on the evidence (i.e., more than one scumtell)? What do you mean by "shouldn't be too big a problem"? I'd like you to go on the record with an opinion.

I wrote really long paragraphs answering these two questions, and then made a TL;DR summary. But the summaries work on their own better than the long explanation, so I'm just going to go for them.

1)At the moment, I wouldn't vote for Mac, I find other people scummier, but your case against him doesn't make you scummy, I find it to be a good town case.
2) By the "shouldn't be a problem" I meant: Mac, stop telling me not voting isn't scummy, I'll nearly always read it as scummy, but don't worry, if I vote you, it won't only be for that.

Anyway, I'm now going to post a little bit of an attack on each player, because as I've said, I find you all a little bit scummy. Hopefully you can answer me, or at least other people can see what I'm thinking.

Flutter - Mega lurking, but he's getting replaced, so yay.

Kinetic - For somebody who was speaking down to us because we had more recent join dates than him, he hasn't exactly been leading the way with good analysis. Percy has crystalised my concerns in his posts. I was unimpressed by his analysis of the names and exactly what has he done since? I really dont' like his modkill concern. Surely if he knows something he shouldn't no, he should replace out. I can't think of anything that he would be allowed to know but can't share.

Locke - He's doing what I think of as sniping. He's posting micro cases, comments on other people's cases and awarding points on other people's interactions (i.e. I won out of Seacore vs Inq. Mina vs Mac is a draw, etc) I'd be happier with stronger cases. He's leaning on the "not enough people are voting crutch, which is a little fair but still.

Mac - I've spoken about this already

Mina - I made a case against Mina Day 1, I don't think it's rubbish, but neither should it be front and centre today. She's voted for a popular Day 2 lynch (bogre) and then spent time focusing on Mac. There's also the potential it's just to make a lot of noise to run the clock out so we vote Bogre, he flips down and scum mina says "I'm really disappointed I went with the crowd on this one, I should have focused on Mac", and bam, into a Day 3 mislynch.

Percy - There's been a couple of skips of logic in Percy's posts that I'd normally overlook and just disagree with for other people, but Percy has a strong logical mind and I don't seem him making these mistakes. I've already brought up the main one about the name claim votes. Another is his two interpretations on Buttonmen, immediately assuming it wasn't the limiting factor that gave a no result (yes, Buttonmen has confirmed this but how could he know?) Also, I don't like his setting up of Raivann as Inq's scum buddy. I think there's also a case for scum-Percy entering the game, seeing the Inq-Bogre scum team has done a rubbish job and now decides to bus his buddy.

Raivann - However, Percy does have a point. Seriously, you don't think Percy's scummy enough to vote, you never liked the Inq lynch. Where's your vote going? You're either scum or terribly anti-town at this point.

Inq - All my previous case still stands, and now we have 'convenient-oops' lurking. But this I mean he comes back from V/LA, sees that Bogre's almost a sure lynch of the day and then disappears for a reread. His plan is probably to come back Day 3 and go "sorry guys, work/school got the best of me, I had this huge post about how it's not bogre, it's seacore, but too late for that now" Pity we got the extension. Well, pity for him.

Buttonmen - Thanks for answering the questions about your role. But really? A small answer about Mac, those other answers and then you dissapear for 48 hours? This close to the deadline? Fantastic. If you had access right then, and knew you wouldn't for two days, why not give us something more?

[Kinetic]

It isn't a matter of knowing something I'm allowed to know or not, but using the structure of the role PM in a way that could cause a modkill. I'm going to ask Faraday a few questions, but I'm pretty sure I know the answers.

[MacavityLock]

Also, you didn't answer what would change in your read of me if I did decide to vote.

Don't make me repeat that quote in size 18 again.

The fact that you don't just suspect me because of my lack of vote doesn't answer my question. Whether or not things would change in your read of me helps me in my read of you.

(Since you attacked Buttonmen for not voting his suspect, you clearly felt the same way.)

My attack of Buttonmen had to do with his use of a FoS in addition to a vote, and why he chose to place both.

To be honest, I do think you've been guilty of wasting time on theory. Case in point: the voting-vs.-not-voting debacle.

Come on now, don't deny your own part in the whole debacle. I've said as much as I want to say right now, and I've said that I've said as much.

And even you've admitted that much of your scumhunting has been based on the roles and set-up.

Theory does not equal setup spec.

But this leads into something else that's been bugging me about you. Why does the bite in your post turn on and off? I'd feel much better about you if you were consistently a jerk. But while you get very snarky when fighting a case on you, you're quite dispassionate when attacking the players you believe are scum. I find that to be a HUGE red flag.

Not sure I understand your point. If anything, I was a jerk to you once, because I knew of no more ways to tell you that I wasn't interested in voting at the moment.

Now I'd like to ask a favour of you. If you respond to me again, could it please be about something--ANYTHING--other than whether cautious voting is a scumtell?

Cute, trying to get the last word. I have asked you about things in previous posts that do not have to do with cautious voting.

For example, you didn't respond to my point about your useless quote re: Bogre that I brought up in 549. What was the point of it?

----

The case against Mac wasn't about his unwilliningness to vote; that was just one symptom of it. It was about his unwillingness to say concrete things about what was happening in game and his constant metaing and set up / role

analysis

speculation rather then scum hunting. He defended himself by linking his past games and by turning it into an argument about voting theory; you can see why this doesn't relieve my suspicions.

I have asked about many things that have occurred this game, and pointed out where I did so. It's certainly not the only thing I'm questioning, but I have been. I have not been trying to turn anything towards theory.

----

I also want to hear more from Rai, who I was about to have prodded before his single word post, as well as Kinetic.

I keep seeing big posts by Mina, but for some reason my eyes glaze over them with out reading much.

That probably isn't a good sign.

I would like to know what you mean by what I italicized above.

[Percy]

Hey, Seacore, it would be awesome if you actually read what I said:

Also, let it be known that one confirmed townie voted against nameclaiming, so

I find it far more likely

that either the scum split down the middle for the vote or all voted for the idea.

Not what you're representing it as:

Also, let it be known that one confirmed townie voted against nameclaiming, so

the only possibility is

that either the scum split down the middle for the vote or all voted for the idea.

So when you criticise my logic, do it properly.

As for TheButtonmen, check out this post from D1:

No, at the worst I could recive no result, and I honestly can't think of a way that could happen N1. (with out using a RB)

I'm making my reads clear based on what I've read in the game. It's not my problem that you are forgetting what was said and making considered statements based on what has happened. It's your problem that you're looking for reasons to be suspicious of me, rather than actually trying to find scum.

Also, if you think Mina/Raivann is worth exploring, why have you done no work in exploring this potential connection? You're voting The Inquisition because of your own personal dichotomy, but the other players are still in this game and need attention as well.

As for Bogre, I've seen plenty of VI play, and I don't see anything particularly scummy in it. Active lurking is probably an appropriate label, and pressuring such players is usually good play, but I would be far more interested in other players.

@Kinetic

: You unvoted The Inquisition based of this role PM shenanigans, is there any way you can paraphrase your conclusions?

[Percy]

EBWOP: It's not my problem that you are forgetting what was said and

that I am

making...

[Kinetic]

I keep seeing big posts by Mina, but for some reason my eyes glaze over them with out reading much.

That probably isn't a good sign.

I would like to know what you mean by what I italicized above.

Its more "Its not a good sign for me" than anything in relation to his alignment. If I'm having trouble reading someone to the point where I want to skip their posts, it isn't going to help me figure out their alignment, etc.

@Kinetic

: You unvoted The Inquisition based of this role PM shenanigans, is there any way you can paraphrase your conclusions?

I'm trying to figure out exactly what I can and cannot say, and what wording would be appropriate from the mod. Also have another question in there for him and I'm waiting for replies before going further with this.

[Faraday]

Confucius replaces flutter as of now. I'll extend the deadline by one more day to accomodate and that's it. Hopefully no more replacements will be needed

Final deadline for day 2: Thuesday the 25th of March @ 6pm GMT

[Confucius]

Confirming.

I will read the game at my next opportunity. Please expect a post by Monday at the latest.

[Raivann]

I also want to hear more from Rai, who I was about to have prodded before his single word post, as well as Kinetic.

I am happy to lynch anyone except Mina or Seacore, they are the only town reads I have.
My two favorite lynches are still Percy and Kinetic.

Vote:Percy

[MacavityLock]

Why then did you unvote Percy (Bogre) just to re-vote him?