Newbie 980 ~ Game Over

[jmurph3]

Well, I'll start everything off, I suppose. Kind of weird to have so many SEs. Hopefully we have a good game! Anyway, to kick off RVS, I say

vote: millar13

for having a name that ends with 3, like me.

OMG, I missed that 3 in my votecount! Fixing! ~ CSL

[jmurph3]

@Nexus: it's called Random Voting Stage, and it's a way to get discussion going and sort of break the ice in the game. You can also use what people say in RVS and the way they respond to things to start to build your suspicions, so it's a good way to start things off.

[jmurph3]

KILL MOD

so he can ghost

Note to Nexus: you can't always kill the mod; but you can

SLAP REPLACEMENT MOD WITH WET FISH

if the lead mod has a sense of humour

LMMFAO

I also am not liking your attitude. Not very helpful to the environment, and TBH, I've found that loose cannons only hurt the town more than they help, whatever their alignment. If I weren't already voting for you, I would switch my vote to you now.

Vote: Jmurph

I dont like your avvie, not even sure what it is.

It's Carmen Sandiego with a tommy gun. Same goes for your avvie...no clue what it is

[jmurph3]

although i'm agreeing with jmurph as of right now... i do have my slight suspicions about him.

*her

Anyway, @Nexus: I think that a lot of the more experienced players (myself included) are holding back slightly in order to let the dust from millar settle. And since, as a general tend, the less experienced players tend not to post a lot to start with for fear of making mistakes. This, to me, is a mistake, since not posting can throw suspicion on you as much if not more than saying something stupid.

In fact, while I'm at it, since no one else has this game, I'm going to give a few general do's and don't's of Mafia:

:arrow: Do talk. As mentioned above, not participating actively

on purpose

is just as liable to get you killed, especially on the first day. Why? Because a lot of mafia players feel that in lieu of a good scumtell, a lynch based off inactivity is just as good as killing scum because it helps town more than having dead weight hanging around. Consider yourselves warned.

:arrow: Do read the wiki. Seriously. Most questions that you will have can and will be answered in the wiki. From common abbreviations (liek WIFOM or OMGUS) to unfamiliar terms (meta, mafia theory), you'll find it in the wiki. Also, some more experienced players will, instead of answering your questions, respond with a link to the wiki. So you might as well cut out the middleman.

:arrow: Do not be afraid to vote. Voting can and does create discussion. Even if you think you don't have enough evidence for a vote, feel free to lay out what you do have. More discussion helps town. Less discussion hurts town. If you still don't think you have enough for a vote, lay out your evidence and add a FoS - finger of suspicion, meaning you find the person suspicious but aren't ready to vote.

:arrow: Do not claim, except in the cases of L-1 or LyLo (if you don't know what these terms mean, where are you going to find them? If you answered "the wiki", you win. What you win is irrelevant). Claiming only serves two purposes: it gives scum more information than they need to have, and it distracts town. Please note: "town" is an alignment. By being town-aligned, you can have one of 3 roles: Cop, Doctor, or Civilian (also known as Vanilla Townie - VT - or townie). Saying that you are townie, VT, or civilian means that you are claiming a role, even if not a power role. You don't want to do this, as it can narrow the field on potential legitimate power roles, thus making it easier for the scum to pick them off.

:arrow: Do not be afraid to die. Remember, you win if your alignment wins,

NOT

if you survive until the end. Yes, it sucks to get killed, but the goal is to win, not to survive.

:arrow: TRY not to appeal to emotion. It happens; we all end up doing it, for the most part, some without even realizing it. And people respond differently to it. But know that if you do appeal to emotion, some will find you scummy.

:arrow: Finally, and perhaps most importantly, scumhunt! The scum are not going to sit around with signs over their heads asking to be caught. You have to ask the hard questions and get them out into the open and make them mess up or say things they shouldn't. And I don't mean ask questions like, "How are you doing today?" Ask people about their motivations for doing things, or why they said things the way they did. Mafia is a game of details, and sometimes you have to be nitpicky.

Anyway, to agree with Beefster, I think we're moving out of RVS, so I will

unvote

as well.

[jmurph3]

@Everyone: can we behave a bit less childlike, please? Name-calling gets us nowhere.

That being said, I personally want to ease away from the Millar train, as I have played with erratic players in the past and know that their behavior has nothing to do with their alignment.

@ChibiSanNub: anything to contribute? You've been awfully quiet, only posting once. Please speak.

[jmurph3]

I am sorry I haven't posted lately, everyone; I had a very busy weekend.

@Earlder1: I have to agree with Nexus...why do you keep questioning us about our experiences? This will only clog up the thread and, IMO, not be helpful in scumhunting. This feels to me like a cop out so that you can pick up your prod without contributing anything to the discussion.

FoS: Earlder1

[jmurph3]

Nexus: the experience question is very common in Newbie games- and really there's no reason to

not

answer it. You're more likely to look scummy not answering a legitimate question (as you will appear to be hiding something) than to ask a fishy question in the first place.
The main purpose for

any

question is to spur discussion. Even if it's about less-than-relevant information such as experience, it gets discussion flowing.

I disagree. After a certain point, namely once RVS ends, talking about less-than-relevant information can hinder and distract town from the issues at hand. As I mentioned, I think that Earlder's trying to get out of posting anything relevant by just rehashing what he's already said.

[jmurph3]

HI, Zajnet. Welcome! As Haylen said, take your time. I doubt you'll miss much in the time it takes you to read, given the pace that this game has taken to get off the ground.

[jmurph3]

@Nexus: *Gasp* How dare you graduate? Don't you know how this will affect the game??? In seriousness, what are you graduating from? College/Uni? Secondary school? Dare I ask...primary school?

Congrats!

[jmurph3]

I'm going to do something I'm generally against doing just to get some discussion. I'd like everybody to answer these questions please.

At this point, I'm very much against this. We've had zero content posted, except involving the millar issue, and that wasn't even content, IMO. We've exited RVS only to go back in following the replacement of millar. Don't get me wrong - I understand what Haylen's trying to do. I just think that this kind of posting, at this stage in the game, isn't going to generate the kind of response needed, because the newbies are going to be unfamiliar with how to approach this, outside of a RV.

That said, I shall do my best to answer these questions.

1. If you had to lynch somebody right now, who would it be?

Haylen or Vamparific

2. Why would you lynch them?

Haylen voted for me. This is NOT an OMGUS; instead, it's a retaliatory question of why, at this stage in the game, you would pick one of the few people who has been active recently as a person to lynch. She claims that I am a "lurker" to her mind, but I've posted fairly regularly, especially as compared to some of the other players thus far. Scum want to keep lurkers around, as it brings the town down and helps the scum, so by picking me, a player who HAS been active, under the guise of me being a "lurker", she leaves room for real lurkers to slip by. This is bad play, to me, or, at the very least, not particularly pro-town.

Vamparific is standing out to me because, as our original IC (Haylen replaced in on what was originally an SE slot), he's not offered much helpful as far as getting the game going, and has also not posted much of anything at all. ICs, in my mind, should be more active than what he is being. This to me is suspicious.

3. What are your opinions on the lurkers?

I don't like 'em. I like discussion.

4. Does anybody have any FORSEEABLE need to go V/LA between now and the time deadline hits?

Not that I know of, but I will update if something happens.

5. If you have played mafia being, is lurking usually part of your playstyle?

Never intentionally. I work fulltime, so I am the first to admit that I may not be able to post everyday. I try to read as much as I can everyday to keep caught up, but real life sometimes gets in the way. That being said, I am normally not away from the game for more than 36-48 hours without at least responding to explain my absence.

I would also like to point out that my playstyle is the complete opposite of Haylen's. Mine is based almost entirely on logic, as my gut can and will be wrong (in my first game, I led 2 lynches in a row on townies. I was town. Oops). I like content. I dislike fluff.

[jmurph3]

Jmurph

The majority of his posts have basically been answering questions related to mafia ect. I am not sure what to make of his 'do or donts' of mafia post. To be it seems like a chance to coach his scumbuddy into being a nice, good, little scum so they aren't lynched. I would like to see a lot more analysis rather than information from him aswell. He says the he is a logical player, but at the moment I am not seeing any logical scumhunting at all. I also don't like the fact that he didn't like my way of trying to create discussiong, however, he did not really try to create any discussion himself.

Firstly, I'm a girl.

Secondly, My do's and don't's post is because this is my first game as SE. I was under the impression that SE, along with IC, is a teaching role. After replacing, you said that it isn't, so sorry if I overstepped my boundaries. In my first game, the SE was actually more helpful than the IC at teaching.

Thirdly, what I said regarding your way of trying to create discussion is that I didn't like where it was going because stating things like "who are you most willing to lynch" without having any information may not stir up a lot of discussion. I'll agree that I did not create any discussion myself, but this was, in a large part, because I was waiting for everyone to respond to you.

I am unsure as to why he wants me lynched because he hasn't exactly posted why. This, I would view, as fence sitting. Not committing yourself to a lynch is scummy because it enables you to slip under the radar and blame others for the lynching of a townie or, if you lynch scum, it will make other players think that you are pro-town. I also am unsure as to where I actually voted him.

This is NOT an OMGUS; instead, it's a retaliatory question of why, at this stage in the game, you would pick one of the few people who has been active recently as a person to lynch.

Kindly point at the post in which I said "sdjksdkfkjs imma go ahead and vote Jmurph". Since there was no vote on you from me, this retaliatory question is void. What I actually said was "I would lynch Jmurph, because he is lurking [insert some other stuff I said here too]", I'm pretty sure I never voted for you. I would lynch you because I feel that the majority of your posts have lacked any real content to the game.

I don't understand why you are under the impression that I never stated why I would lynch you. It says so in this post, which you conveniently quoted from, but you don't know why I would lynch you? That doesn't make sense to me.

I also never said that you voted me; I was responding to where you said that you would lynch me.

Jmurph: I am do not a lurker!
Haylen: uh huh. Last post: Wednesdays 14th July.

Last post from Haylen (before today): Wednesday 14th July. Does that make you a lurker as well? If so, should we lynch you?

At present, I find that Nexus is currently the most scummy player in the room. Why?

* Strawmanning - really exaggerated the whole "Earlder wont stop asking the same question" thing. He only asked it twice. Strawmanning is scummy cause it tends to lead to an easy lynch.
* Worried about what will be thought of her if she doesn't speak. I would consider this a type of slip. I have already explained why this ruffles my feathers.
* Tunnelling - refuses to stop concentrating on the Earlder thing. It makes the Strawmanning twice as probably. I have already explained why it is scummy aswell.

Unvote
Vote Nexus.

I agree with this analysis. I think that Nexus' overposting is as much of a newbscum tell as it is newbtown. At the moment, this leads me to a null town on him, but I am definitely looking out for how he will continue to play. Especially since his latest defense boils down to "Well, I'm town, so your case sucks." That's not a very good defense. And Nexus, you really have to learn to just strike a balance between lurking and posting too often. It may take a bit to get used to; sometimes we're all guilty of either over- or under-posting. I can tell you as a general rule that if you're posting complete fluff for the sake of posting something, it's probably not a good idea to post it.

[jmurph3]

So I also want to try the area thing. I didn't know that existed.

Let's start with Beefster:

Second suspect: jmurph3
It seems like she's just agreeing with Nexus. Her play doesn't seem genuinely IC to me.
ISO3- WHOA! She goes from "OMG YOU NEED TO DIE" to "meh" in less than 3 hours. Scummy.

Firstly, I never said "OMG YOU NEED TO DIE", nor did I even imply it. I eased off of millar because I could tell that we were getting mired in that instead of trying to scumhunt whatsoever. I also unvoted at that point because we were moving out of RVS. I don't hold my RVS vote out of RVS.

ISO3-5- it looks like she's trying to change targets gradually as to not look like a scummy bandwagoning maniac.

How was I bandwagoning at all? I actually moved off of a bandwagon when I saw where it was going.

ISO9 reeks of inconsistency. Earlier, she refused to answer Earlder's experience question, stating that it will clog up the thread. She seems to be against the questions, but proceeds to answer them anyway for no apparent reason. WTF is up with this suddden paradigm shift?

Here's the thing: I didn't like Earlder's question because it isn't relevant. Experience is a null tell, as roles are assigned randomly. Haylen's questions, while I didn't like them, at least were relevant to the game, hence why I answered them. Not a sudden paradigm shift at all.

She also claims she isn't lurking by saying she posts "fairly regularly." (which is a half truth: regularly =/= frequently)
The answer to #3 is hypocritical, more or less.

It's only hypocritical if I'm a lurker, which I'm not. And if posting frequently is the only way to not be considered a lurker, than I guess I'm screwed. I work during the week, and don't have the luxury of being able to post multiple times during the day. It's not lurking, at least, not the way I view lurking. Lurking to me is purposely avoiding posting. I have not done that.

The end of ISO10 looks like she's coaching Nexus.
------------
I feel that her scumminess is dependent on Nexus's alignment. Definitely some buddying going on here.

HoS: jmurph3

Not buddying, or coaching. Just trying to be helpful to a newb.

If I had to pick a third suspect, I would go with Haylen, for one reason and one reason only: wanting a full scum list. Aside from that, her play has been pro-town.

Speaking of buddying, though, you seem to be basing a lot of what you're saying off of Haylen. Bit hypocritical there. And I love the way you throw in your suspicion of her at the bottom of your post so that you can pretend like you're not.

FoS: Beefster

Obviously buddying with Haylen, parroting everything she says, and hypocritical.

Regarding Nexus:

As far as the Nexus thing goes, I really don't understand. Nexus, to me, is newb neutral. All of the things that I see Nexus doing are typical newbie mistakes and are not indicative of alignment. Granted, Nexus could still be scum, but the mistakes he's making aren't indicating that to me at the moment. In fact, Nexus' play reminds me a lot of my first game, where I was a newb VT, and came under heat on D1 and reacted in the same way.

Personally, I hope no one hammers at this point as I think that we have a lot more discussion that could and should come out on D1 before we lynch anyone. I really don't like kov's vote on Nexus - coming in, quick voting without reason, and putting someone at L1 because of it? Bad play, IMO.

FoS: kov

Also, there seems to be some confusion about the list Haylen asked for. Personally, I'm not going to give it for the same reasons already mentioned. Haylen claims:

Um. Can we please note that i

DID NOT

ask you all for a list of most pro-town and most scummy players. I asked for your opinions on each player, that's a completely different thing.

But what she really asked was this (bold added by me):

From you, I just want a list of everybodies names and what you think about them,

whether you think they are town or scum.

[/quote]

That, to me, seems to be asking for a list of town and scum. Very anti-town, IMO.

FoS: Haylen

.

Very impressed with the analysis by Mr. Flay. Seems to be very thorough in reading through everything. I look forward to reading more from him.

I'm concerned with the turn this day has taken. Actually, I'm glad that discussion has come out, as that only helps town. My worry that this game would never get off the ground has not come true, thankfully Currently, however, I'm worried that we're going to get a quicklynch on Nexus, who, at this point, I think will probably flip town. Oh - and Nexus, you may want to claim. Personally, from the way you've been talking about it in your posts, I think you've already claimed townie at one point or other, though whether you were actually meaning to do that, or were just using town/townie interchangeably, I don't know.

For now, I'm going to say

vote: Kov

. Your vote on Nexus seems very opportunistic, and I don't like the way you didn't give a real explanation for it. It's a perfect move for scum to make at this point.

[jmurph3]

Ugh, ninja'd by a2rudeboy's post! I think it'll be interesting to see how Haylen responds to the votes on her, and I'm going to refrain from commenting further to wait for her response.

[jmurph3]

I'm a little unsettled by how quickly you voted Kov. You've been accused a couple of times already of bandwagon jumping, or attempting to start one, I'm just curious with all of this on you, why you would vote Kov in right away? Yes, quickly voting someone to l-1 after just joining the game is VERY scummy, and i also realise you were posting at the exact same moment I was, but still. I'm accepting for the moment Kov's newbness is ignorance in terms of what they did, which I think, yes would warrant a FoS, but definitely not a vote yet. I also think, with the town currently focused on Nexus/Haylen, this could be a bit of a distraction tactic. Which if you are scum, and one of them is scum partner (since neither are really cleared in my mind) this would be something useful to do...

Firstly, at the time of my posting, only one person had voted for Haylen, so I wouldn't exactly call that the town being focused on her.

Secondly, my vote on Kov, which, for the moment, I am going to keep, is an attempt to get him to keep talking, and post some kind of content other than the vote on Nexus. I don't think it's a distraction tactic, especially since now things seem to be moving away from Nexus. It's a discussion tactic, which I think is vaguely working.

Regarding connections:
-I still feel confident that if Nexus is scum, jmurph3 is as well.
-I feel that Haylen's scumminess is mutually exclusive to Nexus's.

So you don't think that Haylen and Nexus could be a scumpair that's playing off of each other?

Come to think of it, I think jmurph3 is scum. I'm not liking jmurph's defense, and am very uncomfortable with how fast he jumped on Kov.
UNVOTE: Nexus
VOTE: jmurph3

I said it before, I'll say it again. I am a girl.

Also, what part of my defense aren't you liking? Why are you not liking it? And see above re: the vote on Kov. I do wonder, however, how you can call my jumping on Kov "fast" when it took place almost 9 hours and multiple posts afterward?

[jmurph3]

well i guess i need to defend myself. I voted for nexus because he seems very naive but in a fake way(I hope this makes sense) and if they weren't scum to hopefully entice a Mafia member to quicklynch(unfortunatley mabye the mafia are too big a lurkers and missed it) giving us an idea who to lynch and the doctors/cops (if we have any) who they should use there powers on. I just assumed that's what you do at this stage go with who you thinks the most suspicious and hope.

Wait...what?? You purposely hoped that the scum would quicklynch Nexus? At first I thought you had just made a mistake by putting Nexus at L-1, but the fact that you were hoping that he would die and flip town is incredible. That's incredibly anti-town, and is throwing up all sort of red flags for me.

[jmurph3]

@ Kov: I may give you a pass because this is your first-ever game, but despite Zajnet's assurance that this is what he would do, this

is not

what is normally done, at least as far as I have seen. With this much time left in D1, so much more information can come out before we actually make a lynch that it may be more beneficial to catch the scum by giving them more opportunity to trip up. After all, and overeager hammer may be just as likely done by overzealous town as it is by scum.

Since you've answered Mr. Flay's questions in a way that I see you as being newb-neutral rather than newb-scum, I'm going to

unvote

for the moment. Also, don't feel like you have to immediately shift your vote. You can just as easily FoS (finger of suspicion) or even HoS (hand of suspicion) instead of jumping votes.

[jmurph3]

I'm going to come clean and admit my role as Vanilla Townie.

I understand you did this in response to try and get the pressure off. But, at the same time, admitting as a VT, has never seemed to me to be a particularly pro-town move. Assuming we have power roles in this game, a VT claim only serves to take one more person out of the scum's possibilities to who they want to get rid of first.

I think Nexus did this not to get the pressure off, necessarily, but, given as he was was at L-1, to get his role out there in case it was a PR. Both Mr. Flay and I asked him to claim as it looked, based off of Kov's vote, that Nexus might get quicklynched. Also, while I agree in theory that it might take one person out of the scum's possibilities, it might also give them a person to NK (not saying this is any better, but just pointing it out). After all, by killing a claimed townie, they leave scummier-seeming players to distract and confuse the town.

[jmurph3]

@Beefster: my reaction to what, exactly?

[jmurph3]

@Mod: I unvoted Kov. Thanks!

[jmurph3]

Oh, and another thing.

Although my rule is that I don't like to vote for anyone because of deadline (game falls too easily into scum's advantage near deadline, hard-lined as it is i would rather not lynch than mislynch at least this early in the game, I like to go by the maxim "if i wouldnt lynch them 4 days before deadline, i wouldn't lynch them 4 hours before"), I would possibly be interested in an earl lynchwagon at the deadline. Part of this is because, as others have stated, been acting a lot more scummy as of late. But also, I am not comfortable with him going inactive again and being force replaced. If that happened, or if anyone gets replaced for that matter, we'll have less than half the people we started with, and that just plays into all sorts of mayhem.

Wow, this put up multiple red flags for me. Firstly, in no way is a no lynch better than a mislynch. Only scum would think that. It's always better to lynch than not because information is gathered from any lynch, even if it's the lynch of a townie, and not lynching just plays into the scum's hands.

However, that aside, you wouldn't policy lynch anyone, except for Earlder1? That just seems like a really bizarre thing for you to say, particularly with 8 days left in D1. There's absolutely no reason for you to come out at this stage in the game and say that. That, coupled with the way you seemed to be buddying with Kov, has made me suspicious of you.

FoS: a2rudeboy[/quote]

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: Fail with the tags.

FoS: a2rudeboy

[jmurph3]

@jmurph: I wanted your reaction to my vote... Makes me wonder if you were trying to dodge the question...

No, I was just confused because I already reacted to your vote. The fact that you never answered my questions to you makes me curious though...

[jmurph3]

It just doesn't seem very likely. It's some pretty hardcore bussing if they

are

playing off each other. In games I've played as scum, my scum partner was never as against me as either one is to the other.
Nexus on Haylen looks like an OMGUS, while Haylen on Nexus looks like a pick on the weakest tactic. Both are pretty scummy, yes, but 2 scums don't bus that hard.
I would say that there is also a slight possibility that both are townies.

I don't disagree, I was just interested to see your reasoning.

This is how I saw it. In the first post, you were very much against millar's actions and strongly held your vote on him. Then in the next post of yours, three hours later, you suddenly change to indifferent on millar. I still find that odd.

I'm sorry if you do. To me, my vote on millar, starting in RVS, was maintained as a pressure vote to keep him in line. When it appeared he wasn't going to, and when I saw RVS as ending, I unvoted. I figured he was either going to get mod-killed or force-replaced. Also, I didn't really think he was scum, just a tool, and I wanted to focus on finding actual scum instead of wasting 3 more pages on millar being an idiot.

Exactly. It looks like you were trying to hide the possibility that you were trying to start a new wagon- and your scumbuddy happened to be millar or Nexus.

How was I starting a new wagon at all? Now, if I had unvoted and revoted immediately after that, that's understandable. But looking at what I did, you're making things up. Literally. What you claim happened didn't. Plain and simple.

I personally just don't like rolefishy questions like "are you nervous." Experience questions never bothered me, and despite being irrelevant, will still help with discussion. The fact that you're getting so down and dirty about relevance is kinda bothering me.

So because a question bothers me and not you, this makes me scum? That doesn't make sense. I've stated before that I don't like fluff. Fluff=irrelevant things. So for a line of questioning that is repetitively irrelevant, it irritates me. And therefore I'm not going to answer it. And how am I getting down and dirty about relevance?

At a few points, you've not posted for a whole day. I'm not really holding the lurking itself against you, just pointing out how it makes you somewhat of a hypocrite.

According to Mr. Flay's graphs, there's been some points where

you

haven't posted for a whole day. Pot, meet kettle.

But it was sooo specific to Nexus.

Yes, because Nexus was the newb who needed help at that point. Note how I did the same thing when Kov had questions.

It appears to be such a fast jump because you just spent the rest of the post talking about Nexus and myself. You clearly had more evidence against us two, yet you suddenly voted on Kov with less evidence. It looks kinda scummy.

Firstly, if you're going to quote that much again in that big of a block, can you just link to the post? And I've already explained that my vote on Kov was a vote to keep him talking. I didn't need to do that with Nexus or with you.

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: Boo, messed up quote tags :'(

My comments are the one's following the quotes of what Beefster said.

Fixed upon request. :)

[jmurph3]

Hey! Jmurph! Any chance that you feel like confirming I did that in Newbie 947 aswell? As town?

Firstly, I don't hold with meta. In all of my previous games, I have been town. In all of my previous games, I have acted differently each time.

Also, I will only "confirm" what you did if a) you stop calling me a "he" - we had issues with this in the very game you want me to reference, so it's not like you don't know about it, and b) you also confirm that your accusations of me "lurking" were the same exact thing that I did in the same game you want me to reference - where I was also town.

So basically, Haylen, if you want me to defend you, you in turn have to admit that based on meta, the same exact thing you want me to confirm for you, your vote on me - due to me "lurking" - is complete BS. Do that, and I'll agree that your meta holds up in this game.

[jmurph3]

How is it blackmail? Anyone can go to the game and look for themselves to see if you acted the same. I'm not blackmailing you, I'm pointing out that if you want me to defend you,

based on your own reasoning

your vote on me doesn't hold up. Also, I was never attacking you. I wasn't the one who accused you of acting differently. That was Mr. Flay. So there's really no OMGUS involved there, as, like I mentioned, I was attacking you, only your reasoning.

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: I

wasn't

attacking Haylen, only her reasoning.

[jmurph3]

Just so you knowing thinking Haylen @ scum

Does this mean you think Haylen's scum? I can't understand what you're saying there.

I wont vote till a few days before the deadline and I wont change my vote after that so any self-defense(Mainly Jmurph/Haylen just because you have most votes) now thanks . (And number of votes won't matter. I may be hammering or I might be putting someone on L-4)

What self-defense would you want? I've posted and linked to my defense for the "case" against me multiple times. I'm not posting it again here.

Also, you should

not

hammer it's it multiple days before deadline. On the first day, it's much better to let things play out because chances are there will be more information that comes out closer to deadline. If you're worried about a no-lynch, you probably shouldn't be, as there's enough townies at this point to hopefully prevent that. Also, between now and then the person with the most votes might drastically change. Is there a reason why you're planning on doing this? Are you not going to be at your computer leading up to the deadline?

[jmurph3]

@a2rudeboy: perhaps buddying wasn't the right word. More like coaching, I guess. You looked at everything he'd done (up until this most recent post of yours) and then dismissed it as newbie or twisted it in a way to make it look innocent, giving suggestions along the way for what you thought he meant.

While I agree that Kov's statement of not changing his vote, etc. is very weird, I'm thinking it's just another newb mistake (hopefully), and, since he hasn't actually followed through with his plan and done what he's threatened to, I see no need to vote him...yet. I've tabled my vote on him for the time being, but if he continues on the course he's laid out, I will have no choice but to vote for him.

[jmurph3]

@a2rudeboy: specific examples of where I saw this happening is here and here

@Zaj: while I don't disagree that a lot of what he's doing are newb mistakes, he's also being exceedingly anti-town. This doesn't mean he's scum, but if he doesn't change his tune, it might be better for town's sake to policy lynch him rather than to continue letting him hurt town.

[jmurph3]

@a2rudeboy: haha, no my "hopefully" wasn't meant to be that way. I meant it in more of a "hopefully - because I don't like when scum are so blatantly obvious (makes the game less fun, IMO)" way. Obviously scum slips are great for town...I just prefer them to be subtle, rather than neon signs proclaiming "I AM SCUM LYNCH ME." Hope that clears up any confusion.

And I do understand what you mean by voicing your thought process out loud, it just seemed like you were carrying it forward to an unnecessary point. For example you could say, "I'm getting more of a newb vibe from him" instead of "I'm getting a newb vibe from him and I think it's because he doesn't understand why he's doing it", which implies that he should stop (the coaching part of the statement). And now that I explained that, I realize that this is how my previous statement is coming across, though with one important difference: I used my statement to say that I'm not voting yet, but could in the future, whereas yours was more of a I'm not voting now, nor am I going to. Does that make sense at all?

[jmurph3]

Oh, and I've just thought: she put FoS on herself when she came in. That threw me initially, and I imagine threw a couple of other people. Surely a townie wouldn't FoS herself? I think it might've been an attempt at making us think she was town, and was trying to stimulate discussion. I'm struggling to explain my reasoning, but I think it might've been a scum bluff.

Honestly, this play by Haylen doesn't surprise me, nor did it throw me. I've seen it done by both scum and town, so I consider it a newb tell. It is an attempt to make you think she is town. She's basically acknowledging that the slot she was replacing into is scummy but that doesn't mean that she is.

Personally, I'm going back and forth on Haylen. I really don't like her OMGUS vote on Mr. Flay, which is basically what it is, as her whole case on him boils down to not liking his case on her. I feel like Haylen's a better player than this, which is why I feel that her getting sucked into an OMGUS vote reeks of scum desperation.

At the same time, some of the problems that people are seeing as scummy of Haylen are, IMO, nulltells. WoTs, for instance, which Beefster called out as scummy, or her read on millar, or even just her semi-erratic behavior/posting.

Personally, looking at what's happening thus far in the game, it looks like a lot of people are being very opportunistic on the Haylen wagon. Nexus, you haven't posted a real case on Haylen yet (though your latest post is better). I'd like to see that (preferably with something other than "I read what other people say and agree", which was your first post). Beefster, same for you. You post one line saying "Kov seems like town" and another saying "Haylen seems like scum". I'd like some reasoning beyond Mr. Flay's case.

[jmurph3]

jmurph: I have more reasoning. I mentioned quite a bit of it earlier, but you seem to want a recap, so...
-The first thing that makes me wary was asking for a scum/town list

I didn't. Stop Twisting my words.

Again, I hate to bring this up, as I feel like it's been beaten into the ground, but you've continually said that you did not ask for this. When it was pointed out in your quote where you did essentially ask for it, you said that it's not what you meant. This is not us twisting your words. This is you trying to take back what you said because it's not what you claim to have meant. Now personally, just because you've gone about denying it isn't a scum tell. You clearly want to get it across that this isn't what you meant to say. I think we've got this, though it might be helpful if you acknowledged that you did say it, even if it's not what you meant.

However, the way you've gone about denying it or reacting to it has made me suspicious. You've reacted with such venom that it appears to me as if we've stumbled upon scum and you're afraid you're going to get lynched. I feel like town in this situation, especially an experienced town as you would be in this situation, would react differently, more calmly, and try to continue scumhunting and helping town. I haven't seen this reaction from you, which is raising my suspicion.

Also,

I don't think that's going to stop. If you think your words are being twisted, maybe that's a sign that those twisting it are mafia? I'm just exploring all avenues.

That's what I've been saying! that's the primary reason I think Flay's scum.

So you think Mr. Flay's scum for this reason, while everyone else in this game (at least for the most part) have pointed out the same thing? That doesn't make much sense.

-Misleading activity graphs.

They weren't misleading. They showed how many posts Jmurph had made over a period of time, if you would like to check out the statistics for it, then I would be happy to provide them.

I think part of the reason why they came across as misleading, at least to me, is because you were using them to justify my lurking, but gave no other evidence of everyone else in the game, so there was no way to compare to everyone else to actually use that graph to back up the fact that you thought I was lurking moreso than others.

EBWOP again. And you're taking that quote out of context. I was simply asking why I should believe what you have to say, when you voted for me, despite the fact I know I'm innocent? If you've made a mistake with me, that undermines all your other credibility....

Haylen already pointed this out, but I'll restate it in a different way. We can get scumvibes off of many people for many different reasons. As there are only two scum, it's very, very likely that we will each suspect more than two people during the course of this game, which would imply that we're all wrong at one point or another and that all our credibility would be undermined. This logic is inherently flawed.

I really don't like the way Haylen's acting, as I feel it's anti-town, if not full-out scummy. At this point, I would vote Haylen if it were closer to the deadline (as I've mentioned before, I don't want to put her at L-1 when we still have 5 days before deadline with a lot of things to be said and with a great possibility of opinions changing).

Also, @Haylen: none of this, at least from me, is a personal attack on you. I've played with you before and read some of the games in which you've played in the past. Please don't take this as such, as it is certainly not meant to be.

[jmurph3]

As for Jmurph, I'm hoping to get a vote down from them somewhat soon. Not having a vote down at this point seems scummier and scummier by the moment, at least for me

The reason why I'm not voting at the moment is because the person I would be voting for is Haylen, and it's too early in the Day, IMO, to lynch someone. A lot more information can still come out.

I do have to say that I'm really not a fan of the way Zaj has been playing, like a2rudeboy pointed out. Only one of his posts has been longer than a couple of lines. I feel like he's flitting in and out, staying under the radar, and everyone's too focused on Haylen to notice. This to me is pretty scummy. Though I still think Haylen is scummier, for the moment, until deadline approaches, I will

vote: Zajnet

.

[jmurph3]

@Zajnet: why? You voted for me a long time ago because you didn't agree with my vote on Kov. Since a lot has happened since then, what is your reasoning for voting for me? The only thing that I can think of is that I'm voting for you (*cough* OMGUS *cough*)

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: more accurately, why

would

you vote for me, Zajnet? I didn't mean to imply that you are currently voting for me.

[jmurph3]

zajnet has been slipping under the radar somewhat, but what about earlder? He's been prodded twice, and when he does come in to post, he says "I'll post more tomorrow."

Don't think that Earlder has escaped my notice either. The reason that I picked Zajnet to place my vote on is because Zajnet, to me, is more active lurking (i.e. deliberately not posting). He's also admitted to doing such, which is scummy. Earlder, on the other hand, though not around much, has actually posted content (compare his ISO to Zajnet). He's definitely someone to keep an eye on and someone that I'm hoping will contribute much more, but Zajnet to me seems to be lurking in more of a scum way than a not.

[jmurph3]

Ok, question for everyone, since talking today seems to have slowed down quite a bit. We seem to have two candidates most viable for lynch based on votes and what everyone has been saying thus far. These two candidates are, of course, Haylen and Zajnet. Now, the Zajnet wagon has sprung up in about 24 hours, but I somewhat doubt that a third wagon could similarly spring up. And since we have approximately 26 hours left before deadline, now is the time for us to gather our thoughts and definitively decide on a lynch. Therefore, my question to everyone is: who would you rather lynch today, Haylen or Zajnet? (Haylen and Zajnet are of course excluded, since I think given the choice, they would rather not vote for themselves)

Personally, I'm comfortable with either at the moment. Both have hurt town in very different ways, Zajnet with purposely underposting and Haylen with the...controversy surrounding her play, shall we say. At the moment, I feel Haylen's play is more scummy, whereas Zajnet's play is anti-town, if that makes any sense. So while I think either lynch would benefit town, I think a Haylen lynch is more likely to hit scum.

[jmurph3]

I'm going to

unvote

for the moment to avoid a potential quicklynch, as I want to hear from people who have not yet responded to the Zajnet situation (including Zajnet himself).

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: whoops I mean

unvote

[jmurph3]

@Nexus: given as I already unvoted, I don't see why you need to as well.

[jmurph3]

@Nexus: My bad, I thought you were on the Zaj wagon for some reason. Nevermind

[jmurph3]

Looking over the way D1 has gone, Haylen's circular logic has taken town off track far more than Zajnet and lurking. I said that I was leaning this way, and now it's time to make it concrete.

Vote: Haylen

[jmurph3]

I'm doing a reread of the thread so I can settle my thoughts before posting on D2. I will try to have a post up later today.

At the moment, though, I want to say that I do not find posting first to be scummy at all. In fact, in all of my previous games, the person who posted first after N1 was town.

Also, Beefster, I expected Mr. Flay as IC to die as well, which is making me suspicious of him still being alive. Besides, in your reasoning for voting Zajnet you state that you think the scum is likely to be a newb, but then vote for Zajnet, who's been around long enough to not be a newb.

Either way, I'm really not liking this quick-hate mob on Zajnet. I don't disagree that things he did on D1 were scummy, but not enough to merit immediate voting until I've had a chance to reread the thread. Besides, I'm getting a vibe from Mr. Flay that merits a closer look.

[jmurph3]

Ok, I finished my reread and a couple of things stand out to me.

Firstly:

Earlder1.

My suspicion of Zaj has indeed carried over from the day prior and...

@ Kov

Refer to my post 21 in iso, if you need my reasons. I feel I nicely made a case against him "in my own words" as you seem to think I didn't.

Here's the problem I have with this. I looked at your post from before, and while you did make some arguments, you also make some points that I think contradict your vote. Read below (emphasis mine):

Although,

the seemingly only reason (except for one post of his) for him to be scummy is his lack of contribution

, I agree that is a valid reason for a lynch, especially on day 1. We managed to hit 16 pages of activity, which is good, and of course that lends itself to actual cases being built because there is a pool of content to gather information from, but day 1 is still so early. Lynching the lurker is definitely a possibiliy in terms of what will enable town to collectively win later on. even if Zaj is town, his lack of contribution is anti-town, and some would say I am not contributing as much as I should, but I am posting when I can and trying to post content. Regardless, my point is that a Zaj lynch is not a bad idea, and I definitely identify with the reasons behind it.

So overall, I am going to pute my vote on Zaj for the aforementioned reasons and

also because I don't see a Nexus lynch occurring today.

This puts him at L-1, so before anybody hammers, wait for his explanation.

You basically undermine your vote by saying that it's mainly a policy lynch, and because your main target (Nexus) does not seem likely to be lynched. How exactly does this reasoning carry over from D1? He hasn't lurked yet today, and you have every chance now to start another wagon on Nexus. So what exactly is your reasoning?

This, coupled with the fact that you admit,

@ Jmurph

I'm largely joking for voting because he was the first one to post, although I think there is slight logic behind it.

So you vote for reasons that don't necessarily carry over, and based on a joke? This seems suspicious to me.

Finally,

And I definitely cannot see a Beefster-Flay scum pair from Beefster's post that mentions he expected one of them to die. I see absolutely no scum agenda in this. As for their individual alignments, nothing is really given away but together, I cannot see them as scum.

Beefster's statement is a complete nulltell to me. Just because he stated that he expected one of the two of them to die doesn't mean that they cannot be a scum team. I'm confused by your logic here.

Overall, I'm really not liking the way he started D2. Definitely enough for me to say

FoS: Earlder1

Beefster:

This vote is primarily in response to day 1. I'll quote and paraphrase if anyone wants a recap.

Please do, as I'm interested if your case holds up as much as Earlder's does.

Kov:

At the moment, though, I want to say that I do not find posting first to be scummy at all. In fact, in all of my previous games, the person who posted first after N1 was town.

If Zaj is scum, this is noted. As it's an obvious defense.

Actually, it's an obvious "This logic is flawed for this reason." I would have said this regardless of who posted first if someone had made this argument. It's just not a good argument, and I don't like it/

Mr. Flay:

Personally, I'm most suspicious of Mr. Flay at this point. I've reread everything from D1 and it seems to me that he was shepherding town. He started the wagon on Haylen, and he tunneled on her to the end. Not once in 9 pages does he vote for anyone else. Even when he suspected someone else (namely Zajnet) he makes his case in terms of Haylen. Note what he says here (emphasis mine):

I'm strongly considering flipping my vote to Zajnet.

He's like a MiniMe version of Haylen, only without the good qualities.

Seriously dude, you HAVE to contribute or you're helping the scum. And if you're scum, you HAVE to contribute or you're going to get lynched.

I also, in retrospect - as I didn't notice it at the time - really don't like this. It seems like he's power role fishing, especially since there's no way that I can see Haylen's post as being misconstrued as soft-claiming.

UNVOTE: Haylen

- just so we're clear, are you softclaiming? You're at L-1 as of the time I started this post, so I don't think it's too early to ask (and Kov is still being bloodthirsty as hell). This is a tactical unvote ONLY, to avoid a quicklynch if you say yes.

Overall, in rereading and reanalyzing everything with the added information that Haylen was town, Mr. Flay sticks out to me.

Vote: Mr. Flay

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: Dang it, that should be

Vote: Mr. Flay

.

[jmurph3]

@Earlder: the reason why I see it as contradictory is because you state in your original reasoning that one of the reasons why you're voting Zajnet is because you wouldn't be able to get a lynch on Nexus, meaning that you think Nexus is more scummy. Why then would you not continue pushing a lynch on Nexus instead of Zajnet?

[jmurph3]

I do have to say, though, that I called what's happening today. How many votes have I already accumulated, because of a wagon that 4 other people were on?

Except that if you actually read my case, you'll notice that none of it is based on the simple fact that you started the Haylen wagon. Let's be honest, I hammered. I clearly thought there was a case there. But using the extra information we now have that Haylen was town, it changes the entire way that we can view D1, and you stuck out like a sore thumb at scum.

I really don't think much can be gained from lynching Flay at this point- we should consider other perspectives before making a decision.

I don't understand this. I guess I don't understand where you're coming from. Nowhere has Flay stuck out as such a pro-town player that we risk things by investigating his play at this point. Voting for Haylen, at least to me, didn't seem like a bad thing at the time, but we have to remember that there's been added information now. Especially because of Flay's first content-filled post I feel like he was steering town in a direction, and truthfully, I fell for it. Still, it's not just the mislynch on Haylen that drives my vote. There's the way I felt he was fishing for power roles. I also don't like the way he was tunneling (which he will probably deny). Granted, we all kind of jumped at Haylen, but I feel like he was really the one who started it and carried it through to completion. And there's the fact that he never took his vote off of her. There's just a lot of reasons why I really don't trust him at the moment and would like to hear an actual response from him instead of brushing off the case against him like it's strictly because of the Haylen mislynch.

Even with this, I don't disagree with continuing scumhunting. D2 has a long way to go still. However, I'm very wary of Mr. Flay at this point. I'm not sure if I will be able to get past this. Most of all, I think it's key that we all keep posting (Zajnet, I'm looking at you - I really don't want a policy lynch on D2).

[jmurph3]

@Beefster: I don't disagree that scumhunting shouldn't stop now, quite obviously, since we have almost 20 days til deadline. But I have to say that I'm waiting for Flay's reaction before I do much else.

[jmurph3]

@ Jmurph

Townies create cases on townies and tunnel townies all the time. Why does this signify Flay as scum?

It doesn't by itself, but in combination with other things, it does. It's not just the fact that he tunneled on someone who flipped town. That would be a null-tell in and of itself. Instead, it's the way he went about doing it.

As a further example, I did some digging. I know personally one of the things that really drew me into Flay's argument and made me trust him was in his first content-filled post when he said this about millar13:

millar13 is... being millar13, on page 1-2. Did he get force-replaced? Ohhh no, he asked for replacement. Interesting. On a sidebar I looked at millar's meta when he's scum: Only two I found, weirdly, is a mini where he also requested replacement (page 4) after getting heat, and a mini where he was modkilled for incredibly rude behavior. Very interesting indeed... yes, I know millar's a Village Idiot in general, but he doesn't usually get tossed out of games. I don't think he likes being scum...

Personally, I took this at face value and used it as further justification for the scum vibes I was getting from Haylen. But much like how Haylen's graph on my posting didn't tell the whole story, neither does this post. After all, Mr. Flay almost dismisses millar's general crap play. He implies that millar's modkill was out of the ordinary, but in this game, millar was denied the win after he replaced in and was a complete a$$hole, and he was townie in that situation. In addition, the first game that Flay mentions didn't happen the way he claims it did; millar indeed requested replacement but then just as quickly unrequested it. He was never replaced in that game.

Mr. Flay is a good player, and I think he realized that most of us would never look much closer at the examples he posted and instead just take his word for it. I did, and we mislynched because of it. To me, this is just further evidence of Mr. Flay's scummy play.

On a different note,

@Mod: I will be V/LA until Tuesday 10 August

.

Noted.

[jmurph3]

EBWOP: Also, in regards to the game where millar "requested" replacement, note what he said in post-game here. He requested replacement

before

he knew his role, meaning using that as a "meta" on his scum play is just not valid.

[jmurph3]

@Everyone: I'm back, catching up on the thread. I will post as soon as possible.

[jmurph3]

I just wanted to apologize in advance. Work/real-life has taken over, so I won't be posting as quickly as I thought I would be able to.

I will say that I am not the doctor, and that while I agree that Zajnet's latest posts are suspect (you didn't read the PM? Really??), I still think lynching a claimed doc on D2 is a poor choice.

BTW, @Zaj: you say that you breadcrumbed cop instead of doc. Can you show where you did this? It might lend some credibility to your claim.

[jmurph3]

Ok, so obviously there's a lot to catch up on. I'm going to talk about what I see as most relevant , particularly the Zajnet claim and what's happened since then.

TBH, I'm not sure how I feel about Zaj's claim. I don't like the way it came out, and I definitely don't like the way Zajnet's been acting since. However, I also don't like (like most everyone else) Beefster's vote on Zajnet for it. However, I don't get a scummy vibe from Beefster for it. I understand where he was coming from, though I'm not sure he went about it the right way. I'm getting a town vibe from singersigner, which follows with my previous thoughts that Kov was town. Nexus is a neutral read to me.

I'm really not liking Earlder's play. He's to be lurking without contributing much (and I know that it's a bit of pot/kettle there, but I was V/LA, and he is not), and now is not the time to lurk.

Also,

@Flay...You seem to be awful keen about getting all the claims out there...

Huhwha?? I only was talking about Doc counterclaims, because I'm perfectly willing to trade scum 1-1. I DON'T want a Cop claim right now, unless they have a guilty.

Why should a cop claim now, regardless of whether or not they have a guilty? If there is a cop, we already have one PR exposed, and exposing another at this stage in the game could prove disastrous for town. The extra information of one guilty is, IMO, not worth exposing the cop at this point.

At this point, I'm still confident with my vote on Flay. I think that our most likely scumteam at this point is Flay/Earlder.

BTW, if there were/are any questions at me that still need to be addressed, if you wouldn't mind pointing them out, I'd appreciate it.

[jmurph3]

Just wanted to let you all know that I'm still here. I unexpectedly lost internet access at my apartment for awhile. But I'm back now, so expect a longer post sometime today/tonight.

[jmurph3]

Ok, since it's been suggested, I will just come out and do it. I don't think it hurts at this point, since we have only a week until deadline, and at the rate we're going, I feel like we're going to continue going around in circles. I didn't want to do this so early, and was hoping to make it into D3 without claiming, but I would rather lynch know scum today than risk a mislynch and ending up in LyLo.

I am going to claim: cop. I investigated Mr. Flay last night. That's how I know that he's guilty.

Here are my breadcrumbs:

:arrow: Firstly:

I am

sorry I haven't posted lately, everyone; I had a very busy weekend.

@Earlder1: I have to agree with Nexus...why do you keep questioning us about our experiences? This will only clog up

the

thread and, IMO, not be helpful in scumhunting. This feels to me like a

cop

out so that you can pick up your prod without contributing anything to the discussion.

:arrow: In this post:

I

'm concerned with the turn this day has taken.

A

ctually, I'm glad that discussion has come out, as that only helps town.

M

y worry that this game would never get off the ground has not come true, thankfully.

C

urrently, however, I'm worried that we're going to get a quicklynch on Nexus, who, at this point, I think will probably flip town.

O

h - and Nexus, you may want to claim.

P

ersonally, from the way you've been talking about it in your posts, I think you've already claimed townie at one point or other, though whether you were actually meaning to do that, or were just using town/townie interchangeably, I don't know.

:arrow: And regarding Mr. Flay:

I

don't understand this.

I

guess I don't understand where you're coming from.

N

owhere has Flay stuck out as such a pro-town player that we risk things by investigating his play at this point.

V

oting for Haylen, at least to me, didn't seem like a bad thing at the time, but we have to remember that there's been added information now.

E

specially because of Flay's first content-filled post I feel like he was steering town in a direction, and truthfully, I fell for it.

S

till, it's not just the mislynch on Haylen that drives my vote.

T

here's the way I felt he was fishing for power roles.

I

also don't like the way he was tunneling (which he will probably deny).

G

ranted, we all kind of jumped at Haylen, but I feel like he was really the one who started it and carried it through to completion.

A

nd there's the fact that he never took his vote off of her.

T

here's just a lot of reasons why I really don't trust him at the moment and would like to hear an actual response from him instead of brushing off the case against him like it's strictly because of the Haylen mislynch.

E

ven with this, I don't disagree with continuing scumhunting.

D

2 has a long way to go still.

H

owever, I'm very wary of Mr. Flay at this point.

I

'm not sure if I will be able to get past this.

M

ost of all, I think it's key that we all keep posting (Zajnet, I'm looking at you - I really don't want a policy lynch on D2).

(In case you couldn't tell, it spells out "I investigated him").

So Mr. Flay is confirmed scum. I have a feeling, having read over the thread, that Earlder is his scumbuddy.

I hope I'm doing the right thing by claiming. This is my first time playing as cop, but as this point I don't think it will hurt town too much to have this information out there.

[jmurph3]

Ok, so I'll start things off: I investigated Nexus last night, and he's innocent (go him!).

I originally intended to investigate the Earlder slot, but my main suspicions on Earlder stemmed from his inactivity/active lurking, meaning that the slot could be less scummy today than yesterday. I investigated Nexus because of a few things I saw on D2 that stood out to me (if anyone wants to know what they were, just ask).

Obviously, the scum is either singersigner, Nikanor, or Beefster. I will be doing ISOs on each of these to see what I can get from them.

[jmurph3]

Just wanted to check in and say that I'm still here. Life has been a bit hectic of late, but I promise a more substantive post sometime in the near future (most likely tomorrow).

[jmurph3]

At this point, I'm leaning towards singersigner as town. I had misgivings about kov, but those were mostly solved during the course of his play, and further solved when singersigner took over.

However, I'm torn over Beefster and Earlder/Nikanor. While at first I was leaning toward the Earlder slot, after an ISO I'm really not sure. Beefster definitely had some questionable things (the vote on Zaj after the claim, as well as the fact that he did not interact with Flay much either, even explicitly asking that we not tunnel him and not vote him right away). Granted, Flay voted for Beefster, but this definitely does not convince me that Flay wasn't bussing his partner.

At the same time, Beefster is right in pointing out that Flay never voted for Earlder, but he did mention him several times. Earlder's play was questionable, but I don't find Nikanor's statement as anything bad yet. I definitely want to hear more from him before I decide anything.

Moral of the story: I'm confused, and need to continue to read through things more.

[jmurph3]

@singersigner: will do. Take your time; we've got plenty of time left in D3.

Waiting on further posting from Nikanor and Beefster.

[jmurph3]

@Mod: I don't disagree. But it

is

frustrating when others aren't posting...or are posting evasively.

Beefster, I'm looking at you. What do you mean, there's not much more to add without going into specifics? Then go into specifics, for goodness sake!! This game is stalling because singersigner, Nexus and myself have posted all our thoughts, but we're waiting on you and Nikanor. So when you post something like that, you continue driving this game into the ground. If you're trying to appear pro-town, you're doing it wrong.

[jmurph3]

@Nikanor: please stop posting if you're not going to contribute anything.

Why do you think Beefster is scum? Why don't you try and build a case on him instead of just being obnoxious?

[jmurph3]

@singersigner: I understand your frustration (as I share it), but here's the thing: Nikanor has set up a whole round of WIFOM. Naturally, I, like you, look at what he's posted and think, "What townie would write that?" and subsequently want to vote for him. However, then I think to myself, "What scum would be that obvious?" meaning then I don't want to vote him.

It's a hugely circular logic pattern that he's set up, and it's incredibly frustrating. So I will say this only once, as a warning: Nikanor, what you are doing is anti-town. If you do not stop acting anti-town and thus creating a lot of WIFOM for us to have to deal with, I will lynch you, scum or otherwise.

[jmurph3]

Wow, this thread exploded with uselessness overnight.

@singersigner: I will put out all my thoughts. I feel like I've put most of them out, but I'll go through and see what I'm missing. Expect a better post later today/

[jmurph3]

Something has come up IRL and I will be

V/LA until Sunday the 29th.

Beefster, if you don't post more by then...

Noted.

[jmurph3]

Very well played to singersigner, who I did not suspect was scum at all.

This was my first time as cop, and I have to be completely honest: I panicked when I actually got a guilty on Flay on N1. I was so prepared for an innocent that I had no clue what to do with a guilty. In retrospect, I should have played it a little better with my guilty result, but Flay gave me so little to work with in terms of actually building a case on him outside of my investigation that I was forced to claim before I wanted to. Ah well.