A Storm of Swords - Lay your swords down!

[Thor665]

@Benmage - next time I do something like that I'll use smaller words so you can understand. My bad.

[Benmage]

@Benmage - next time I do something like that I'll use smaller words so you can understand. My bad.

So you admit you lied about your limited time and tried to use that excuse for not reading pgs 8-32.

[Twilight Sparkle]

Nothing about MoI here because Mina is still finishing the response to him.

We think Thor has a very large chance of flipping scum, we think Raivann has a fairly large chance of flipping scum, and a scumflip on one virtually confirms the other as town. There's no contradiction here.

**Why is one flipping scum confirming the other town?

Raivann's attack on ASoIaF/Thor make extremely little sense as a bus. It's possible - hence 'virtually' confirms - but extremely unlikely. Remember, this came before LMP claimed the chesskid shot. If there are multiple scumteams, then change this to "aren't same faction scum."

Why would you ever kill a player softclaiming Twyin Lannister???

You advocate for Chess to be vigged here, well after his softclaiming of Twyin and softclaiming PR. Am I missing a subsequent change of position somewhere?

So I named all the scum, and call town immune... and that has a negative effect on the game?

Yes. It becomes obvious to scum that they must either pursue a mislynch on your list, or bus a scummate. Tomorrow, it will be easier to slip to a mislynch off of your list (“Why didn’t I go after this person yesterday? Why Ben, old chap, they were off your list!”). Basically, you’re telling the scum who the allowable mislynches are and lowering the accountability players will have to have for the actions; not really a good thing even IF it’s accurate.

(It’s worth noting that, if the scum have daytalk, your actions aren’t nearly as bad - part of the problem with your list is that you’re essentially giving the scum a plan for how to act, but if they’re talking anyway this isn’t a problem. Given the wording of Envoy to the Eyrie, though, I’d be fairly surprised if the scum could daytalk.)

--

@LMP:

We’re your third biggest scum read. How much of it is associative with Feysal?

--

Where am I a scumread of Zdenek's?

In all fairness, he does say you’re unlikely to be Stark, but his second post of D2 implicitly treats aspects of your play as scummy::

Magua

Because I am leery of people who say "Policy lynching a VI D1 is the smart move" when there's more than one VI.

Why does the presence of more than VI make a difference?

$10 says Hasdgfas is faking his post restriction. It's cute, but it's also nonsensical from a setup POV. Undecided on scumminess; not enough information yet. Nulltell.

LL called him out this already, but I'd like to draw attention to it again. He thinks that someone is faking a post-restriction but calls it a null-tell, which I think is nonsensical.

Ghostlin: why didn't you have a problem with Magua's 962?

(In my somewhat biased opinion, this is a pure scum post--picking out a couple of superficial details that have no relevance to anyone’s alignment, and then failing to reach a conclusion on them--but moving on.)

But thank you for asking me this. Because now I just noticed this:

Magua’s 962.

Did I miss any controversy over this post? To break it down, Magua:
-retroactively believes zoraster’s flavour, calls Cow and Locke confirmed town
-argues Raivann is highly unlikely Stark, and MoI/Zdenek/xvart are less likely Stark.
-speculates on the diddin NK.
-votes Twilight Sparkle.

Considering Zdenek’s only other comment on Magua had to do with Cow’s post restriction, this is a useless fake-scumhunting question. Even if Zdenek singled out Ghostlin because Ghostlin agreed with Magua’s post on Raivann...was that the most noteworthy thing to mention in his only catch-up post?

But furthermore, this is Zdenek’s first post of the day:

I strongly doubt that Magua is Stark because of his push on diddin yesterday.

I am willing to accept that because of the flavour that LL is cleared (my own knowledge of flavour is minimal, so I really am trusting others here)

I agree with MoI that Twilight Sparkle's use of soft accusations against him is scummy.

In other words...he asks Ghostlin why he agrees with every point of Magua’s in 926?

Yeah. Still happy with this vote.

-hito/Mina

[Eddard Stark]

Vote count 2.17

Twilight Sparkle (5) MagnaofIllusion, Benmage, Raivann, Zdenek, Hasdgfas

Bunnylover (3) Ghostlin, xvart, Danakillsu
danakillsu (1) Kast
Ghostlin (1) DTMaster
Thor665 (2) Shadow1psc, Nexus
Feysal (4) LynchMePls, Setael, Locke Lamora, DrippingGoofball
Zdenek (3) Twilight Sparkle, Bunnylover, Feysal
Nexus (1) Magua

Not voting (1) Thor665

With 21 alive it takes 11 to lynch. No majority at deadline and there'll be no lynch.

Envoy to the Eyrie

[/u]

Setael (1) Danakillsu

Bunnylover (6) MagnaofIllusion, LynchMePls, Nexus, hasdgfas, Setael, Locke Lamora

Raivann (4) Bunnylover, Ghostlin, xvart, Feysal
Zdenek (1) Kast
Thor665 (4) Zdenek, Benmage, Twilight Sparkle, DrippingGoofball
Nexus (1) Raivann,
xvart (1) DTMaster
Twilight Sparkle (1) Magua

Not nominating (2) Shadow1psc, Thor665

With 21 alive it takes 11 to sent someone to the Eyrie

* Kast is on V/la. As is Zdeneek.
* Any mistakes in the VC point them out
*The deadline can be found here.

[Thor665]

@Benmage - next time I do something like that I'll use smaller words so you can understand. My bad.

So you admit you lied about your limited time and tried to use that excuse for not reading pgs 8-32.

No, if you go back and look you'll realize I was being sarcastic and insulting your ability to draw conclusions. Let me walk you through it;

Ben: Thor is scummy, because he didn't say that he would read up and now he is saying he did say that.
Thor: Actually I did say it, here are relevant quotes.
Ben...um...well, you're scum because you did do that, but I'm going to claim that you're using truth to hide your greater scumminess, yes.
Thor: Was there a point to answering the first question, or is this all confirmation bias?
Ben: My penis is huuuuuuge!
Thor: Carry on good sir.

Actual quotes.


Basically you admitted that I did say I'd read up, and then decided it was all part of an elaborate truth in a lie scum fake out - meaning you actually didn't care whether or not I did or didn't say I would read up and really just wanted to scream and keep me in your scum column. If you're town you're being silly and narrow minded, and if you're scum...well played.

[Zdenek]

I'm back, and will start catching up. One of my flights was delayed by eight hours, do I have less time now than I'd hoped. I'm just going to address some of the points Twilight Sparkle raised against me earlier.

Point One: Inconsistency re: LL, but more importantly, his sidestepping around whether he could consider LL to be third party.

Just because you say something, doesn't make it true. I have never sidestepped on this issue. Here is what I've said about LL:

I am willing to accept that because of the flavour that LL is cleared (my own knowledge of flavour is minimal, so I really am trusting others here)

I don't think that he's scum.

It's precisely because my read on Locke is due to other's knowledge of the flavour that I said

Trying to undermine someone who most people are perceiving as almost confirmed town is scummy.

All of TS's point one is poor logic and rhetoric.

TS, why did you wait to share your argument that LL could be a serial killer in your case against me rather than arguing with people who think that LL is confirmed town?

Point Two: Zdenek’s inconsistency on MoI’s interactions with me

Exhibit C: Post 346, Zdenek says his read of Benmage has weakened, and raises Sparkle.

Zdenek never mentions MagnaofIllusion or Twilight Sparkle afterward beyond moving his raise to Benmage for "liking his observation" (what observation?).

I did not say that my read on Benmage had weakened.

The observation of Benmage that I liked was:

Although pending a further look. I'm pretty confident Sparkle is scum... Why haven't they requested the governor? They gonna throw it away? Sotty and hito are bad players ?!?!?!??!?! Baloney.... I'd want to give it to them, because it should be a doom sentence.

Why didn’t you have a problem with our breaking up Magna’s and Benmage’s protown union BEFORE you’d raised us? Why didn’t you dislike our "soft accusations" of Magna before then?

This implies that his claim to have suspected us for softly attacking Magna and for interrupting the MoI-Benmage lovefest were disingenuous.

Since you are such a fan of post numbers, I'd raised you in post 346.

This

To me, it read like you were taking a snipe at him as a VI and yet you had raised him after your early game rant

wasn't until post 460. Asking MoI how him raising Benmage and being disappointed with him in the past gel was a reasonable question, and I agreed with the criticism of MoI for bringing up the statistical analysis of self-raising from the last game.

So your final claim is false.

What we see in point two is TS misrepresenting the content of my posts and the order of posts in the thread.

I'll answer your questions about this later.

Point Five: Inconsistency regarding Danakillsu

There is no inconsistency; I was attacking your logic.

[DrippingGoofball]

Sine Twilight Sparkle is town, there is one scum here:

Twilight Sparkle (5) MagnaofIllusion,

Benmage

, Raivann, Zdenek,

Hasdgfas

I just want to remind everyone.

[MagnaofIllusion]

You know, I'm having a problem with what you're saying here. Time to have a look at how this discussion has developed.

That’s great .. I’m having a problem with the manner in which you are trying to frame the discussion so that I don’t have a legitimate reason to question you. Let’s observe.

I respond to Zdenek with the counterargument that the last person I saw using his argument was wrong. I made my point clear: no one is above reasonable suspicion.

Here you are arguing that you made your point clear that no-one should be under suspicion and that my questioning you isn’t scum-hunting. You are once again missing the pont of my concern.

My concern is that you are cherry-picking events from prior games to bolster you stance. That is something I find that scum are more likely to do. Your initial statement was phrased as such –

The last person I saw making this argument was town, and also wrong. He went on to mislynch the player accused of undermining an obvtown player, and the obvtown player was indeed scum. In other words, no one is above suspicion, at least not reasonable suspicion.

You don’t start off by saying ‘The time I sawy someone use this argument”. You specifically use the phrase “The last person I saw”. The phrasing infers quite clearly that you have seen people use that scum-tell on other occasions. I first questioned you to determine whether there were indeed other occasions where you had seen this tell used. Because if there were and they conflicted with the occasion you used to support your stance against Zdenek then that would be very likely cherry-picking, which Town had no reason to do.

When I questioned you about other occasions your response is to make a linguistic argument out of it and react in a defensive manner as opposed to just simply stating “I didn’t phrase it clearly, that was the only occasion”.

You also ignore the direct counter-example I provided from Clash. Benmage was absolutely correct in that case that I was looking to undermine him in that game and it was a scum-tactic. Scum don’t want too many players that are strongly viewed as Town. The “no-one is immune to suspicion” argument you continue to make follows that thought process. It’s very similar to the arguments KMD made in Gorrad’s Fictional Large Mafia after MPR was a demonstrated Daykiller with flavor that supported him as being Town. KMD kept harping on the fact that ‘proven power doesn’t mean proven alignment’. That’s true in the sense that MPR was not 100% cleared but the circumstances dictated it was not worthwhile to put him in the suspect list until late in the game. KMD was scum who wanted to minimize the PoE Town might have at their disposal. And MPR was 100% Town, of course. I get the feeling you are trying to do the same with there.

1. What was the purpose of the questions concerning my counterargument you asked in post #1274?
2. In particular, why did you ask me about other examples and their outcomes? How would they be relevant to the current game?
3. Where have I dodged a question from you before? Your use of "again" clearly implied I had.
4. Why did you not answer the above two questions when they were originally asked?
5. What would be my purpose in obfuscating how many times I've seen the original argument used? Since you seem to imply that this is scummy, you need to show what I would gain from this as scum.

1. That’s fully explained above.
2. Again, explained above.
3. The again is in regards to you dodging questions from players in general, not specifically me. It apparently wasn’t phrased as clearly as it should have been. Should I chock this question up to the following? –

What I'm thinking about right now is that this is an example of you questioning people on trivial and irrelevant matters. I feel that you're not hunting for scum, you're hunting for weaknesses you could spin into a mislynch.

4. Because they looked more like rhetorical questions when you originally posted them.
5. Explained above.

I await your answers. Meanwhile, I have a feeling that I would find a lot more of such meaningless questions from your ISO.

Scumtastic soft-attack. You have ‘a feeling’ that you would find more ‘meaningless’ (which they aren’t, as clearly shown above) questions in my ISO. But you don’t follow up … which is to be expected when you want to make a rhetoric attack.

--

WHAT?! How is that good posting? BL is on Benmage's "I will govern this lynch if you even try it" list so why the HELL would I vote her? Also, frankly, what BL case? Is "the information" Ghost's referring to me listing all the times she calls herself stupid, because that's about all it is. I'm wary that it's intentional, but her response made me less so.

1. Two other players were voting for Bunnylover when you’ve gone after him for his ‘VI’ posting. Toeing the 'Benmage's approved hit list' line and not voting him while focusing your attention with laser accuracy against Bunnylover I find suspect.
2. If you don’t see the massive amount of words you threw at Bunnylover as something leading to a vote-worthy case why waste all that time pointing out someone you are ‘wary’ of and actually hunt scum?

[Shadow1psc]

Sine Twilight Sparkle is town, there is one scum here:

Twilight Sparkle (5) MagnaofIllusion,

Benmage

,

Raivann

, Zdenek,

Hasdgfas

I just want to remind everyone.

♪One of these things is not like the other...♫

[LimMePls]

You don't get to dictate who we're allowed to suspect and vote, or where we're allowed to hunt for scum.

Seeing as how the town GAVE HIM A GOVERNOR, I think he does in fact get to dictate who we're allowed to vote.

Setael: Here's a simple counterquestion for you. If you believe in the BL case, are getting all the information for it, then why aren't you voting for it?

Good fucking posting.

How is this good posting? Isn't Bunnylover on the "cannot be lynched today" list?

Come to think of it, I didn't even know GW was in this game. So no, NOT good posting.

I’ve read it and just want to be sure we are on the same page.

Points 1, 2 and 5 are all the same point – Zdenek is being inconsistent and thus scummy.
Point 3 – Making safe, convenient stances is scummy.

I’m not sure what exactly you are saying in Point 4 but I don’t see the scumminess there.

Your slot is guilty of exactly those same offenses in Points 1-3, 5 as Zdenek is.

Inconsistency – I’ve pointed out this in my case regarding my slot. Others have pointed out how Hito’s “Iso Extraveganza” has players with Town reads being listed in second tier suspects.

Safe, convienant stances – As others have again mentioned the catch-up spectacular ended up listing 3 suspects who were either already under fire and a primary counter wagon to you (Thor) or low profile players being suspected. Add to that my suspicions regarding why you choose ‘Suspect 2’ over 'Suspect 1'.

That catch-up post is exactly what I would expect to see from competent scum under fire for lack of Pro-Town play – a well-reasoned case against a player who isn’t likely to competently fire back.

I don’t see any of my concerns about your slot being addressed. Just a large post that says – LOOK OVER HERE!!! HE’S SCUMMY FOR X,Y,Z! DON’T PAY ATTENTION TO THE FACT I AM GUILTY OF THE SAME CRIMES!!!

This. Plus, my experience with Zdenek is that he's mislynch bait. Every game I've been in with him (2 that I can think of off the top of my head plus 1 I modded) he was mislynched by the town. The fact that the case came out of left field when TS was being run up makes me feel pretty confident that it's a red herring.

Starts day two by voting for us. Really it is a pretty easy vote for him. He's right, we haven't done anything but what about Kast, Nexus, LMP (at this point, he has picked up since), Zdenek, Setael (ditto LMP), Thor or DTMaster? I'm not seeing the legit scum hunting that is present with MoI, it's opportunistic.

Deflection?

Now THIS is good fucking posting. I love the "but why me, everyone else is doing it too" defense. Pretty much always comes from scum.

IDIOT CLAIM. You were under 0 pressure.

Why would you ever kill a player softclaiming Twyin Lannister???

Read on. Disagree with your characterization of my claim. *shrug* WHY DOES EVERYONE KEEP SAYING HE WAS SOFTCLAIMING TYWIN!? Clearly it was Tyrion!

The fact that LynchMePls is the one pushing for my death. He killed Chesskid, and I expect that if he can't have his way by day he will kill me by night.

[WIFOM]Pretty fair assumption.[/WIFOM]

Multiple town Night Vig's and a Day vig.. No....Just no. The mods are gonna want to be creative.

SK, maybe. Redirect maybe. 2 scums....I guess a maybe.

Trust me on this Benmage, it'll all make sense when the time comes to claim it out full. Just remember that ACOK had "vig-hander-out-guy", dayvig and triggered vengeful townie. So multiple town aligned killing roles is not out of the question. diddin = SK kill is also certainly a possibility.

Why would you ever kill a player softclaiming Twyin Lannister???

You advocate for Chess to be vigged here, well after his softclaiming of Twyin and softclaiming PR. Am I missing a subsequent change of position somewhere?

Second this question.

@LMP: We’re your third biggest scum read. How much of it is associative with Feysal?

Enough of it that I want him dead before you. That's why my vote is on him.

1. Two other players were voting for Bunnylover when you’ve gone after him for his ‘VI’ posting. Toeing the 'Benmage's approved hit list' line and not voting him while focusing your attention with laser accuracy against Bunnylover I find suspect.
2. If you don’t see the massive amount of words you threw at Bunnylover as something leading to a vote-worthy case why waste all that time pointing out someone you are ‘wary’ of and actually hunt scum?

MOI, Benmage has said multiple times that it's fine to attack his "no lynch" list, just not vote them. So why is Setael's stance on BL bad? I don't understand this.

[MagnaofIllusion]

MOI, Benmage has said multiple times that it's fine to attack his "no lynch" list, just not vote them. So why is Setael's stance on BL bad? I don't understand this.

Because he spent entire posts (ISO 8 and 10, specifically) addressing how Bunny is likely scum using the VI thing as a defense – specifically says this:

There's also a good chance she's scum whether she is or isn't a VI

and is hoping she'll avoid attention if people think she's stupid, and then if any attention comes she can just shrug her shoulders and look pretty.

Then Bunnylover responds at 1340 with some statements that to me don’t say a thing about his aligment. Then, in his response to me Setael says:

Also, frankly, what BL case? Is "the information" Ghost's referring to me listing all the times she calls herself stupid, because that's about all it is. I'm wary that it's intentional, but her response made me less so. Other than that I have very little on her and it looks like it could all be explained away if she really is just a VI with low self esteem.

Um whut? If all he had on Bunnylover was the “VI shield” why was the bolded portion of the first statement made. The clear implication is that other information makes Bunnylover scummy and that the VI act is just a way to deflect attention. Yet when called on it by Ghostlin (not Ghostwriter smart-ass ) and myself he tries to distance himself from implicating Bunnylover as scummy. Inconsistency of opinion with a nice side of back-tracking.

[LimMePls]

@MOI: You're the one that attributed it to Ghostwriter, in your ISO 63. I was just assuming your quote was accurate. (insert required joke about knowing what happens when you assume...)

[Twilight Sparkle]

Stray thought as I leave: Kast has been really lurky as well but hasn't been mentioned by anyone. If there is only one scum team he is likely a member.

Sotty - I don't understand the logic behind the certainty of being on a single scum team compared to multiple scum teams.

It was just a I thought I had since I believed there was scum pushing us at the time for what can be boiled down to lurking for the most part. Kast on the other hand has lurked and is known as a good player and yet got exactly zero flack his way. I found it extremely strange and disproportional.

If there is one scum team and Kast is a member, they wouldn't want to draw any unneeded heat his way. If the town are ignoring him, they would too. This could work with more than one scum team, but I think the tell is significantly weaker IMO. Pushing lurkers, is good busy work for scum because it is a protown action that townies should be doing. However it shouldn't (and in my opinion doesn't) reflect on the alignment of the player who is calling out the lurkers.

This is just a flyby answering a question directed at me. We're currently working on a bigger post together that should be up soonish.

~Sotty

[Locke Lamora]

To clarify definitions for you LL, "plenty active" refers to posting fairly lengthy death flavor 45 min after the hammer. The speed made me feel he should be able to be posting here.

I'm fine with his response. I hadn't considered that possibility and it makes sense.

You hadn't considered the possibility that he had time to write 'lengthy' (I checked, it's 125 words) flavour but not to read the couple of hundred posts that had passed since he last visited the thread? Really?

[hasdgfas]

@Benmage - next time I do something like that I'll use smaller words so you can understand. My bad.

[Feysal]

That's great... I'm having a problem with the manner in which you are trying to frame the discussion so that I don't have a legitimate reason to question you.

What? You will either explain how I'm supposedly doing that, or this is just mudslinging.

Here you are arguing that you made your point clear that no-one should be under suspicion and that my questioning you isn't scum-hunting. You are once again missing the point of my concern.

Yes I was. That's why I asked. And it was above suspicion, not under.

Having read your response, I can say that your logic fails you, MoI. I wanted to know why it was supposedly scummy of me to not specify how many times I'd seen Zdenek's comment used. You said that you suspected me of cherry picking examples that supported my stance. Nice try, but your answer is flawed.

The problem is that you accused me of linguistic obfuscation in post #1353. By then it was well established that I had exactly one example, and you can't cherry pick from a sample size of one. Therefore your suspicion was no longer valid at the time you made the accusation. It did not make much sense to begin with either, since I clearly specified it was the "last person". Even if I had had more examples, I could not have picked which of them was the last.

You also said that I reacted defensively to being questioned about other occasions. In fact I answered directly the first time you asked, but you continued to press the matter, having obviously misunderstood me. You criticize me for "making a linguistic argument out of it" instead of simply stating that my phrasing was unclear. Say what? That was exactly what I did, I even pointed out exactly where and how it was unclear, explaining how your misunderstanding had arisen.

I have not ignored the counterexample you provided, I simply choose to trust my own experience. I am reminded of my first game ever, where one player was considered town for having been verifiably targeted by mafia. On the last day I realized he'd been playing me for a fool, and he was in fact a member of another mafia faction. I will not put my faith in a generic tell that would discourage players from voicing reasonable suspicions.

The again is in regards to you dodging questions from players in general, not specifically me. It apparently wasn't phrased as clearly as it should have been.

I'll say.

That's again dodging

the question I asked

.

Emphasis by me. The question remains then, where have I supposedly dodged questions from anyone at all? I do not recall doing so.

[MagnaofIllusion]

What? You will either explain how I'm supposedly doing that, or this is just mudslinging.

I’ve already explained it to you. You’ve made arguments from a scum perspective and in our back and forth are trying to frame my suspicion as solely based on your ‘lingustic’ gymanastics when those are but a part of my issue.

The problem is that you accused me of linguistic obfuscation in post #1353. By then it was well established that I had exactly one example, and you can't cherry pick from a sample size of one. Therefore your suspicion was no longer valid at the time you made the accusation. It did not make much sense to begin with either, since I clearly specified it was the "last person". Even if I had had more examples, I could not have picked which of them was the last.

That’s not an accusation, it was a conclusion Feysal. The linguistic obfuscation where you tried to explain who the phrase “the last person” is synonymous with “the only person” (which it is not) in an additional scummy layer to your play.

I’ve quite clearly explain why I find your “No-one is above suspicion” explanation scummy. Here again you are attempting to say that your linguistic argument is the only thing that I found scummy when it is clearly not. The manner in which you reacted with said linguistic argument adds to the scumminess.

I have not ignored the counterexample you provided, I simply choose to trust my own experience. I am reminded of my first game ever, where one player was considered town for having been verifiably targeted by mafia. On the last day I realized he'd been playing me for a fool, and he was in fact a member of another mafia faction.

I will not put my faith in a generic tell that would discourage players from voicing reasonable suspicions.

Nice. You are presented with not one but two direct counter-examples that show your stance isn’t strong and your response is to “choose to trust my own experience”. That’s fine. I’ll trust my own experience which says someone making the arguments you have made in the manner they have made them is scum.

Emphasis added – the bolded portion is classic. Attempting to minimize the opposing viewpoint by saying it's 'generic' and that it 'discourages' discussion is straw-manning.

[LimMePls]

Nice. You are presented with not one but two direct counter-examples that show your stance isn’t strong and your response is to “choose to trust my own experience”. That’s fine. I’ll trust my own experience which says someone making the arguments you have made in the manner they have made them is scum.

Emphasis added – the bolded portion is classic. Attempting to minimize the opposing viewpoint by saying it's 'generic' and that it 'discourages' discussion is straw-manning.

So IMO the only question left from the MOI-Feysal interactions is: Why isn't MOI voting Feysal?

Also, we're less than a week from deadline so all of these people:

danakillsu (1) Kast
Ghostlin (1) DTMaster
Nexus (1) Magua
Not voting (1) Thor665

are doing it wrong.

Also Also, these people:

Bunnylover (3) Ghostlin, xvart, Danakillsu

are both doing it wrong AND not paying attention.

@MOD:

Can we get prods on the non-V/LA players in this set {Bunnylover, Kast, Magua and DTMaster}?

[MagnaofIllusion]

So IMO the only question left from the MOI-Feysal interactions is: Why isn't MOI voting Feysal?

Are you really asking this question? My number 1 scum read is Twilight Sparkle. I'm voting them. I only have one vote.

[LimMePls]

Yes I'm really asking. It seems to me like the case on Feysal is better. Can you list the points against each and then explain why the TS read is stronger? At least so much stronger that you don't seem to even be entertaining a Feysal vote over TS, despite your continued noting of clearly scummy behavior from Feysal.

[Setael]

1. Two other players were voting for Bunnylover when you’ve gone after him for his ‘VI’ posting. Toeing the 'Benmage's approved hit list' line and not voting him while focusing your attention with laser accuracy against Bunnylover I find suspect.

Misrep. My attention has hardly been focused only on BL. I have a LOT more reason to be voting Feysal so it's ridiculous that you find it "suspect" that I'm not voting BL.

2. If you don’t see the massive amount of words you threw at Bunnylover as something leading to a vote-worthy case why waste all that time pointing out someone you are ‘wary’ of and actually hunt scum?

How is it a "massive amount of words"? Are you talking about Bunnylover's quotes that I bolded and underlined?

Nothing I say about BL at this point makes it a vote-worthy case

today

, since Benmage has declared he'd govern her lynch. That doesn't stop me from pointing out what I find suspicious and certainly isn't a waste of time when it can be looked back at later.

Your #2 here seems to indicate that if we find anyone scummy that is not on Benmage's list you think we should just keep it to ourselves since it's a waste of time to vote them. Is this true?

MOI, Benmage has said multiple times that it's fine to attack his "no lynch" list, just not vote them. So why is Setael's stance on BL bad? I don't understand this.

Because

he spent entire posts (ISO 8 and 10, specifically) addressing how Bunny is likely scum using the VI thing as a defense – specifically says this:

There's also a good chance she's scum whether she is or isn't a VI

and is hoping she'll avoid attention if people think she's stupid, and then if any attention comes she can just shrug her shoulders and look pretty.

Then Bunnylover responds at 1340 with some statements that to me don’t say a thing about his aligment. Then, in his response to me Setael says:

Also, frankly, what BL case? Is "the information" Ghost's referring to me listing all the times she calls herself stupid, because that's about all it is. I'm wary that it's intentional, but her response made me less so. Other than that I have very little on her and it looks like it could all be explained away if she really is just a VI with low self esteem.

Um whut? If all

he had on Bunnylover was the “VI shield” why was the bolded portion of the first statement made. The clear implication is that other information makes Bunnylover scummy and that the VI act is just a way to deflect attention. Yet when called on it by Ghostlin (not Ghostwriter smart-ass ) and myself

he tries to distance himself from implicating Bunnylover as scummy. Inconsistency of opinion with a nice side of back-tracking.

The "VI shield" isn't the only thing I've pointed out about BL. The first thing that I found scummy was the post where she says she ISO'd diddin and didn't get a single read either way. I've also seen statements that indicate a connection between she and Feysal, though I realize this doesn't mean much until one of them flips (and that I'm probably reading more into it than others because I think Feysal is scum). After her response, I'm leaning toward the possibility that it's not an act and it's not intentional. (I actually started thinking this while ISOing her and gathering the quotes, but I still wanted to post it and gauge her reaction.) I'm not sure how to say anything else about it without insulting her intelligence, but if it isn't an act then maybe she really wasn't able to get any reads on diddin and then yeah, I've got pretty much nothing. She's now in my "needs more info" column.

@Anyone who has played in a game with BL before: Has she made comments like this in those games about being an idiot and not trusting her reads? I'd like to know if she does it as both town and scum (and also if she did it prior to the game she's referring to where she was unlynchable), but I won't have time anytime soon to read other games she's been in to find this out.

To clarify definitions for you LL, "plenty active" refers to posting fairly lengthy death flavor 45 min after the hammer. The speed made me feel he should be able to be posting here.

I'm fine with his response. I hadn't considered that possibility and it makes sense.

You hadn't considered the possibility that he had time to write 'lengthy' (I checked, it's 125 words) flavour but not to read the couple of hundred posts that had passed since he last visited the thread? Really?

He was posting regular vote counts and posted 125 words (thanks for counting, that's helpful) of death flavor 45 minutes after the hammer. I was considering that active on the site. What I had not considered was that in order to stay active as a mod he had to ignore this game entirely. Makes sense.

So IMO the only question left from the MOI-Feysal interactions is: Why isn't MOI voting Feysal?

Are you really asking this question? My number 1 scum read is Twilight Sparkle. I'm voting them. I only have one vote.

This is a pretty hypocritical response considering your surprise that I'm not voting BL when she's clearly not my #1 scum read.

[Feysal]

The problem is that you accused me of linguistic obfuscation in post #1353. By then it was well established that I had exactly one example, and you can't cherry pick from a sample size of one. Therefore your suspicion was no longer valid at the time you made the accusation. It did not make much sense to begin with either, since I clearly specified it was the "last person". Even if I had had more examples, I could not have picked which of them was the last.

That's not an accusation, it was a conclusion Feysal. The linguistic obfuscation where you tried to explain that the phrase "the last person" is synonymous with "the only person" (which it is not) is an additional scummy layer to your play.

You continue to fail, MoI. According to your own words, what you called linguistic obfuscation was only scummy because it obscured cherry picking on my part, a theory that has been disproven by the fact that there are no other examples. Whether you call it a conclusion or accusation does not matter, either way your logic has been proven unsound, and you dodging this fact is scummy.

In addition, you saying that I'd have said those things were synonymous is a misrep. This is what I actually said:

The "last time" can just as well refer to the only time as to the last time of several.

I've quite clearly explained why I find your "No-one is above suspicion" explanation scummy. Here again you are attempting to say that your linguistic argument is the only thing that I found scummy when it is clearly not. The manner in which you reacted with said linguistic argument adds to the scumminess.

Another misrep. I have not claimed that the linguistic argument would be the only thing you found scummy about me, I am claiming that the linguistic argument does not make sense, and you are trying to deflect this by talking about other things.

For a

third

misrep, I've repeatedly asked you where I dodged questions like you accused me of doing. The first time you dodged it, apparently because you mistook it for a rhetorical question. Admittedly it was not phrased as a question then. The second time you claimed that you were talking about dodging questions from other players instead of you, in blatant contradiction to what you originally said. I asked you for a third time now, and you ignored it completely. You will either provide examples or admit that you were painting me black with a baseless accusation.

Nice. You are presented with not one but two direct counter-examples that show your stance isn't strong and your response is to "choose to trust my own experience". That's fine. I'll trust my own experience which says someone making the arguments you have made in the manner they have made them is scum.

What the hell do you expect? That I should automatically discard my own experience when you disagree? No way. As for you, you're about to learn why I spoke of a generic tell. There are exceptions to every rule, and ignoring that fact is a severe flaw in a player.

Why is it that everything I say you seem to consider scummy? Oh right. Because that is what you are doing. For the record, ignoring the town side of an argument is a major scumtell for me. I've never liked your posts in this game, and after this exchange I have a definite scum read on you. I know I'm a dead man, whether by lynch or nightkill, and right now I'm not afraid of accusing anyone.

[Eddard Stark]

Bunnylover, DTMaster and Magua have been prodded.

I do prod on request (within reason)

[Bunnylover]

I'm here. Nothing that I see I can give my two cent in.

[Kast]

There's a lot of posts and not that much actually going on. Order within categories doesn't indicate anything. To be honest, I'm not really motivated much for this game; I hope things pick up more in D3.

I'm dismayed to see the amount of blind obedience to

Spoiler: Benmage's blatantly anti-town power play.

My gut read on that situation is Benmage let the governor power enhance natural arrogance; so I don't think it's a scum tell. I do think it's doing a heckuva job bogging this game and creating smokescreens for scum to dither around and waste time jumping around while buddying to the Governor.

At this point, I'm ok with a VOTE: Feysal and

Nominate: BL

Town (Thor these are really the only town reads that make any sense for townies to oppose lynching...anyone else is lol):

Hasdgfas

- confirmed via Day Vig

Locke Lamora

- confirmed via Zoraster

Beats No-Lynch:

xvart

- He's playing like town meta and not playing his scum meta.

LynchMePls

- Gut town read and liking most of what he's posted. Disliked this bit (and the stuff that was similar to it).

Seeing as how the town GAVE HIM A GOVERNOR, I think he does in fact get to dictate who we're allowed to vote.

This is wrong. He does get to veto a single player. If he wants to veto a player that town wants to lynch, then town should hold him to that and he should use the power to do what he says. As it is, he's just letting his ego run wild, providing half baked cases, and congratulating people who listen to him and provide cases for his preferred lynches. Meanwhile, he's protected the two most suspected players and allowed them free reign to continue playing as anti-town as possible without any repercussions. Raivann and BunnyLover are so safe, they can directly press our claimed vigs for more role info, and even after being told to stop it, they still each pushed without any repercussions.

Thor665

- Gut town read. Reads somewhat like a stubborn town. I may be unintentionally giving him some credit as a VI.

Shadow1psc

- Gut town read. Reads a bit like a follower/weaker townie, but I like that he's staying vocal about his Raivann read despite the coercion.

Neutral:

Magua

- Been very reasonable, but that seems to be his playstyle and not an alignment tell.

MagnaOfIllusion

- Hard to read. Has been fairly reasonable with a few exceptions. Actually on catchup I'm glad he isn't giving BM's protected players completely free passes. Also, I think you asked if anyone was buddying you and you hadn't mentioned it; there looks to be lots of buddying between you and BM; I'm not sure if you mentioned him, but I didn't see any mention of that in my catchup. I'm assuming some of this is just because you agree with each other on a lot.

DTMaster

- Greyice was overactive and too emotional. He was probable genuinely upset with many players, and that kinda masked his affiliation. DTMaster hasn't posted enough to develop a read.

DrippingGoofball

- Some of the early pressure on DGB seemed opportunistic; if we see scum flips among early attackers, I'll likely shift DGB to a higher category. Not really contributing, but that's not unexpected.

Nexus

- Had a neutral read on Nexus, but not really pleased with the rolling over for Benmage. If Nexus has a strong scum-read on Raivann, he should simply ignore Benmage's blustering and vote his suspect. A Raivann lynch at that point seemed fairly likely. If Benmage really opposes the Raivann lynch, then he can use his power. No big loss to town. Rolling over and letting a single unconfirmed player decide on our lynches for 1+ days is ridiculous.

Benmage

- Initially some reasonable behavior/explanations, however, since being nominated Hand, that's been replaced with mostly anti-town actions and an unreasonable expectation that people should just treat him like confirmed-town while blindly follow his direction.

Spoiler: BM's Craplogic at the center of his approved list

The claim that Dana/Shadow/BL all must be town due to not jumping on Zoraster lynch is nonsense. Scum VIs have equal motivation as town VIs for avoiding scum lynches. Theyalso have the additional motivation of staying off an inevitable mislynch. The further claim that people who recognized Zoraster was scum and voted accordingly are more likely to be scum is ridiculous. I can see him doing his anti-town coercion play out of arrogance as a townie; but it is also possible he's attempting to protect a buddy among his protected candidates.

So stop bitching... I'm giving the town direction for the day. And its working.

This is a blatant lie. There's lots of support for either a BL or a Raivann lynch today. You've added "direction" that's bogged down town and protected the two players that were pretty much universally recognized and admitted as the scummiest players in the entire day.

Ghostlin

- Initially had him as an acceptable lynch, but on re-read, I revised this to neutral on account of his posts sounding more genuine than I remembered on the first read.

Twilight Sparkle

- Not really seeing the case on Twilight Sparkle.

Spoiler: What I have seen...

Seems to be mostly just a claim that TS isn't contributing as much as others expect and disagreement with MoI/Benmage. However, the Feysal/TS potential links should probably be reviewed again if Feysal flips scum.

And Magna is the kind of player who needs to be tackled with a huge post with headings, subheadings and bulletpoints.

Lol, not really. MoI's the kind of player if you need to lynch him, you better have some damn solid investigation results from at least one trusted townie and/or some flipped townies. Solid arguments don't work since he's good at building a large wall to bury them under.

Acceptable Lynch:

Setael

- Low content. I didn't like the initial case on Mikujin, but his abrupt abandoning of his stated position/beliefs in response to the threat of pressure seemed like scum appeasement. A lot of his arguments felt like misunderstandings without interest in clearing them up.

Raivann

- Generally scummy play. The case on SoFaI, the blatant buddying/declaration of towniness of anyone who doesn't want to lynch him, and the role fishing reads scummy. This is a case of a scummy VI; Benmage's insistence on protecting him doesn't really fit his earlier talk about lynching VIs regardless of how scummy they are.

Preferred Lynch:

Bunnylover

- Generally scummy/careless play. If Benmage is using the Hand to protect scum, BL seems the most likely candidate. This is another case of a VI acting scummy, and I'm surprised MoI isn't pushing this harder (to be fair he still has pushed it).

Feysal

- I like LMP's thoughts on Feysal. Also the point Magua and I think someoen else raised

If there's two scumteams, then doesn't that completely invalidate the "Feysal slipped knowing that there's only one scumteam D1" theory?

LMP's case holds for Feysal being scum and assuming a single scum team or being scum and assuming DGB/

Zoraster

was the other scum team (with LL obviously not being Feysal's team).

Danakillsu

- He's a more capable player than he's acting like. I doubt he would actually slip and make the mistakes that he claims; though I can easily see him as scum "pretending" to make those mistakes and hoping nobody calls him on them.

Zdenek

- I've liked Zdenek's D2 posts much more than D1. I'll have to think on this a bit more and may move him up a category.