Preston

At this point it's speculation - I was theorizing mafia getting 2 shots per night to offset the 1-shot arrowproof everyone seems to have, but your idea of a Strongman could make sense too. However I thought Kevin's threat to buff the scum by making their arrows strong implied they don't already have that in their arsenal. If they have a strongman, we can probably expect to see that used tonight and it'll be pretty clear from the death message if it was a strongman shot or not (i.e. a 1-shot arrowproof dies in a single arrow). The fact that you're calling my roleclaim an 'act' and saying I am 'getting away with it' are pretty accusatory terms. I understand that I messed up last night by using the wrong cop, as EM pointed out and Kevin later confirmed; there's no point in rubbing my face in it further. Hopefully I will have better luck tonight with the normal cop role. I strongly disagree that simply saying I knew Imran is a role cop would have sufficed. The real consequence of my roleclaim is really that it outed Imran at all - that I had a role was already known, so I already had a target on my back. Your idea that outing Imran without similarly claiming myself would have 'sufficed' just seems wrong - I think it would have looked extremely scummy. People would have called it unnecessary still, only I would have had the added side of being suspected because I didn't claim too. Furthermore, I think the knowledge of Imran's role on its own would have looked more like I was a second rolecop (and hence more likely scum) had I not explained my role. Kevin weighing into the thread that sharing what you know is fine, effectively removed the danger of the scum getting buffed from me roleclaiming. Just having our roles out isn't what Kevin is watching for - it's if we visibly try to come up with a way to use them together that the scum will be unable to counter. I've been extremely open about why I ultimately felt I had no choice but to roleclaim. It was not an easy choice, but I ultimately thought the suspicion I would have incurred by NOT claiming would have been too much - until the roleclaim chain was resolved, we would have been distracted from trying to find the real scum. At least now we're moving on with the actual scumhunting. As for the Rafay wagon - we've got four votes. Six would end the day, so we've got a buffer of one vote before the hammer vote. If necessary I can unvote to give us a larger buffer, but for the moment I don't think that is needed. Scum had better wagons to jump onto (d3mon or Lyner) instead of buddy scum Rafay wagon with 2nd vote. Maybe it's just too late at night (CN war attacks at update!), but I'm not fully following this; could you elaborate please? If you're referring to the end of Day 1, the wagons were on ABD and Lyner, not d3mon and Lyner. I hope Kaz posts more than this soon; I understand life is busy of late (doubly so if you're involved in the ongoing war on CN), but something more than this would be good. I'm also curious about why Kaz included that note about Rafay, though. My response upon reading it is that it could either be a gut feeling that he's sticking with (especially if he hasn't had time to read the current day's posts in detail and is relying on Day 1 gut), or hedging so that if Rafay proves town he can claim credit for it. The latter option is a bit much to assume at this stage, but it IS possible. We'll see what Kazio says when he (hopefully) posts tomorrow. -Preston

If you're referring to my most recent post, I don't think it added anything NEW - your role cop was already out, and all roles seem to be 1-shot arrowproof. I've already explained that claiming was a hard decision for me, and why I ultimately felt I had no choice but to do so - but yeah, this was NOT the ideal way for Day 2 to go at all. Sorry again for that even so; but if nothing else we seem to finally be moving towards actually finding scum again. As I referenced before, with the role madness game setup and two shots fired last night, I'm increasingly thinking both shots were scum instead of scum + vig - which would give additional benefit to EM and TBRaiders for having been shot. It makes sense given the fact everyone seems to have 1-shot arrowproof; scum would be able to spread out their shots and keep us guessing. It's difficult to figure out the balance of this game, but for the moment it seems to be in our favor at least. Role Cop does not reveal the alignment. "Tracker" would be returned. There is no restriction on multiples of a role in the same faction. It seems like EM was right after all; bleh. This would have been good to know prior to Night 1. Looks like my investigation didn't clear Imran, but I've still got a decent feeling about him based on the conversation that followed. There seems to be a wagon building against Rafay - Imran threw the first vote, ABD who started the claim chain threw the second and EM who took an arrow last night (which I'm now suspecting may have been both scum arrows) threw the third. ABD seemed scummy when the day started so I'm still on the fence about him somewhat, but Imran and EM are two that I'm considering more likely town at this point - so their input carries weight with me. Rafay's lurking followed by his stated upcoming inactivity don't sit terribly well with me either. Adding that to the fact Rafay was on the Montosh wagon, and he seems like a reasonablescum suspect candidate. This is probably about as confident as I'll be able to be on Day 2, at least for now - so I'm not going to sit on the fence for this one. Vote: Rafay -Preston

Glad to hear from you again Kaz. We've got a week left in Day 2, and a lot for you to catch up on; it's been an eventful day. I don't understand your question - I'm a JOAT, so one I guess? I don't have any reason to believe there's more than one JOAT in the game right now. The way I understood role cop, it would return the name of the role. My expectation had been that if his role had 'goblin' or 'mafia' in the name, it would mean he was scum. The response I got for Imran is a 1-shot arrowproof role cop; my role doesnt have 'town' or 'alliance' in its name, so the result sounded like a full role name. If what you're saying is true, the result I got doesn't actually clear Imran like I thought it did, and he could in fact be a scum role cop. Such a role might make sense for them in this role-heavy setup; however I don't want to immediately assume Imran is scum either. It would also mean I somewhat wasted my night 1 action... bah. I was thinking this last night when I read the post. You didn't need to out his role. You could have just said it came back townie. Prior to my roleclaim I had said that my role returned information and another person that would have to verify my claim. If I just said "it came back townie", that would not have matched what I previously said, and there's not exactly much to verify about that either; who WOULDNT say they were townie? A claim with that minimum of information would have probably been MORE suspicious rather than less - any scum can claim they normal-cop investigated someone they KNOW is town and say the result returned townie. Perhaps worse, if I'd just said it "came back townie" that would be the same as claiming a normal cop - and if we actually HAVE a normal cop it would cause more confusion (and possibly the normal cop roleclaiming as a result), not to mention if Imran investigated me on Night 2 and saw my JOAT role he would then have grounds to call me a liar. It would make more sense for duplicate roles to be on opposite sides; i.e. one town tracker (Montosh) and one scum tracker (possibly Rafay). This does NOT mean that Rafay is 100% proven scum however - I don't think role duplication is impossible by any game rules, especially in a strange setup like this game seems to be - I wouldn't rule anything out. As for your hypothetical question - if Rafay is scum, it's possible he thought I had a role based on my Day 1 activity and wanted to see where I applied it. If he saw me targeting himself or any of his allies, he'd have reason to worry if I proved to have an investigative ability (and possibly try to kill me before I claimed with my results, if I didn't do so on day 2). If he saw me targeting someone that the scum fired their arrow(s) at - in this case EM and/or TBRaiders - they could worry about me being a watcher or alternately a doctor if their arrow shot failed. So short version: scum tracker could be used to find a town doctor or see who a town cop/watcher has investigated. Possibly other reasons as well, but those are the ones that immediately jump to mind. -Preston

I addressed this in my response; there may be goblin variants of all roles, but Imran did not return as a Goblin anything - hence it tells me both his role and that he's not a goblin. I also previously said I have a normal cop in the list, but am saving that for later because it just returns a yes/no which is less information. I used the role that would give me the most information first. As I said, I was very hesitant to claim at all - however if the roleclaim chain thus far ended with me doing something that I refused to explain, I can't see that NOT ending in tons of suspicion pointed at me that would distract from finding the actual scum. Now that you've said you were roleblocked last night, you probably would have thought I was the roleblocker too - so in an unexpected way it's a GOOD thing that we've cleared that up; I cannot have both found out your role AND roleblocked you in the same night! It wouldn't have made sense for me to watch who targeted you last night, at least not as of what I knew at the end of Day 1 - I was more interested in you yourself, so I needed to use an investigative role to do so. If nothing else I at least know you can be trusted now. @Robert: It's ironic that me painting a target on my own back with this roleclaim makes you more suspicious of me, but given your explanation about how JOAT is usually used I can see where you're coming from. My role is what it is; and whether a town JOAT is normal or not, this is clearly not a normal game - or at least not the normal balance we're used to. We're in a game where everyone seems to have 1-shot arrowproof, two arrows were fired last night, someone roleblocked Imran, and who knows what else the scum did last night. For all we know both arrows fired were scum, possibly in addition to their night abilities - given the fact it looks like it's going to take two 'shots' to finish anyone, that would actually make sense balancewise. The other town abilities we've seen up til now are also a bit more indirect; tracker/watcher require more luck to yield useful information than a directed investigation. I wouldn't be surprised if my JOAT is in play to balance out some of the other roles. I'm a little confused by your not believing my claim though; in your first post you say you'd believe me being a role cop but not a JOAT - at the same time that my ability was used to find an actual role cop. In your second post you then say the JOAT role doesn't sit well with you because it's usually a mafia role. The second one I understand per the above; the first one about not believing that I actually am a JOAT doesnt make as much sense. Since I used a role cop ability to find an actual role cop, I can only be either a second role cop or a JOAT. If I only stated Imran's role that I'd learned (effectively claiming role-cop myself), the question would if there were two Role Cops in the game - as such a full claim on my part was indeed necessary if I was going to claim at all. Because Kevin weighed into the thread saying that sharing what we know will not result in the scum being buffed, if I had NOT claimed I'd have been under suspicion as the end of the chain refusing to share information. From my perspective it doesn't feel like I had a lot of choice. Imran can use his ability to verify my role on Night 2, but that would be partially a waste of his night action. The only way I could be lying about the information I learned is if Imran and I were both scum and he is backing up my roleclaim - but if we were both scum, it would make no sense for me to target Imran as Rafay discovered. Which calls Rafay into question; but if Rafay and I were scum, why would he have targeted me as ABD said he did - and why would he then have thrown my name out there at all? If the only way I could have set up lying about my role is for almost the whole chain to have been scum together, that's a bit of a stretch. Rafay could be a scum tracker as Imran suggests; but otherwise the abilities in the claim chain seem to be verified by reinforcing each other. ABD could separately be a scum watcher, but given that ABD outed Rafay I don't think the two of them are scum together; its one-or-the-other, or neither. If we look at the Montosh lynch wagon as a starting point, two of those who have claimed are on it: Robert2424, Nick The Great, Rafay, ABigDeer, Lyner For the moment I'm going to go with Imran and lean towards suspecting Rafay over ABD; as such I'll have my suspect list be the Montosh wagon without ABD included: Robert2424, Nick The Great, Rafay, Lyner Given that the day ends next Sunday you won't miss the entirety of the day - but this is a really bad time to be ducking out for four days! I appreciate the heads-up, but don't be surprised if this is counted against you as staying under the radar in the meantime; if being inactive or lurking can simply be excused by claiming it beforehand, that tactic would be used a LOT more! Hopefully you can find the time and/or Internet access to check in before Thursday and contribute at least something to the discussion. Nick, you've got a LOT of catching up to do. As with EM, it's good to have you active again - now try to avoid going inactive again. Given that you were inactive AND on the Montosh wagon, that didn't look good for you. Another LONG post... okay, back to Evolve for a bit I'll try to check for updated posts later tonight. -Preston

In terms of me having 'the most power to sway other people into my line of thinking' - that's not the way it seemed on Day 1, no matter how active I was. If anything I think running with my analysis just earned me a bunch of suspicion, and possibly distracted from the actual scum - case in point, Robert and Imran disagreeing with the premise of how suspect the rapid no-lynch wagon was. In either case, good to see you posting again; now we just need Kaz and Nick back in the thread and keep everyone active. Maybe because it's late, I'm not understanding what you mean by your second to last sentence? I think you're referring to me being cautious because referring to EM as a potential cop on Day 1 caught your attention in a bad way. Since I'm potentially about to do something similar on Day 2 with this role claim, that's why I brought it up in my prior post. I'm not sure the information I found will be useful - but at this point it's just going to look increasingly bad and prompt speculation if I don't explain the action I took, so I may as well do so. I don't want building suspicion to get me lynched and cost the town whatever help my role can provide on future nights. At least this way you'll understand what I've been referring to, and why I've been hesitant. My role is a Jack of all Trades. It gives me several one-shot roles - but I can only use each type once. Last night I used a Role Cop-type investigation of Imran, and in so doing I found out his role; he is an actual Role Cop. Per my earlier post, it will be up to someone else to confirm this - namely Imran himself. And also per my earlier post, this may chain further to someone else if we then ask Imran who he investigated, and what the result was. I used the Role Cop on Imran for three reasons: First, after Day 1 I wanted to find out if Imran might actually be scum. His role result didn't include "Goblin" anything, so I think that settles that. Second, after seeing Montosh's role with the same 1-shot arrowproof, it made me wonder if we have some kind of Role Madness game setup - i.e. where nearly everyone has a role of some sort. Seeing EM and TBRaiders surviving arrow shots mostly confirms the theory for me, but I didn't know it as of when Night 1 began. Third, I have a one-shot 'normal cop' as well - but that would return less information, so I'm saving that til later in the game. If Imran was scum, I wanted to know what he could do instead of just a yes/no answer. You can see why was hesitant to claim, because in order to explain what I learned I had to say it was a role cop investigation - which means that I learned Imran both has a role AND what his role is, which he then has to verify to prove my claim, and in so doing it exposes him too. I'm hoping this wasn't the wrong choice to make, and hope that a doctor will shield either myself or Imran on Night 2 - so that scum cannot safely target either of us without risking losing their shot - but as I said, I don't want unanswered speculation to result in my being lynched and this role being lost. At this point it's up to Imran to confirm what I've said about his role and prove my claim. From there it's up to him whether he chooses to then reveal who he investigated last night, and what the result was. And if we carry this craziness to its conclusion, THAT person may then be pressured to say what they did with THEIR role's night action! This really has the potential to have been a long roleclaim chain indeed; ABD -> Rafay -> Preston -> Imran -> ???. And the number of roles is part of the reason I was so worried about tripping the "Mass Roleclaim" condition before Kevin clarified it. That's all for now. Tired; had fun playing the Evolve beta as I said in my last post. If you haven't heard about the game, go check it out. I'll check in tomorrow and hopefully there will have been some good discussion resulting from this. Here's hoping this was the right decision. -Preston

Sorry for the delayed post; Friday evening ran longer than expected, and odds are I'll be out much of today as well (LAN party for the currently-running Evolve Closed Beta on PC!) so I probably won't be posting again til tonight or tomorrow. It also doesnt help I just lost the first iteration of this post by accidentally clicking the back button when trying to look back over the thread. Still, let's respond to what's happened since my last post: Well now that Kevin has clarified the no "No Mass Roleclaim" rule, it seems it will be ok if you reveal a bit more about what you found last night. I dont want you to roleclaim but from your post it seems you have some info about another player using his action on me. If that is so, I would be interested to know who the other player was. Kevin's clarification means that I'm free to claim and say what I've learned without fear of giving the scum their better arrows. On the other hand, per my previous post if I claim and explain my night action it WILL out another person with a role, and it will be up to them to confirm what I've said. There have already been targets painted on ABD, Rafay and my backs by all this (assuming neither of the first two are scum), and if I claim there will then be a fourth - possibly a fifth if that fourth person is also asked for info about THEIR night action! I caught some flak from TBRaiders for just referencing the possibility that EM might have been a cop on Day 1 - if I'm going to completely out someone as part of my claim and continue this roleclaim chain I want to make sure people *want* me to do so, such that they cannot turn around and call my exposing someone else 'scummy' as a result. I hate being hesitant and hedging on this issue, because I know it's got people curious; but roleclaims are serious business. People seem to understand this contradiction, since reactions on the subject have tended to be in the vein of "I don't want you to roleclaim, but I want to know" - see Imran and Robert's prior posts, noone wants to be the one ASKING for the roleclaim, but people want the info from it. That's part of the reason I'd asked TBRaiders - one of the seemingly most 'town' in the game - to make that decision; he could do so without people thinking it was scum asking for it. And per above, he's also the one who previously criticized me for referencing someone else's possible role. As it stands, the question of the roleclaim chain has eaten up a few days' worth of discussion. We still have 8 days til deadline, but we need to move forward with actually generating suspect lists - and I think we won't really be able to do so until we've laid this question to rest. So if people (especially TBRaiders) *want* me to roleclaim, I'd like to hear that from people so you can't turn around and criticize me for doing so later. I'll check back into this thread either later tonight or tomorrow, and post based on what I see then. I try to avoid posting fluff which unfortunately means that I would never have the highest post count in any game. I am guessing that things got lost in all the discussion but I provided a list of possible scum and still believe that Lyner is our best bet. Is it possible that I am wrong?.. ofcourse.. but I just don't believe that such an obvious scum move should be ignored. @Robert, why do you believe that Lyner is a Townie? Well, first off, he's made no friends during the day phase. A Townie can't trust anybody until they are proven guilty. If you get false sense of trust, you probably going to get shot or get stabbed in the back. Some people reasoning for thinking people town this game are, how I say, Crap. The entire lynch wagon on lyner was based upon Lyners first vote of the game. the first vote in the game is almost always spam. So seeing a no lynch bandwagon in "Honor" of Kevin (witch I doubt he'd forgive us for no lynching without him) was mainly spam. Could of it gotten out of hand? Maybe. But unlikely. All eyes would of been on the people placing the final no lynch. Lyner is also actively scum hunting and I intend to agree with his points for now. That could change, but I've seen more townie out of him than most the time. (He tends to be neck and neck with EM most the time.) Another point I want to address D3mon, I get the feeling there more of a reason you're simply asking a simple why I think lyner is town. Therefore its only made me more suspicious of you. I have no proof on this but its mainly gut. @d3mon - Not having the highest post count is fine; but short posts that do little more than sling suspicion or defend yourself combine with inactivity/lurking it does not paint a terribly flattering picture. A post with thin contributions like that can be borderline fluff in itself; the kind of thing people post to say "hey I'm active!" without really sticking out. The one thing you have going for you right now is that you actually have a stated suspect you're working with - takes you off the sidelines somewhat. @Robert - Lyner may not be high on my suspect list anymore, but I'm going to disagree with your characterization of that no-lynch wagon. It very nearly DID get out of hand at L-1, and first vote or not, noone should be able to bring a wagon that close to completion and then be able to laugh it off with perfect deniability. Lyner later claimed he simply didn't look - despite the fact EM had voted immediately before him, and I had counted four votes immediately before that. I have trouble believing an experienced player like Lyner (or EM who took it to L-2) would simply 'not look' - and frankly that's what a large part of my suspicion came down to, just not believing them. If "all eyes would have been on the people placing the final no lynch", would you have similarly excused such a person on Day 2 if they said they just didn't look before placing their vote? I basically applied that same reasoning as a reason to suspect Lyner and EM on Day 1 - and as Day 1 votes go, it's better than sheer randomness or flavor quotes. With all that said - we're not at Day 1 anymore. I havent 100% forgotten what Lyner did, but he's not the top of my list anymore. I frankly need a NEW list, because most of those I thought were scummy are now tied up in the roleclaim chain. The objective/independently verifiable info we have is really as follows: 1. Montosh was lynched by Robert2424, Nick The Great, Rafay, ABigDeer, Lyner on Day 1. 2. TBRaiders and EM took an arrow on Night 1 3. EM and Kaziocore have not posted since Day 1, and have been prodded. EM and Kaz have both had one post elsewhere in the forums while having been inactive here - Kaz on Jan 14 (Gaming area) and EM on Jan 15 (Comms from Council). 4. We have an ongoing roleclaim chain being resolved, started by ABigDeer claiming Watcher that has been semi-confirmed by Rafay claiming Tracker, now leading to me (Preston) saying I've seen another role. Imran noted Nick has also been inactive; his last post was Jan 14th (3 days ago). I'm not sure this yet merits a prod, but if he hasn't spoken up by Sunday we should ask for one. -Preston

Fixing my own typo; EM and Kaz, not EM and Lyner. Too many names back to back to back The rest of the post is consistent with wanting to see more from EM and Kaz.

Briefly able to read during the day, but not a lot of time to post just now. @Lyner: I don't like sheer inactivity being used as an excuse for a lynch wagon - see all the conversation from Day 1. However you are correct that we can't just let EM and Lyner avoid the discussion - and with all the roleclaims shaking up my list from Day 1, I should consider Kaz as well even though he agreed with me for much of the first day. d3mon could probably stand to post more as well, but at least he's posted within the last day or so. @d3mon: your last post was asking if you are "too inactive" - right now the answer is YES, especially since that's all you really had in your last post. Please give us more to add to the discussion if you can - thoughts on who seems town based on the roleclaims, or who you think is scum, or etc etc. @KevinH: Can we get a prod on EM and Kaz please? An updated votecount would help too. @TBRaiders: Not to defend ABD, but the first of his two posts looks like an accidental one; it breaks off mid-sentence and then his next post finishes where that one started. Not a major point, but when you said "two posts" that's worth commenting on. I'll post more later this evening - ideally there will be more to respond to as well. -Preston

I posted my thoughts on Imran previously, in my response to TBRaiders: At the end of Day 1 the main point that stuck out to me about Imran was that reversal where he suddenly supported lynching Lyner after disagreeing for me for much of the day. I understand he had his reasons, but later justifications notwithstanding that's what I took into Night 1 - his first action upon returning to the thread had been to suspect me, and then he ended up wanting to lynch the same target I did. I wasnt sure whether to take that as a scum trying to start a wagon against me and later giving up on it, or as a town player genuinely trying to scumhunt - I ultimately concluded the latter was more likely. I started this day looking at ABD and Rafay more than my prior focus on EM and Lyner; not 100% forgetting Lyner's L-1 vote, but letting him move to the back of my list and dropping EM from it. That EM has been this inactive/lurking is still not good, however. Then ABD's roleclaim happened, which shook up my list quite a bit. There are still interpretations where ABD *or* Rafay could be scum with their claimed abilities, per my prior post - but likely not both. Since my Day 1 list had included EM, Lyner, ABD and Rafay, and now all of those are being questioned, most of the others I had either not gotten a strong enough impression to contrast between or got a town vibe and was not suspecting them. I'm going to need to either come up with a new list, or decide to question one of the claims that has happened today. One of the only pieces of information that has not yet been reversed is the five votes on the Montosh lynch wagon itself. You're correct that people are going to be curious. I'm hesitant to claim because I don't want to be the one whose claim gives the scum better arrows - that's honestly a dangerous aspect to this game. I'll give people a chance to respond to what I've written here, and if you want me to claim tomorrow then I'll do so. I know I'm probably being paranoid here, but I don't want to unilaterally make the decision that changes the game setup. I alluded to this in my prior post, but I can say this much without a full roleclaim: my night action returned information that it would be up to someone else to then verify to prove it. However that would result in more people being outed, and that may not be good for us. We've got a veritable chain of roles here, and if we keep tugging on the loose end we may end up with nearly everyone wrapped up in it - which is exactly what I think Kevin was afraid of with his "No Mass Roleclaims" rule. I'm not sure if EM is lurking or simply inactive. He hasnt posted on Day 2 at all. If anyone has seen him reading the thread, please say so. If EM hadn't taken an arrow, I'd be looking at this as a scummy action. As it stands that COULD have been a vigilante arrow which would not excuse EM, but he's not really on my suspect list at this point. -Preston

.[/size] It is great to hear people come out and say what they did, but the bolded part above advises caution. There could be mafia roleblockers, watchers, trackers, etc. It is great to see this plot thicken, though. This is a very good catch by TBRaiders, and an important thing to note; possession of a power role does not solidly confirm an individual is town. ABD is now being treated as town due to his claim... it may be wise to remain skeptical as the dust settles and we figure out where best to go with the day. A lot of targets have been placed on backs as a result of this roleclaim chain. Per TBRaiders' catch above, any of these claims could also be scum variants. During the day I had some time to think about this, and started wondering if there's a way ABD and Rafay could be a scum team together, such that he could fake-claim 'watcher' just by knowing what his partner did at night (and having him verify it). I concluded a few things as a result of this thought process: 1. Rafay's *action* sounds like a Tracker because it knew who I targeted without knowing what I did. We've already had a town-aligned tracker die and be revealed; but nothing says role duplication isn't possible. 2. I believe ABD's watcher *action* at minimum is genuine. To claim without it being real would have risked someone else saying they targeted me at night, and ABD did not name them. Obviously this could just not have happened yet, but as time goes on it becomes less likely. If that happens though, a lot of what follows would have to be reconsidered. 3. I emphasize "action" above because as Lyner pointed out, the Jack of All Trades role is also possible in this game. Either of the claims thus far could have that role. This would remove the inherent role duplication between Rafay and Montosh (two trackers) but not prove role duplication is impossible. 4. It is unlikely both ABD and Rafay are scum together; because that would mean they BOTH targeted me at night with their abilities... which doesn't make a lot of sense, focusing everything on me like that instead of spreading out their skill usage. 5. Either ABD or Rafay could be scum separately, but not both. I would sooner see Rafay as scum than ABD, since ABD effectively forced Rafay's claim with his own and pulled Rafay out of his normal lurking pattern. I'd still like to hear some more from EM as well. You're not really on my suspect list due to the arrow you took (this day is messing with a LOT of what I thought I'd figured out from Day 1!), but you havent posted on Day 2 yet. Being silent isn't helping the discussion. That be interesting to hear also. Also, lets try to avoid mass role claiming if at all possible. Both ABD and Rafay said what they learned, which pointed directly to their roles. For me to do the same would similarly be tantamount to a roleclaim on my part - and may similarly chain to someone else. I can do so, but per Robert's comment we may be getting dangerously close to a mass claim. Since TBRaiders seems the most town at the moment, I'll leave that decision up to him - If he asks me to detail my action I will do so. I'm curious where you get the idea there could be two scum groups from this? It's not impossible, especially given the "Five Armies" flavor, but I'm interested in your reasoning. If the 'obvious' move is for the two attacks to make ABD look scummy by targeting two who voted for him, that would imply one group with two actions instead of two groups with one action each. Which is actually something we should consider, now that I think about it; if scum has two shots per night instead of it having been a scum and a vigilante... that may change the analysis somewhat. Lyner, Montosh is dead... the inactive you shifted your vote onto to seal the deal on Day 1... that's a pretty big mistake to make. -Preston

Checking in before work, so this will be a shorter post from me. 1. I can confirm Rafay is correct; my action last night had Imran as its target. This in turn confirms ABD is correct. 2. ABD has confirmed a Watcher ability. We know we lost a Tracker with Montosh yesterday. If we end up having Rafay and Myself claim, that will be four roles known. I'm willing to do so if there's a consensus for it, but I am leery of Kevin's prohibition of mass claims; I don't know how close we're getting to that. If we're not careful Kevin will buff the scum. -Preston

Ugh. I start typing a post as I'm getting ready for bed, get a call, come back to finish my post and see that 5 replies have been added?? I'll do a more full response when I'm awake tomorrow. Good activity, but a bit much to respond to as I'm about to go to bed. Was far more awake/active during the holiday... give me another vacation! Let's have some quick reactions though: ABD has roleclaimed as a watcher, and said that Rafay targeted me. This puts the onus onto Rafay to either explain himself, or to otherwise say that ABD is lying. Since I obviously didn't die last night, Rafay's action was not a destructive one. If he saved me as a town doc, I guess I'd owe him an apology As noted however, it paints a giant target on ABD and probably Rafay from this point forward; with Montosh as the tracker gone, the watcher is a pretty potent ability, along with whatever Rafay is. Watcher would be a strange/difficult roleclaim to fake since it comes with a result. It's not impossible for ABD and Rafay to *both* be scum with one backing the other up... however if anyone ELSE had targeted me last night, they would then be in a position to call ABD's bluff. So that may mean ABD could be telling the truth. Rafay hasn't responded yet, but we're already shifting to the assumption Rafay is going to support what ABD said; votes have been cast for Lyner and d3mon. And another reply notification just appeared. I'm going to finish this post here and come back to this tomorrow. -Preston

A nice LONG post by TBRaiders! A bit much to quote, but I'll respond to it bit by bit. I was quite the rabble rouser on Day 1, and I frankly was expecting to be targeted at night as well - one reason I threw out my list and thoughts as the day ended. As I speculated above though, when someone is TOO obvious the scum runs the risk of wasting their attack because a town doctor might protect that person, or a watcher might watch them to see who tries anything against that person. Or it's possible that I'm going after the wrong people in Lyner and EM and the scum wanted to leave me alive to finish the job, or get lynched myself for being so vocal. Second-guessing scum kill choices is inexact at best, hence the WIFOM acronym/concept I explained above. At this point I'm largely convinced you (TBRaiders) are town, so your input carries some weight for me. You and EM were both shot during Night 1, which gives you both some townie points. I'm not going to 100% forget my suspicion of Lyner, but for now I'm going to remove EM from my suspect list. Much of your suspect list I can agree with, main exception being Rafay - lurking that tends to be a fairly major red flag for me. He was pretty quick to post at the start of Day 2 and sling suspicion, but for much of the end of Day 1 once someone had 4 votes he stayed quiet. Imran raised my attention near the end of the day when he decided to vote for Lyner over Montosh after having suspected me for doing the same; however his action made sense (better than lynching an inactive) so I'm inclined to still call him town despite his focus on me during Day 1. I'd be more inclined to move him up towards more certainly town and Rafay down towards more probably scum - at least until we get more info. As for your suspicion of me: @1 - In that post you quote I essentially said EM's stance change that Kaz raised, while notable, didn't do much to change my decision of suspecting Lyner over EM. I did so by balancing two contradicting possibilities against each other - EM changing no-lynch stance because he was scum and EM changing no-lynch stance because he was a cop. Since I think a Vigilante is responsible for the shot on EM, I don't see a town Vig trying to shoot the town cop based on this statement; Vigilantes win when the town wins. @2 - Defending ABigDeer is exactly what I wasn't doing in that post. EM had just switched his vote and accused ABigDeer with the line "Something about his posts seem scummy to me. It's like he is trying too hard to make it seem like he is a townie. My spidey sense senses something sinister." Since I suspected EM and Lyner at the time, anyone EM switched his vote to would seem town as a result; especially with a thin reason like that for the vote switch. Instead of just criticizing EM's vote and defending ABD I read back about ABD myself. I found reasons that ABD might be a valid scum suspect after all, despite the thin way EM voted for him. The only point in ABD's favor in that post was saying at least he wasn't silent. The other data we've got at the moment is the Montosh wagon - the five people who lynched him as inactive. The problem is that every one of them can claim they were just trying to remove an inactive from the game. It's probable that there's at least one scum out of those five who jumped on the bandwagon because it was a safe/defensible vote; therefore I have a negative view of that wagon in general. The only vote I wouldnt call that is ironically Lyner's; he was blatantly looking to save himself (and it wouldnt have made a ton of difference), so I'm actually more inclined to give THAT a pass than the other four. ABigDeer is notable on this wagon as well - he contradicted himself pretty significantly near the end of the day when he argued Montosh was likely town, then voted for him anyway. Looking back, ABD also complained about everyone voting for Lyner after he removed his own; nothing stopped ABD from putting his vote BACK, but he kept it on the inactive Montosh. So for the moment I'm inclined to have ABigDeer at the top of my own list, with Rafay second. Lyner is either third or just a FoS at this point; let's see how the rest of the day turns out. -Preston

As you later point out, it cannot be a Serial Killer because that's not a role Kevin listed for this game. I was afraid I was going to be taken out overnight as well, and for exactly that reason; they killed me last game after I was so vocal in suspecting Kevin. Maybe they thought I'd be protected by a doc or watched by a watcher, so they didn't want to risk a wasted shot. Or maybe my being aggressive like that was a useful distraction and they didn't want to remove me yet... wonder if that means I need to tone it back a bit. So two attempted kills; potential scum and vigilante as Imran said above. As Kevin pointed out last game, reading into kills is always WIFOM - Wine In Front Of Me, i.e. trying to analyze something the scum did KNOWING we'd be able to analyze it. We can try and take meaning from it (and kindof have to), but there's the danger of us falling into the trap of what they wanted us to think. TBRaiders doesnt make sense for a vigilante to target; he's seemed strongly town so far, so I'd want to call that the Scum attempt. That would leave EM as the vigilante's target... but I'm not truly sure how much sense THAT makes either. Kaz and I suspected EM on Day 1 due to his 5th vote, but Lyner was the higher focus due to his 6th vote. I don't want to immediately look at Kaz because that would seem too obvious. So could EM have been the scum's target, and TBRaiders not? EM is a veteran and it'd make sense for scum to try and remove him. But then we'd have to answer why someone thought TBRaiders stuck out enough to try and kill as potential scum... Tricky mess, this. At least we've got the benefit that noone actually *died* overnight! -Preston

I did not shift vote because Kaz convinced me what you could not. I shifted vote because this will give more info to the town after today than lynching an inactive Montosh. Even the people voting for him are now saying, Montosh is probably town, so they have a defense ready for the next day if Montosh turns out townie. I had a choice of shifting vote to either ABigDeer or Lyner as both had 3 votes each after Kaz voted for Lyner. ABD has been making suspicious statements but lynching Lyner will give more info to the town. If he turns out scum, it confirms a couple of people as townie, if he turns out townie it reinforces my suspicions on a couple of people. People voting for Lyner had some good arguments to push a lynch so this gives a good set of info for use in the next days. On the other hand votes on ABD are based on some contradictory and scummy statements from him. I am not actually sure what EM is basing his vote on but TB and Lyner's votes are based on his postings on his last 2 days. I didn't give much weight to these votes because townies normally post a lot and pretty much always makes some stupid comments. Scum try to keep a low profile comparatively. Lyner has been keeping a lower profile compared to ABD. So to summarise: - I want to see if votes shift based on 2 possible lynch wagons compared to the easy inactive lynch of Montosh - I want to see how people react to the forming of wagons on them and on others - Montosh lynch isnt giving us much info atm - Lyner lynch gives us more info compared to ABD lynch You commented that you liked Kaz's analysis when you changed your vote, and Kaz said essentially the same things I'd been saying; that's what gave me the WTF moment. As for Montosh - we're on the same page there in that lynching an inactive is not going to help us find scum on Day 2 because everyone will be able to excuse their vote - but unfortunately that looks like how the day will end. Two hours left and Montosh is ahead of Lyner 5-4. Montosh's inactivity may be moot given Lyner's vote shift just now. In the unlikely event something changes and Montosh survives into Day 2 (while still being inactive), I would hope for the second option out of Robert's list - someone jumping into the game to take over and be a voting player again. Lynching him on Day 2 would be wasting our chance to act on whatever further information we get overnight, so that's not a good option; however if Montosh is town, having him modkilled would be giving a freebie to the scum and bring them that much closer to winning the game. At this point we'll probably just see Montosh's alignment in the next two hours or so - unless something happens at the last minute to mix things up. I still would like to see a post from Rafay before the day ends, but that's highly unlikely at this point. -Preston

Hopefully things won't come up again, and life settles down for you! Good to finally see a post from you - I was really starting to wonder. Just about everything you've posted is in line with what I kept saying while people were gone, so obviously I agree with it. When you went silent it was just me and a semi-inactive d3mon still paying attention to the rapid wagon that started (and nearly ended) the day - Robert characterized it as Lyner vs Preston at one point, and since I was the only one really talking I couldn't really disagree with that. As for your thoughts on TBRaiders - I can see what you're saying here. He seems to be trying to play well and be inquisitive, and generally work the game out in a way that someone who is scum might not be doing because of what they already know. So we seem to be on the same page here. This is a good point. I like Kaz's analysis above too. Lets see what happens if we put the pressure on some on these other guys. Unvote Vote: Lyner Also updated vote count please. A part of me wants to go WTF and wonder what Kaz said that won you over, that I hadn't already said several times during the day O.o Not going to criticize or question your vote since I obviously suspect Lyner and EM myself, but it's a far cry from your original disagreement with me when you returned. Perhaps just having a second/third voice so it's not coming from me is what did it? This is the first time I now feel like voting for Montosh. My radar just blasted and if Montosh turns out to be scum... To be honest I had not really considered ABigDeer's prior comment about Montosh being likely town due to scum not shifting votes away from him - probably because ABigDeer then immediately voted for Montosh in the same post, and the focus was then on ABigDeer's self-contradiction. However with Lyner calling out the vote shift and TBRaiders now giving it more weight, it's worth another look. IF we are considering that Montosh may actually be scum due to the votes moving to keep him from being lynched for inactivity, it implies that one or both of the votes that just moved were scum. Kaz's vote is less of a surprise because he was already on record as suspecting both EM and Lyner from the beginning of the day. Kaz did not previously have a vote on Montosh. The timing of his return is interesting, but at least he made it back by the end of the day. Imran's vote shift is interesting for the reason I stated above - he previously disagreed with the arguments behind suspecting EM and Lyner, then after Kaz returned and posted the same kind of information Imran changed his mind. However Imran had previously put his vote on Montosh as well - it could be a distancing vote to make it look like Imran and Montosh are not together, but that's a bit of a stretch. So while two votes in a row shifted onto Lyner, I don't know that I'd call either one inherently scummy. This doesn't mean Montosh cannot be scum by any means... but I don't see those two votes as being a strong motivator for suspecting him. ... so he's back on IRON's forums but not posting? Ugh. That sounds like more apathy than scummy, but it certainly does not help. I just finished saying above that the two votes shifting onto Lyner don't make Montosh that much more scummy in my eyes because the votes make sense on their own, but hearing Montosh is doing this does NOT help his case at all. As much as I dislike lynching inactives... I can't disagree with Robert's sentiment here. Since Rafay never responded after protesting he wasn't Lurking, I looked up his content. Turns out Rafay has been posting in the "Attacks in Paris" topic on the IRON forums, but has otherwise been inactive/lurking here - so he's more solidly on my suspect list now too. We're coming down to the end of the day, so I'm going to post my suspect list again for review - bearing in mind that this is Day 1 behavioral analysis only: Lyner EM ABigDeer Rafay I'll try to check in either tonight or tomorrow morning, since the day ends at Noon - we're in the final hours now. Montosh is still first up to be lynched with Lyner right behind, and my vote is staying where it is unless something significant happens. Either last minute votes will decide the day, or apathy will rule and we'll coast into a Montosh lynch if nothing changes. -Preston

Still waiting on Kaz, indeed. Definitely want a word in here before the day ends; given that he popped back long enough to say he'd post soon when prodded and then went silent again, my initial feeling of towniness on his part is fading. It could just be genuine inactivity/offline problems, but we need to hear SOMETHING more from him. As for the rest of your post ABD - so you argue that Montosh may be town because it would be 'easy' for someone to shift votes to either you or - you meant Lyner, though you said me at the time - and then you vote for Montosh anyway. I understand voting to keep yourself alive, but with Montosh at 4 votes and yourself at 3, you are not currently the one who will die at the day's end. So at best this is you just... panicking at having 3 votes on you and wanting more of a buffer. As Robert points out, you basically contradicted yourself. You're already on my suspect list, but with acts like this you look about as scummy as EM and Lyner did with their early votes; yours is the 5th on a different wagon. With that said - I'm getting some deja vu from the past game, when Rafay acted incredibly scummy on Day 1 and drew a ton of suspicion. We got burned badly that game, no matter how certain the lynch felt. It doesnt change that I think the town benefits more from day 1 lynch voting records... but the deja vu is making me pause instead of immediately switching my vote to ABD. So I'm holding my vote where it is for now; but that may change depending on what I see in the next 24 hours or so. If no further votes change, it's Montosh that will be lynched based on his inactivity - not an ideal lynch wagon since I am not sure the voting information will be useful for us on Day 2. We've got roughly one and a half days left to debate this - in which you need to do a LOT more clarifying of your position, and we need to hear from everyone else that's gone quiet. Kaz still needs to deliver on having 'returned', EM posted a cryptic townie list that he's been asked about, and Rafay came back from "reading the conversation" to say he wasn't lurking, then went back to being silent again after jumping on the Montosh wagon. These three in particular I'm watching, and would like to get some closure on them before the day ends. At minimum people should weigh in on this most recent turn of events. -Preston

I still want to see Kaz post; hopefully sooner than later. We've got 4 votes on Montosh so if nothing changes that's the day's lynch... and now the thread seems to be going silent. It's way too good of a cover for scum to just wait for the day to end like this... please keep talking! -Preston

Yeah, not much point to referring to a number on the list when it's not in an order; I did read that it was unordered, but referring to where Imran's name was happened anyway And I fully agree that people should post their Day 1 thoughts - especially as the day nears its end. Treat every day as if it's your last chance to say whatever it is you have to say. Unfortunate that Montosh hasn't read his prod in 4 days... he could come back at any time, but right now signs point to know. I'd rather our lynch be for someone that isn't just inactive, but rather votes people would have to actually *defend* on Day 2. If Montosh doesn't return though, I could easily see the half-majority remaining there and that being how the day ends. -Preston

The half-majority on Montosh isn't about to end the day, at least. We'd need 3 votes added to end it, so unless we see a rapid vote shift we've still got time. Kevin said Montosh was prodded but as of a bit back had not read the prod message; has that changed Kevin? Also Robert - did you message Montosh on the other forums where he's been active and ask him to be more active here? (I think you said you were going to do that - and I would hope Kevin would not penalize a simple "please come back to the game" message!) -Preston

Misspelling my name and curious phrasing aside, I'd be interested in more details behind this too. Montosh in particular - what makes you so certain, given that he's had a single post the entire game? And if that is who you think are town, who do you believe are more likely to be scum? All of this is true in terms of the perils of keeping an inactive around if there is no prospect for them to return. However given that Robert has seen Montosh being active in other forums, I would hope that Montosh can return - though the longer he delays doing so, the more likely he would just be lynched anyway. Lynching an inactive is nearly as bad as no-lynch in terms of denying us useful voting information for future days, because it's so neutral/obvious of a vote to bandwagon on. However you are correct that if we must fall back on "Lynch the inactive" because it doesn't look like he will return, I guess it's better to do so on Day 1 than later on. My point is that getting a no-lynch is bad for scum and they should avoid it in the first place. And eh if the no-lynch passed I believe the situation will be different. Either that or I've succesfully convinced the rest of the town that I'm not scum-worthy as of now Given that the day did not end, we'll never truly know what would have happened - I'm fairly confident that the same defenses we've seen today would have cropped up tomorrow though, and had about the same effect. I'm still watching you and EM, but at this point I seem largely alone in my interpretation of the 12-hour/6-vote wagon that nearly ended the day. I'll keep it in mind for Day 2 and forward. Given that ABigDeer is on my stated suspect list as well, I can't really criticize this vote. You are the third to join this bandwagon, while there is a separate wagon for the inactive Montosh at 4 votes. A new votecount would be quite helpful to keep track of this. Oh Really, I'll keep this in my notes then you supposedly know they are town. I would love for you to expand on this. I'm going to agree and disagree with Lyner, the value of the No lynch relies entirely on the situation. I played elsewhere, we did lynch on day one, but on a future day. (think it was day 4 or 5) where we purposely no lynched for more info and better lynching odds, and we won that game. So really, it depends on the reasoning behind the no lynch. Second off, from my experience, Scum can deal with inactives in two ways, (If said inactive is Town). one, kill them early on. The thought process is killing most inactive after a productive day 1 phase or successful day for the town. What this does is eliminate a townie with leaving the town nothing to go on. This is also minimal risk from being caught by watchers. If you have a watcher ability, you're going to target probably somebody that looks townie, hoping to see somebody visit them in order to gain info on say somebody you can trust or can't trust. If scum kills that person, you get to get a dead mafia now. Mafia targeting an inactive would eliminate this threat and leave no additional clues for the town. two, move to lynch the inactives. Lynching inactives draws little risk as well, as they help nobody. Lynching inactives is a double edge sword really when you think about it. Scum gets a townie list, and there is a chance the the inactive could be a power role. If said inactive where to last till end game, it may be problematic for town if they outnumber scum 2 to 1 but one town is inactive there can be no lynch, hence mafia would win. Although, if an largely inactive person lasts the whole game but active enough to make an impact, I'd say the likelihood of him/her being scum greatly increases. but that just my feelings. As the end of day is approaching, its best to put my suspect list out there officially. As I've been NKed N1 here before. My suspect list, in no particular order. EM, ABIGDEAR, IMRAN, Rafay, Nick 5 for first day. None without solid reasoning behind. But its info for the town, in case I'm killed since they like killing me here.... Your reason two above is largely what I've stated already: that lynching an inactive draws little risk because it's an obvious and safe vote for scum. Even if there is a benefit to town in removing dead weight, you don't get useful voting info from such wagons. Good to see your list - you're correct that anyone could die tonight. It's one reason I've gotten my own out there as well; last game I pretty much knew I was about to die after the active day where I was looking hard at Kevin. EM and ABigDeer are on my list too; I can see Rafay on there as well for his lurking. Imran was inactive, but has returned - his two actions have been to suspect me and then vote for Montosh. Why does this make him number 3 on your list? Nick I don't have too strong of a feel on yet - some of his stuff reads like +1's, humor or fluff, but he is openly still new. With that said, it WOULD be a good scum cover. Can certainly watch him going forward. He was pretty inactive last game actually and it actually helped him from getting lynched until the very last day. lurking is a sign of scum. He was pretty active to start the game. I just went back and read the thread to see how the scum and vigilante acted throughout the game to see if I could gain any tells for this game. With that said, if EVERYONE thinks scum lurk then why would you lurk if you were scum if you thought it made you suspicious. Wouldn't you maybe do the opposite and post 24 times instead of 3 times. I mean, no way Preston can be scum right, because he has posted so much and given all this analysis on why everyone else is scum? lol I get that if he remains inactive then he would be of no use to the town and heck, he may even really be an inactive scum and we have a real quick and easy game by lynching him so early. Or he may be some power role that comes back Sunday night, catches up on this thread, and can efefctively use his role if he isn't lynched. I am not advocating that he must be saved because lord knows if we lynch and he turns up scum I wouldn't be able to think of a thing to say to convince anyone I wasn't trying to back up a fellow mafia mate and I'd be lynched shortly after as the only one backing him, but I am advising caution. Unless someone links me to some statistical analysis that says town should lynch people every day, I still don't think lynching right away is the way to go. Kevin said no mass declares or he makes the scum stronger. Is that a normal option in these games or can that actually be a helpful hint on how many scum there might be and what kind of roles fellow town have? A lot of times in Mafia you find yourself looking at both sides of an argument and acknowledging the 'what ifs' on both sides. What you wrote here is a decent example of that. At some point you need to stake a solid position and stay with it despite criticism or how it looks because it's what makes the most sense to you; it's what I've done for much of the day thus far. Scumhunting is NOT easy, especially on Day 1. There are advantages to the town to removing an inactive, but similar to no-lynch the votes for it will be harder to criticize and use for further analysis on Day 2 in the likely event the inactive proves town. My personal theory tends to be that someone with an 'exciting' role - a power role or scum - are less likely to let the game lapse and go inactive because they've got something neat to work with; hence scum are less likely to bail on the game. This is not definitive by any means, but I'd say it adds to the probability that a true inactive is town. Kevin responded to your question that the no mass-declare rule isn't common. He has already said in a prior post that he knows this game setup has some flaws to it - flaws that are probably fairly obvious if we were to look at all of our roles at once, which is why he doesn't want us to do it. I would imagine speculation about what roles we have is mostly alright - Kevin gave us a HUGE laundry list to speculate from - it's only when roles start being revealed or we start saying "if we do this they cant touch us" that we may run into what Kevin considers a "Breaking Strategy." For myself - I'm watching the ABigDeer and Montosh wagons primarily. The former I could see, based on empirical evidence alone - i.e. the way he seems to post... but at least he is here and posting. The latter is inactive, and those voting for it are essentially taking the easy, less controversial lynch - with its own tradeoffs. Perhaps we'll see some action in the next few days before Day 1 ends that will lend more weight to one or the other - or to someone ON one of those wagons. For now however: I definitely want to hear something from Kaz, who said they would read and then post later. I'd like more information/posts from EM as well; you're not exactly lurking, but your list (even with me on it) was something of a teaser in terms of content - we want to know the why, and I'd also like to hear your scum list. -Preston

Good to see you back; at least one of the prods has worked! You've got a fair bit to read up on and post, so please do so asap tomorrow. I'll be quite interested in your thoughts/reactions. I'm glad that the stats helped; it's some pretty basic information and analysis, but it saves everyone else the trouble of digging through and finding it. Given the inactivity wagon building on him, I'm more inclined to think he's less lurking and more just not here. Also, I went back and checked the first page - you are correct that your response you also used to vote; I had not remembered that, just the conversation itself happened. Overthinking is just about par for the course in Mafia; and that's half the reason it's so fun! However don't let your fear of seeming noob-ish prevent you from asking a question if something genuinely confuses you; we need an informed town -Preston

Reading the discussion without posting or contributing is lurking... http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Lurking In either case, please post more so we know what you're thinking of what's going on. We need viewpoints written down and questions being asked for us to respond to. Being silent gives us neither of those. In either case; as I dislike "lynch-the-inactive" because it's a deniable vote later, we can see who jumps on that wagon. We've got 5 more days though, so we don't need/want it to finish yet. As for choosing between myself and Imran; I've been clear throughout why I find what happened suspicious. When Imran returned, his suspicion of me was based on not agreeing with the line of reasoning I've followed. I don't hold that against him - some things just come down to difference of opinion on how you see events. I don't think that makes us an either/or scenario where you have to choose ONE though - you can suspect me without supporting Imran, or suspect Imran and suspect me too, or suspect neither of us. Case in point, Nick and TBRaiders had a digression earlier where they talked about the girl in TBRaider picture; bumped post count a bit without adding content. Not condemning them for it, but it makes your point that sheer post count being high is not an indication. Post count being LOW on the other hand - especially when combined with not having posted recently - that can be worth looking at. But yes, Montosh being inactive seems to be one of the things everyone agrees on. It's a safe vote, comparable to no-lynch... which actually frustrates me because if Montosh flips town (likely), everyone will just say they voted the inactive. I don't like voting randomly very much; so most of my votes will have some kind of train of thought behind them - and because I hate when people vote without elaboration, I try very hard to not do it myself. You may disagree with the logic/analysis behind my votes and suspect me for it, but you can't say I'm trying to lay low and let the day pass me by. Saying that Robert and I post too much was less criticism and more incredulity - surprise that we've written THAT much. Also somewhat amusing to be honest. It would indeed be better if others 'caught up' by being more active with meaningful posts though! Yeah, a montosh wagon does indeed seem to have started. To reiterate what I said above, I understand the benefits of lynching an inactive to remove a non-voting townie, and it may well be how this day ends - but I don't like the idea of it as much because it gives us less information to go on. The ideal would still be if Montosh actually comes back to participate; then people won't be able to just claim "I voted for the inactive!" to avoid responsibility if/when he flips as town. -Preston

Per my prior post, I did a check of everyone's last post time and post count thus far in this thread. For people who wanted to know who is inactive/lurking/etc, enjoy the statistics. Here are the results: Last Post Time (From oldest to most recent): Montosh: 12/31 @ 1:57 AMKaziocore: 1/2 @ 4:39 AMRafay: 1/3 @ 3:30 PMImran Ehsan: 1/5 @ 9:27 AMElectric Mango: 1/5 @ 4:57 PMNick The Great: 1/5 @ 5:13 PMD3mon: 1/5 @ 6:17 PMRobert2424: 1/5 @ 9:24 PMABigDeer: 1/6 @ 2:29 AMLyner: 1/6 @ 3:24 AMTBRaiders: 1/6 @ 3:23 PMPreston: Now! Post Count (From fewest to most):Montosh: 1Imran Ehsan: 4Rafay: 4Lyner: 5Kaziocore: 6D3mon: 7Electric Mango: 7TBRaiders: 9ABigDeer: 15Nick The Great: 15Preston: 17Robert2424: 20 So what does this tell us? Here are a few thoughts:Montosh, Rafay and Kaziocore are the only ones with a last post time earlier than yesterday (1/5). Montosh having the oldest post and lowest post count is no surprise; he's inactive (or REALLY lurking) and has been prodded. Kevin noted the prod message has not been read, and Robert noted Montosh has been active on other boards. Imran Ehsan and Lyner were inactive for a long time and then came back; so their lower post counts reflect the time they were inactive. Both are relatively current on post times. Rafay has 4 posts - same as Imran and less than Lyner, when both were inactive for a while.Robert and I have posted way too much. Rafay and Kaz need some more recent postsThis information doesn't change my still watching Lyner, EM and ABigDeer - but it does highlight that Rafay seems to be lurking a bit by comparison. @KevinH: can you please prod Kaz if you haven't already, and also your vote count list is missing Imran. -Preston

I've got a quick minute to respond before work, and it's worth responding to these two posts since my last: So you are claiming your "Let's not be hasty" is supposed to be something Gandalf would say as flavor, as opposed to having any other meaning. I still have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea you didn't see how far along the wagon was before throwing your vote - given that EM had voted the same just before you and immediately before that I had pointed it was at 4 votes already. If you didn't even bother to scroll down to the bottom of the page that would explain your missing it - but why would a townie not read other peoples' posts? It's all we have to go on; only scum knows anything more right now. I'd question your last statement though; as I have said previously, if no-lynch had reached 7 votes and gone through, on Day 2 everyone on the wagon would have claimed innocence, random votes, and tributes to KevinH exactly as they have now. They'd point out how odd it is to suspect people who voted for no-lynch, how the scum would have rathered a day 1 lynch - all the same arguments that have come up today. In your prior post you mentioned focusing on the "top voters" had the wagon finished - but that's what I've done looking at you and EM today, and you can see how that's turned out. So we've seen today how deniable all those votes would have been on Day 2, and how impossible it would have been to use that in picking out scum - which makes me very glad it did NOT go through. I think all of our thoughts are a few pages back at this point, since as TBRaiders pointed out we've been repeating ourselves. I'll reiterate that my scum list currently consists of Lyner, EM, and ABigDeer - I posted that a while back. So you're on my list too, just not where my vote is currently placed. However Lyner is doing some work to try and rank himself lower on my list; and while I cannot simply believe everything he's said, at least he's talking again. EM is somewhat active, but his most recent post was about prodding Montosh - the one before that stated his vote was tongue-in-cheek. Similar to Lyner I have trouble believing an experienced player like him would have voted without doing a count first; but if I am considering Lyner's defense, I have to do the same for EM as well. It doesn't mean I'll stop watching them on future days, though. Taking your statement separately: you are correct that we need more people talking. Montosh and Kaz need to show up again; possibly others. I don't have the time to do a last-post-time or total post count analysis right now, but maybe later tonight; see who is lurking. -Preston