Imran Ehsan

Which I have admitted. ---> My answer to that was and is I wanted a lynch vote in place of a no lynch vote and he was the one who caught my eye.

I never admitted that my logical deduction for suspecting SirCrocodile was faulty. I still hold on to my reasoning that he received his role PM much earlier than me and some of the others. It IS suspicious because I remember seeing him post his confirmation and then checking my mail and seeing that I hadn't received any and thinking..hhmm..there must be something different about his pm. My only mistake was thinking he received the mail 12 hrs early...but it was actually 2 hrs..which I have admitted. It may be a weak reason to suspect someone but logic was not faulty. And in Day 1 with so little information, the little things are all we have to go on. And throwing suspicion on someone and seeing how they react is much better than going with a boring "No Lynch" vote before any discussion has taken place.

So since we already had quite a bit of discussion and it has been interesting and we saw some voting patterns maybe its time to reach a general consensus. As it sounds now I think the voting is split between me, SirCrocodile and no lynch. I didnt like a flurry of no lynch votes with no discussion, picking a target revealed quite a bit already I think. if the majority agrees, I would be happy for a no lynch option for Day 1 and see who the scum target on the first night and also if we get some info from the cop (if hes around).

SirCrocodile is still on my suspicions list and I don't find it at all suspicious that he is now ganging up on me. As I mentioned in my earlier posts the scum will try to blend in and go where the general consensus is going and they will switch votes. Both SirCrocodile and KF2001 fit the bill. I made a decision at the start and I am not following anyone and changing my vote. Trying to make me look as scum solely based on me going for lynch option as compared to no lynch and that Kaziocre followed me is ridiculous and laughable at best. Specially when a few others have been making the same points as me. I will stick to my vote and let the others make their own decisions.

Why lynching is better than no lynching: 1. There may or may not be a cop and if there is a cop he may get killed leaving us with no info. 2. If we lynch a scum through a random lynch, we know for sure that the ones who voted for him are not scum. Then its a matter of time to narrow down to those who voted for someone else or no lynching. 3. If we lynch a townie, we still narrow down the possibilities of scum because the scum would have joined the bandwagon in lynching the townie. We lose a townie but gain valuable information while doing so. 4. Reading the actions of others reacting to people being accused is also giving us valuable info, as well as those looking to switch their choice of votes (they want to blend in and are looking at where the general consensus is going). So a flurry of no lynch votes gives us nothing. We are being reactive and waiting for the scum to make their move. However, even a random lynch has a lot of advantages.

Ok i just noticed he posted 2 hrs earlier than others...not 12 hrs. my bad. but still "off with his head!"

My suspicions are not based on air. I find it very suspicious that SirCrocodile confirmed so early. Almost 12 hrs before I even received my game pm. So it is likely that those who are scum were given role pms early..and those who are inncocent (me) received role pms later on in the day. aaand..it is more fun to lynch then to do no lynch. :V

I am finding Sir Crocodile very suspicious> Vote: SirCrocodile

I am ready for a lynching. *goes in search of a rope*

Confirmed. :matt:

*signs up* have never played before but have some general idea. please give detailed instructions on roles etc before game starts. :zoidberg:

VI

Colorado: 106 Indiana: 66 Massachusetts: 8 New York: 105 North Dakota: 69 Oregon: 37 Washington: 104

Colorado: 47 Indiana: 68 Maine: 42 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 58 North Dakota: 66 Oregon: 96 Washington: 62

VII

Colorado: 47 Indiana: 67 Maine: 43 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 58 North Dakota: 65 Oregon: 97 Washington: 62

Colorado: 48 Indiana: 68 Maine: 45 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 57 North Dakota: 64 Oregon: 95 Washington: 62

Colorado: 48 Indiana: 68 Maine: 45 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 57 North Dakota: 64 Oregon: 95 Washington: 62

Colorado: 48 Indiana: 68 Maine: 45 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 57 North Dakota: 64 Oregon: 95 Washington: 62

Colorado: 48 Indiana: 68 Maine: 45 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 57 North Dakota: 64 Oregon: 95 Washington: 62

Colorado: 48 Indiana: 68 Maine: 45 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 57 North Dakota: 64 Oregon: 95 Washington: 62

IV

Colorado: 48 Connecticut: 4 Indiana: 72 Maine: 46 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 56 North Dakota: 76 Oregon: 70 Washington: 67

Colorado: 48 Connecticut: 6 Indiana: 71 Maine: 46 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 56 North Dakota: 75 Oregon: 70 Washington: 67

Colorado: 48 Connecticut: 8 Indiana: 70 Maine: 46 Massachusetts: 55 New York: 56 North Dakota: 74 Oregon: 69 Washington: 68