926 replies to this topic

[Wolfpacks]

Today is probably the last day for me (on this game Day), because I'll be busy tomorrow (may find just a moment to come), so here's my summary:


- SM - no reads on her, except for her urge to vote on someone (preferably a lurker).

- Mandarijn - Really shy in this game, but he's mentioned (out of the game) that he has little time recently - this may explain it. Voted on Rafay just at the beginning and pretty much did nothing else.

- Mazuurek - again as in the last game following votes. Promises to write more when he votes, but does not keep his promise. Can't gather any info basing on this.

- Rhizo - somewhat townish, or at least not doing anything that gives scum vibes. Notably not jumping on the fast bandwagons.

- Lego - my biggest scum suspect. I've posted my reasons already. He's also jumped on Rafays wagon immediately and then jumped of just because (his reasoning to do so could be made anytime, anyday - maybe he was told to keep his head down). People are very unwilling to vote him, which is also telling, considering how fast Rafay's wagon was formed.

- Finster Baby - not posting much. FoS'es Lego and says he might be a scum, but actually avoids talking about him with anyone. Also prefers to jump on Rafay's wagon (and I'm having a feeling like he could be waiting for an excuse, as per post http://ironcentral.org/community/topic/57842-tw-03-harry-potter-and-the-chamber-of-secrets-mafia-day-1/page-8#entry874231)

- Samus - Stout D1 no-lynch supporter. Not much more can be told.

- iSoc - Active, prodding others, seems helpful to the town.

-Wolfpack - not much participating, cant read much out of him.

- Rafay - toxic playstyle. I wish he'd been replaced, or at least turn out to be a scum...but seeing how fast a wagon formed I'm skeptic about it.

- CoD - can't tell much about him...but I admit I've let him go under my radar and not analyze his posts to much.

- 1ceCream - Lurker that apparently is slipping under everyone's radar. He was active but after feeling some heat he disappeared (he's still somewhat active on the forums). As with Preston, if Lego's not a scum I got nothing on him.

- KevinH - At this point my second suspect. Rather not taking part in conversation, posting distractions instead (like invitation to talk about the lore). Voting no lynch, but at the same time suggesting lynching others. I feel somewhat offended about calling my mistake (about his number of scums claim) a lie. I'm not the owner of mensa-level intellect, but still I think I could make up something more sophisticated than simple swap of one number. He's very rough in this case calling for a lynch (yet he keeps his stance on no-lynch).

- Death - strange confirmation of Finster...though I'm not sure if they can be connected (at least I think there might be a connection between Finster and Lego instead). Voting for Lego so I find him helpful personally.

- Preston - I'm assuming his allegiance basing on presumable connection to Lego. If Lego turns scum he'll be a possible scum in my eyes. If it turns out that Lego's a town, then my observations are worth nothing and I'm quite probably quarreling with a townie.

- Lyner - cant read much about him, but I don't really find him helpful in general. Proposed a distraction in a form of talking about the lore (same as KevinH). Voted no lynch and asked others to do the voting (which I'd say is not as bad as KevinH suggesting names of people that could be voted on), though no lynch is actually beneficial to town (I think he voted to lynch when he was a scum).

- Canik - seems helpful to the town

Sorry I over participated last game and I don't write novelettes to sum up my feeling, my FOS is still Legoboy and Rafay, but tbh Rafay inactiveness is starting to grind and I don't see the point if your just there to make numbers up.

[Chaplain of death]

Interesting that you don't have a read on Lyner there ABT. Also fascinating that if you are going to go to the trouble of making a list like that that you chose not to evaluate my posts and made a provocative comment like I'm trying to fly under the radar when I feel that I've been pretty out in the open this game, perhaps not what you meant but that's how it sounds.

 

 

 

 

 

Bolding emphasis added; your lines at the end are pure drama instead of analysis. You and iSocialism had commented on my dislike of teasers, and I answered that - but with the way you're writing now, this does not appear to be about that anymore; you appear to be framing facts in a provocative way. You imply information being gathered, but aren't spelling it out - leaving other readers to draw their own conclusions. So really there isn't much said in this line at all beyond implications, which says quite a lot about what you are trying to do.

 

So let's check the facts:

- I'm showing up on Sunday posting quite a bit of my thoughts, saying I'll post a bit more on the next day and asking other for thoughts on the posted part.

- I'm posting rest of my info on Monday.

So how I'm not spelling it out and leaving anyone in the dark? Secondly, please do tell me what you think I'm trying to do...because as of now it seems you're just trying to imply something and leave it without explanation, letting others to "draw their own conclusions". Isn't that what's called "pure drama".

 

Preston actually spelled out his observations and the issues he had with your post pretty clearly and why he has an issue with them. He pretty clearly stated that those pieces of your posts are for framed to create drama, in other words, they are framed in such a way so that the town will chase non-existent leads. Long story short, you are influencing the scum hunting conversation, and you are doing it the way a scum would. Preston hasn't accused you of being a scum (so far as I've seen) but you're looking pretty suspicious.

 

Voting for a suspected scum to catch or test them is better than voting for an inactive, so that much I don't argue. However your justification is that Rafay is a constant vote from you, and so it should be just ignored? Nevermind that it counters the "free no-lynch" theory you advanced earlier from the even player count.

 

How does it counter? How does saying "normally I'd do X, but there's also an interesting option Y that's worth noticing, however based on the information I've gathered I think I'll do Z". How does those statements counter each other? Again no explanation, just insinuation from you.

 

Because if you are going to push for a no-lynch, which is a valid option given the math as you stated, then it is a bit odd that you would then turn around and vote for something other than the agenda you were pushing. Especially if its got the momentum to win the vote. Also just gonna state the obvious here. NOBODY'S VOTE SHOULD EVER BE IGNORED. Everything we say and do is information to be used later. Its not that you have to be locked into a decision ABT, its just quite odd for someone to come out and say "hey guys do this, the math supports this option so do this!", and then out of nowhere and even though your first idea has plenty of support, you come out and say "hey guys, forget that first thing I said and how the math supports it. Do this because I don't like this guy's face! and don't mind me, I just don't like his face."

 

So the fact that you would have phrased my point differently interests you...? Either elaborate on why you feel that particular word choice is a significant point worth making, or this grammar correction serves no purpose other than to try and sustain your attack.

 

I'm not phrasing anything differently, I'm just quoting you, because I'm wondering what does "hitting all the normal scum-hunting checkboxes" means for you. And it's not quibbling over a grammar, it's just simple question.

 

Just gonna go out on a limb here and say that "hitting all the normal scum-hunting checkboxes" means that someone is actively scum hunting, and that they are doing to in a manner that is generally agreed upon to be at least somewhat effective. It could be someone who's trying to appear to be scum-hunting, especially on day 1, or it could be someone legit scum-hunting.

 

 

Overall, Ali - this most recent post from you feels more like an attack than your previous ones, and now I have a reason to watch you more closely. None of us have any role information to base a solid belief on, yet you tailored your words for provocative effect - you don't do that with simple post analysis that should stand on its own. Your latest post has the same quality as iSocialism's from the previous game: throwing material, much of it wrong, to see what sticks and others respond to. You have falsely claimed I threatened you, quibbled over my grammar and tried to justify your attacks with implication and your own say-so of what you did as scum instead of fact. It's fine to just have a feeling at this stage - we are only on Day 1 - but you have taken it a step further to where you are now looking for anything to justify what you are saying. That stands out to me.

FoS: Ali bin Turban
 

I could say very same thing about your material. You don't really bother to explain anything, just throwing insinuations and stopping half way instead of finishing and posting your reasoning. You arbitrary decide who's wrong and who's right, without providing not even a proof, but at least explanation why did you think so. You accuse me of everything you're doing on your own right now and your last paragraph is a pure emotional drama.

 

Its not drama to point out suspicious activity? He is presenting facts, he hasn't outright acused you of being scum though, is that what you prefer? Okay here. ABT you are acting like scum and I think that both you and Lyner are in fact scum at this point. Do I know for sure? fuck no I don't know for sure, but you are my 2 biggest scum suspects.

 

When I was posting my observations I've shown your possible motive (assuming you're scum). I've pointed out Lego's actions which I believe show his scummines. I've shown what I think are connections between you and him, the way you're acting and defending him (at least what I believe might be going on). I think it's possible for You and Lego to be in a same scum team and I've told why I think so.

 

Kinda like how you coming out and making a big show arguing with Preston detracts from the case made against Lyner. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm......

 

You on the other hand have not explained what motive I could had. Did you even thought why would I jump on 4 people? If I were a scum, would I really aggravate 4 people so aggressively? Would I jump on 2 active, veteran town players at once? It's not even about clashing with arguments. If any of those ones had a PR I'd be on their list to check and even a godfather wouldn't save me from a role cop check. Am I such a fool to tackle a whole group at once when I can only try to lynch one per day?

 

You're right you aren't such a fool to do that, but you threw a lot of suspects at the wall and attempted to see what stuck. Maybe you were okay with taking that many people on knowing that you would then night kill one of them and be down to 2, and could just claim that scum did it to make you look guilty. I'm sorry but the "would I really have done x if I was scum?" argument is bullshit. Scum use that argument left and right to get away with things that would otherwise get them lynched.

 

 

Bolding emphasis added; your lines at the end are pure drama instead of analysis. You and iSocialism had commented on my dislike of teasers, and I answered that - but with the way you're writing now, this does not appear to be about that anymore; you appear to be framing facts in a provocative way. You imply information being gathered, but aren't spelling it out - leaving other readers to draw their own conclusions. So really there isn't much said in this line at all beyond implications, which says quite a lot about what you are trying to do.

 

So let's check the facts:

- I'm showing up on Sunday posting quite a bit of my thoughts, saying I'll post a bit more on the next day and asking other for thoughts on the posted part.

- I'm posting rest of my info on Monday.

So how I'm not spelling it out and leaving anyone in the dark? Secondly, please do tell me what you think I'm trying to do...because as of now it seems you're just trying to imply something and leave it without explanation, letting others to "draw their own conclusions". Isn't that what's called "pure drama".

 

Voting for a suspected scum to catch or test them is better than voting for an inactive, so that much I don't argue. However your justification is that Rafay is a constant vote from you, and so it should be just ignored? Nevermind that it counters the "free no-lynch" theory you advanced earlier from the even player count.

 

How does it counter? How does saying "normally I'd do X, but there's also an interesting option Y that's worth noticing, however based on the information I've gathered I think I'll do Z". How does those statements counter each other? Again no explanation, just insinuation from you.

 

More bolding emphasis added to highlight provocative language. Did you miss last game how I was against the inactive wagons, and suspected KevinH due to how much he kept pushing them? It looks like you are equating my push to get people active and voting instead of defaulting to discussionless no-lynch with your scum behavior last game. That is a subjective comparison because it depends entirely on your statement of what you would have done; i.e. it's an argument you can make sound like whatever you want. If you want to talk prior game comparisons however, didn't Rhizo comment that normally you are the one who pushes people to be active?

 

That's a nice question, especially considering you've quoted me saying I was pushing people for activity last game when I was a scum. So...I was pushing people for activity when I was town and I was pushing them when I was a scum last game...but in this game I'm not. So what are your conclusions? Are you even interested in finding out my motives or do you just ask random questions hoping that they'll look as arguments?

 

So the fact that you would have phrased my point differently interests you...? Either elaborate on why you feel that particular word choice is a significant point worth making, or this grammar correction serves no purpose other than to try and sustain your attack.
 

I'm not phrasing anything differently, I'm just quoting you, because I'm wondering what does "hitting all the normal scum-hunting checkboxes" means for you. And it's not quibbling over a grammar, it's just simple question.

Overall, Ali - this most recent post from you feels more like an attack than your previous ones, and now I have a reason to watch you more closely. None of us have any role information to base a solid belief on, yet you tailored your words for provocative effect - you don't do that with simple post analysis that should stand on its own. Your latest post has the same quality as iSocialism's from the previous game: throwing material, much of it wrong, to see what sticks and others respond to. You have falsely claimed I threatened you, quibbled over my grammar and tried to justify your attacks with implication and your own say-so of what you did as scum instead of fact. It's fine to just have a feeling at this stage - we are only on Day 1 - but you have taken it a step further to where you are now looking for anything to justify what you are saying. That stands out to me.

FoS: Ali bin Turban
 

I could say very same thing about your material. You don't really bother to explain anything, just throwing insinuations and stopping half way instead of finishing and posting your reasoning. You arbitrary decide who's wrong and who's right, without providing not even a proof, but at least explanation why did you think so. You accuse me of everything you're doing on your own right now and your last paragraph is a pure emotional drama.

 

When I was posting my observations I've shown your possible motive (assuming you're scum). I've pointed out Lego's actions which I believe show his scummines. I've shown what I think are connections between you and him, the way you're acting and defending him (at least what I believe might be going on). I think it's possible for You and Lego to be in a same scum team and I've told why I think so.

 

You on the other hand have not explained what motive I could had. Did you even thought why would I jump on 4 people? If I were a scum, would I really aggravate 4 people so aggressively? Would I jump on 2 active, veteran town players at once? It's not even about clashing with arguments. If any of those ones had a PR I'd be on their list to check and even a godfather wouldn't save me from a role cop check. Am I such a fool to tackle a whole group at once when I can only try to lynch one per day?

 

Are you really looking for a scum, trying to build a coherent view of your interlocutor motives...or are you just fighting back?

 

ew it quoted twice, and my first responses color didnt change >.>

[Finster Baby]

*sigh*

So you want me to come to conclusions about people based on the first day with zero info? All we can go on is past performance, which means squat here?

Gee Ali, how awfully scummy of you.

FOS: Ali bin Turban

[Samus]

*sigh*

So you want me to come to conclusions about people based on the first day with zero info? All we can go on is past performance, which means squat here?

Gee Ali, how awfully scummy of you.

FOS: Ali bin Turban

And even past performance isn't much, as good players keep their style consistent, regardless of team. i.e Lyner

 

I'm just waiting to see if I survive D1, so not really involved as much

[Ali bin Turban]

@CoD I didn't mean anything negative in your case. All I wanted to say there is that your posts somehow slip by and I don't really remember anything out of them, that would strike me as scum or town.

 

That being said I think you're now arguing just because you feel hurt. This is my conclusion upon reading this one piece:

 

Its not that you have to be locked into a decision ABT, its just quite odd for someone to come out and say "hey guys do this, the math supports this option so do this!", and then out
of nowhere and even though your first idea has plenty of support, you come out and say "hey guys, forget that first thing I said and how the math supports it. Do this because I don't like this guy's face! and don't mind me, I just don't like his face.

 

I did present my 3 options in a single post (http://ironcentral.org/community/topic/57842-tw-03-harry-potter-and-the-chamber-of-secrets-mafia-day-1/page-6#entry874067) with further elaborating on 3rd option 2 posts later (with 2 Samus posts in between). And in that very post I've mentioned I'm going to vote on someone. These are the facts and they made your theory completely invalid.

I'm also sorry that my description of Lyner is not to your liking, but that's just what I think.

 

Why don't you take a deep breath and get back when you can be more objective?

 

@Finster...wow, trying to catch a wind I see.

[Ali bin Turban]

 

Sorry I over participated last game and I don't write novelettes to sum up my feeling, my FOS is still Legoboy and Rafay, but tbh Rafay inactiveness is starting to grind and I don't see the point if your just there to make numbers up.

 

That's OK, I'm not forcing you to write novels. But in return don't expect me to write a detailed feedback on you, when I don't have much to work upon. I just don't know what's your alignment and I'm not leaning in either direction. I think it sounds fair.

[Wolfpacks]

 
Sorry I over participated last game and I don't write novelettes to sum up my feeling, my FOS is still Legoboy and Rafay, but tbh Rafay inactiveness is starting to grind and I don't see the point if your just there to make numbers up.
 

That's OK, I'm not forcing you to write novels. But in return don't expect me to write a detailed feedback on you, when I don't have much to work upon. I just don't know what's your alignment and I'm not leaning in either direction. I think it sounds fair.

Yep sounds fair to me

[Rhizoctonia]

What irritates me at this point is the quick wagon on Rafay makes me less suspicious he's likely scum, but he continues his usual self, not posting, not commenting, not even after being voted on and after many people have called him out.  I don't want to vote Rafay merely because how quick his wagon jumped off, I hate to vote off someone when others have shown more suspicious actions and comments that make them IMO a better choice.  The thing with Rafay is he always get pressured about his activity, by people asking him to talk to putting votes on him, but what he also knows is rarely does he get enough votes to vote him off merely because of his gameplay.  Usually by the end of the day, the vote shifts to someone more suspicious and he gets off another day without a lynch.  

 

So now it's really do we vote off someone because of their gameplay to maybe strike some fear in him in future games to either be active or he will continue to get lynched D1.  Hoping ultimately we hit two birds with 1 stone (let Rafay know we aren't going to continue allowing his inactivness + hopefully he's a scum as well).  Or do we go with people who have given off some suspicious vibes and their posts have seemed scummish.  

 

With less then a day, we need to figure that out.  I'm back and forth, because I feel others have given off more scum vibes, but Rafay has played this way and been Scum in the past as well, and also I hate he never participates no matter what game it is.  

[KevinH]

"If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth"

Here's what I said:

Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game.
 
Given that everyone has equal probability to be scum at this point, he's my first choice to lynch (after today).

 
At the point I said it, Rafay had 2 votes. My vote was on no-lynch. I clearly said "after today". In no way did I ever suggest that others should lynch Rafay.

But then the lies begin: 

Kevin may have said Rafay would be his first choice on Day 2 onward (since he supports no-lynch), but by explicitly pointing out "Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game" Kevin fuels the inactivity-based wagon without voting.

 

... a very valid point about kevins play style this game, especially since influencing a wagon into existence without voting on it is a hugely scum tactic.

 

Kind of like how you [Lyner] & KevinH were voting no lynch then encouraging others to make moves.

 

- KevinH - ...Voting no lynch, but at the same time suggesting lynching others.

 

FoS: Preston, Chaplain of Death, Canik, and Ali bin Turban
 

[Canik]

I advocated for a no-lynch, then you said it is no good.

 

I then advocated that people should vote instead of just chatting, then you said it is no good.

 

I also advocated that if we go down the lynch route, Rafay is the ideal target, then you say it is no good too.

 

 

Anyway it's good to see that Canik is thinking in terms of possible teammate suspects(ex: I and Preston mustn't both be scums), scums usually avoid that so bonus townie points there.

I didn't have that much issue with you voting no-lynch early. This is all I said after you voted no-lynch -

"I wasn't in last game but with it being a big Harry Potter game I
imagine there was a good amount of power roles and probably will be in
this one as well. In that case no lynching does make more sense, I just
would suggest not advertising it and not voting no lynch so early. These
days are long, we have until friggin Thursday."

It wasn't until you started to reverse your position that I got suspicious of you. A reversal that seemed to come as a defensive reaction and not because you considered the wisdom of my words and decided I was right.

So, I'm sorry if you feel I've been unfair/inconsistent with my criticism of you but that's not the reality of it.

[Chaplain of death]

@CoD I didn't mean anything negative in your case. All I wanted to say there is that your posts somehow slip by and I don't really remember anything out of them, that would strike me as scum or town.
 
That being said I think you're now arguing just because you feel hurt. This is my conclusion upon reading this one piece:
 
Its not that you have to be locked into a decision ABT, its just quite odd for someone to come out and say "hey guys do this, the math supports this option so do this!", and then out
of nowhere and even though your first idea has plenty of support, you come out and say "hey guys, forget that first thing I said and how the math supports it. Do this because I don't like this guy's face! and don't mind me, I just don't like his face.
 
I did present my 3 options in a single post (http://ironcentral.org/community/topic/57842-tw-03-harry-potter-and-the-chamber-of-secrets-mafia-day-1/page-6#entry874067) with further elaborating on 3rd option 2 posts later (with 2 Samus posts in between). And in that very post I've mentioned I'm going to vote on someone. These are the facts and they made your theory completely invalid.
I'm also sorry that my description of Lyner is not to your liking, but that's just what I think.
 
Why don't you take a deep breath and get back when you can be more objective?
 
@Finster...wow, trying to catch a wind I see.

Fair enough about you presenting all 3 in one post, i missed that. I actually am not upset but when you make what appears to be an insinuation that I'm trying to stay under the radar, while also refusing to acknowledge very suspicious behavior in a suspect of mone, it smells fishier than low tide.

I am still however suspicious that given the fact that the math supports a no lynch unless there is a good candidate, you still chose to go after Rafay. I get it, Rafays play style these days is pretty awful and hurts the town, but still seems odd.

[Chaplain of death]

"If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth"
Here's what I said:

Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game.
 
Given that everyone has equal probability to be scum at this point, he's my first choice to lynch (after today).

 
At the point I said it, Rafay had 2 votes. My vote was on no-lynch. I clearly said "after today". In no way did I ever suggest that others should lynch Rafay.
But then the lies begin: 

Kevin may have said Rafay would be his first choice on Day 2 onward (since he supports no-lynch), but by explicitly pointing out "Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game" Kevin fuels the inactivity-based wagon without voting.

 

... a very valid point about kevins play style this game, especially since influencing a wagon into existence without voting on it is a hugely scum tactic.

 

Kind of like how you [Lyner] & KevinH were voting no lynch then encouraging others to make moves.

 

- KevinH - ...Voting no lynch, but at the same time suggesting lynching others.

 
FoS: Preston, Chaplain of Death, Canik, and Ali bin Turban
 

If it were a lie your point might be valid. But it isn't.

Whether by design or by accident, you helped set Rafay up for the wagon currently on him. I tend to believe that when it comes to mafia, you do things by design. You do have the most wins of anyone in this community after all.

[Canik]

"If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth"

Here's what I said:

Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game.
 
Given that everyone has equal probability to be scum at this point, he's my first choice to lynch (after today).

 
At the point I said it, Rafay had 2 votes. My vote was on no-lynch. I clearly said "after today". In no way did I ever suggest that others should lynch Rafay.

But then the lies begin: 

Kevin may have said Rafay would be his first choice on Day 2 onward (since he supports no-lynch), but by explicitly pointing out "Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game" Kevin fuels the inactivity-based wagon without voting.

 

... a very valid point about kevins play style this game, especially since influencing a wagon into existence without voting on it is a hugely scum tactic.

 

Kind of like how you [Lyner] & KevinH were voting no lynch then encouraging others to make moves.

 

- KevinH - ...Voting no lynch, but at the same time suggesting lynching others.

 

FoS: Preston, Chaplain of Death, Canik, and Ali bin Turban
 

In my defense I did say your comments didn't seem as suspicious as Lyner's in my suspect analysis post, couldn't remember why exactly and was tired of re-reading through the thread but I knew it wasn't as bad.

Still somewhat suspicious though since, if I recall correctly, your comment was made as the Rafay bandwagon was building. Not too hard to understand why people may see this as subtly trying to encourage a Rafay lynch while keeping a safe distance. Preston even mentions in that 1st quote that you said you weren't for lynching Rafay now but D2 onward. Really I don't see how that is a lie.. he just gave his opinion on it.

[KevinH]

You do have the most wins of anyone in this community after all.

 

It's more an indication of longevity than skill.

 

 
 

[iSocialism]

I would say a combination of both.

[Preston]

Looks like the day is wrapping up, and we've had a lot of conversation to get people engaged. Unless two people shift from no lynch to something else, I do not see the day ending in anything else - but this has been a VERY productive Day 1.

I'm not sure it's worth responding to Ali's latest - it's more him trying to throw my words back at me instead of responding to the actual content of it. So instead of another line-by-line rejoinder that he will again twist around, I will summarize as follows:

At some point Ali made the transition between examining his potential scum team of lego and I and others, to attacking me specifically. His language changed from analytical to provocative/persuasive, and he started stretching for ways to sustain his attack instead of actually responding to the content of what I posted. Since CoD seems to understand the response points I am making, I do not believe I am being THAT unclear - which means Ali's continued attack becomes a matter of interest; the flavor changes from a misunderstanding with a townie seeking truth to potential scum looking to taint/discredit me and set up suspicion for later. I responded to this with a FoS since my vote is already on Lyner. Nothing is conclusive, but the more he keeps up this line of attack that seems to only make sense to him, the more I think he is scum caught with a position he cannot give up.

Ali's listing his thoughts on people would normally be a town move, but after his attack and the fact that it has drawn more attention to him instead of me, I am inclined to see it as scum trying to save face. Main point I take away from his list is that he seems to agree with KevinH's posts being suspicious, despite their attempts to remain impartial.

As for Kevin, I am a little surprised by his attempt to characterize the posts criticizing him for his "Rafay has made exactly 1 post all game" as lies. Yes he points out that he would vote for Rafay tomorrow instead of today, but it does not change the fact of that post calling attention to Rafay specifically, drawing everyone's notice to him. The fact that Rafay had two votes at the time of that post and then it went up to five shortly thereafter (and SM said she was about to jump on the wagon as well) is a testament to the fact that the town's attention shifted more fully to Rafay after Kevin's post. I have enough respect for Kevin's intelligence to believe that he was not ignorant of the effect calling out Rafay's post count would have, which makes me view that post as an attempt to influence the town towards a Rafay lynch while he maintained his No-Lynch vote. The fact that four people saw it the same way would seem to show it is a rational conclusion to draw - unless Kevin wants to accuse all four people he lists of being on a scum team together, that blatantly.

And finally, reviewing Lyner's response... I disagree with the idea that scum will push for a Day 1 lynch whenever it is offered, even if it would benefit them; I think that first and foremost scum do not want to stand out on Day 1 to be the subject of town investigations for the rest of the game. I similarly see people who throw a vote on no-lynch at the beginning of Day 1 for townie points and then try to sit out the day's discussion as people actively trying tricks to avoid notice - and per my previous sentence, that is potentially scummy to me. However what made Lyner stand out to me was not simply his no-lynch vote; it was explicitly calling out his own towniness due to that vote separating him from people voting for lynches, and then saying that committing on the Rafay wagon - which at that point had a very real chance of being the end-day wagon - would ALSO be a town thing to do. I read that as trying to push others to vote Rafay while he sat on the sidelines, similar to KevinH - which made him a notable potential scum suspect in my eyes. Though I did have to laugh at Lyner's bathroom comment; the humor was somewhat welcome.

So if the day ends tomorrow at noon CST, I may not get to post again. If I have been enough of a nuisance to the scum then maybe they'll just bump me off tonight; who knows.

-Preston

[Sister Midnight]

OMG these posts have become way too long.  I'm currently reading the new Harry Potter book and then i see this stuff and I'm like yeesh, lynch someone who writes a wall of text and forget Rafay.

 

I think the lightning quick bandwagon on Rafay is startling and suspicious.  I really want to vote for him and he isn't responding to me practically begging him to post something  this thread.  

 

VOTE: RAFAY

[Lyner]

...and then saying that committing on the Rafay wagon - which at that point had a very real chance of being the end-day wagon...

The original assumption is that if Rafay is town, scums wouldn't defend him. If Rafay is scum, scum would divert attention from him

 

Those who commit on Rafay wagon's gets bonus townie for--as you say--not afraid of standing out by killing Rafay, regardless of what alignment Rafay will show. It doesn't even matter if I supported Rafay's lynch or not, the fact is that those who confidently put the vote on Rafay is a townie tell.

 

I'm not sure why you keep focusing on my motives instead of the actual reasoning, Preston.

 

 

 

 

Anyway if there was a cop I would check one of these people tonight: Samus, Sister Midnight, Finster Baby.

 

All of them played differently this time, might be a changing of style, might be scums.

[Ali bin Turban]

Quick note before the work.

- "He's hitting all the normal scum-hunting checkboxes": I understood this phrase as Lego hitting all checkboxes on Preston's scum-hunting list (therefore acting scummy). CoD explain it totally opposite and that would also explain why Presont said he was consistent and I was quibbling over grammar. That changes things a bit, because Preston didn't actually defend Lego the way I thought he did. That also means I've mostly lost my connection between Preston - Lego and therefore he's less likely to be a scum in my eyes. Quite possible I've been quarreling with a townie I usually do at some point in a game (though it's to early to confirm anything).

 

@Preston

You look surprised that I've focused on you...when you were the only person on my scum list I was actually able to talk to. Also try working on people's motives. Without them you might be getting in more situations like iSoc case, you're so eager to remind us, like it was something to be proud of.

 

@Finster is way more aggressive than in previous game, where he was very careful and uncertain of what to do.

 

@CoD I've not been voting on Rafay. I said I won't vote for him because I got better targets (and I've been repeating that). I don't know where you get your information from -certainly not from my posts. You also got me two "wow that's strange" moments, I sometimes get when something odd happens. I usually shrug shoulders over that because I can't really explain it and I does not seem that significant...yet it tends to be important.

 

First is when you voted on Lyner for quoting the sample role where he bolded "your power is in your vote" part probably to emphasis his stance on making a vote. I thought then, that it's strange for you to say, because it's quite obvious that this is sample role and in no way Lyner could imply anyone it's his role

Second was when you ranted over some small description...was it really a rant or something designed to look like it?

 

In case I don't manage on day end and I die at night. My current suspect list (from the most important to the least) is Lego, Finster, KevinH, ...a little bit of free space..., 1ceCream, CoD (with Preston being back in unconfirmed zone).

[Chaplain of death]

I'm usually posting from my phone so navigating back to confirm is a hassle. So I evidently have made the mistake of drawing wrong conclusions from other peoples posts. I apologize ABT, my suspicions against you were substantially slimmer than I believed. I'll try to be better about confirming back before making an ass of myself again.

 

I do however stand by my stance toward Lyner. I didn't see the bolding so I suppose that makes sense that hes trying to emphasize voting, but discussion is quite relevant and he was using that argument to deflect from his behavior which was suspicious at best.