Henchmen Anonymafia - GAME OVER - SCUM WIN

[Zerg Rush]

Long recaps and the like don't provide new information and do very little but waste time. They can also serve as a convenient way of not actually discussing anything, but keeping up appearances nonetheless. I can't fault people for finding this scummy at all, and do so myself.

That aside- #Vote: Gumshoe. I found him pretty bad towards the end of the day too; the vote for Oddjob and eventual switch to Weasels seems pretty bizzare, particularly in the light of his earlier statement ('Tony/Prinnies are fine too!'), and the other main point I see is his weird calling out of Oddjob.

He's kinda one behind Oddjob himself for me at present, whose arguments I just cannot quite stomach. Voting out the Prinny's for trying to convince people to vote the other guy is kind of off, it's stupid to begrudge people trying to save themselves in an effective way. Similarily, calling out Gumshoe for not voting Oddjob towards the end of the day is pretty dumb, since it's the end of the day and sometimes it seems like you won't get to lynch your first choice.

Not sure what to think about Axem's vote for smithers. I hardly think the actions he relates are the scummiest thing around though. Changing votes, it's not a sin, and the penguins hardly looked clean.

[Chiaki]

Voting out the Prinny's for trying to convince people to vote the other guy is kind of off, it's stupid to begrudge people trying to save themselves in an effective way.

No.
Go back and read it again, here is the link: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=4339.msg89807#msg89807

Prinny's efforts to "convince people to vote the other guy" consisted of:

Given the circumstances, dood, unless someone can make a very convincing case otherwise, the weasels disappearing when they were taken off the pressure cooker doesn't sit well with us, dood...

That's it.
His efforts were weak.
He failed to mention the most basic reason why he should have been voting Weasel - to save his own skin.
I found him to be un-townlike because his defense was pathetic.

My strategy might be meta, but don't you dare suggest that I voted him because he was trying to save himself 'in an effective way', because he was not.

[Tanaka]

(Sorry in advance for this one. Gonna take a post to defend myself before looking at new arguments.)

As for my vote on Oddjob, for those who asked, he seemed the most suspicious to me.

No reasons listed.

I don't like these "I'll stand and wait" posts, pal. If you're gonna take some action, take some action as soon as you can! Th-that's just... usually late for me! That's all, pal!
Both the Prinnies and Oddjob have done this here - although, at least the Prinnies actually present some reason for waiting, you know? Oddjob's just kinda standing around for the sake of standing around, and I don't like it one bit, pal.

Just 'cause it's not in the post you quote, doesn't mean it's not there at all. You need to actually read the topic before you go presenting an argument, pal.

I'm always gonna go for the most suspicious right 'til the last minute.

So we're supposed to trust in Gumshoe, until he changes his vote at the last minute - great consistency there.

This whole job is about trust for all of us, pal! If I think someone's suspicious, I'm voting for them until there is absolutely no chance that they're getting lynched or until they move behind someone else in suspicion.

Listen up, pal. I'm liking the look of you less and less. Don't go throwin' your vote around aimlessly in a pressure situation.

(What on Earth was wrong with my vote for Prinny? I listed my reason for voting Prinny. But Gumshoe: no reasons given again, apparently I'm just horribly suspicious, and we should implicitly trust Gumeshoe on this, since he's so great at arresting murderers and all).

What was wrong with your vote on Prinny? The fact that there had been one post (of content) in-between you voting Weasels and unvoting/voting Prinny. Flailing with a vote is bad at the best of times, and this was with sudden death closing in, pal! You seem to really buckle under pressure, and the pressure isn't even on you!

If it weren't useless there, I'd be leaving my vote on you and callin' for a lynch.

If I'm so suspicious, why wouldn't you vote for me & call a lynch? Then again, maybe you should actually refer to some reasons.

With five minutes to the deadline?! Seriously?! I-I'm not even sure this one's worth talkin' about, pal! At that point, I was pressured to even get the post out, let alone change the lynch target!

As it is, I'm gonna have to choose.
##Unvote, ##Vote: Weasel Squad
Definitely much worse. Bad (but seemingly Town) contribution is better than nothin' at all, pal.

I find it interesting that he spends so long talking about Tony, then at the last minute votes Weasels (as he said he would, vote for the AFK who can't fight back etc.), and then doesn't stick around for the next 20 minutes to see Weasels post.

...Wait, are we referrin' to the same post here, pal? "So long talking about Tony"? That was 2 lines in a 12-line post! And the Weasels' return changed nothin' - I was around, pal, but a Vanilla Town claim is as weak as they come, and I'm not changing my vote based on a sudden death "wait, I'm still alive!" to let 'em lurk to victory.

Gilmagesh, I'm not sure where your argument really is, pal. I said Tony was still suspicious, and the only time I even suggested lynching the Prinnies was after the WoT recap. As for Oddjob, I have no idea how you can't see the case - he sat around doing nothing for most of the day, then flailed around at the last minute and essentially decided the final lynch target himself.

[Zerg Rush]

@Oddjob: I can't see how his action connotates scumminess. I'll acknowledge he was WEAK and that I was focusing on the reasoning of your own vote, okay, so what? Dayend+pressure, townies fold, scum fold, I really can't see it as something to make a last-second choice on.

@Gumshoe: The point I was making was not whether or not there was a case on Oddjob, but that you chose to vote for him whilst identifying the other two leading lynches at the time as viable/equal choices, and then managed to go on to vote someone completely different. There's too much switching and waffling around there.

[Tanaka]

Right. Now for my actual thoughts. I can't really say I'm surprised to see the Prinnies flip Town, pal - like I said, they played more like bad civilians than criminals.
My main sights for now are set on Whim and Oddjob. Whim was low-content for what little time she stuck around, and hasn't returned since. The main problem here is the inactivity, though, and not poor content in the posts.
Oddjob, on the other hand... reasons already stated, and poor logic on the Prinny vote. I've never liked seein' votes based on what people haven't done, pal - different playstyles an' all that. You should be voting based on what you can see, not what you can't, and everything I'm seeing from you is bad - you were stalling for time, flailing with your vote, made the decisive vote on the lynch and have used terrible arguments. Think it's no surprise for me to:
##Vote: Oddjob, pal.
---
Jammin' Ninja: I was switching from Guildenstern, so I'd've had to switch regardless. If I could have left my vote on someone suspicious at the time, I would've not bothered switching, but since I had to, I decided I should at least go for the most suspicious suspect in my suspicions.

[Margaret Houlihan]

Eto... Smithers-san, Gumshoe-san was put higher because I convinced myself during typing that he looks worse than Oddjob-san. While Oddjob-san is quiet, Gumshoe-san's been odd: as I noted, up until my post all his actions had been appraisals of how much content is in someone's post, but not actual content he attacked or held out on.

Toriaizu, my vote goes to the Weasel Buntai again.

##VOTE: Weasel Buntai

I'd actually resigned to just bow out

Why? Why come back and smaaaaaash the Prinnies after all then? Will you actually be around now (coming from me) or what's the big idea? My earlier point of "you call for serious but don't bring it" still stands- and now you add "post resignation at the same time as hammer" to that! What's with this weird play?

[Chad Hutchins]

Long recaps and the like don't provide new information and do very little but waste time. They can also serve as a convenient way of not actually discussing anything, but keeping up appearances nonetheless. I can't fault people for finding this scummy at all, and do so myself.

If your ways of catching scum are fallacious and don't work, then maybe you need to change them. Recap is far more playstyle than scummy. If you want to pat yourself on the back for catching those people when they are scum, then go ahead. But I won't be involved with such inexact nonsense.

Oddjob: I see where you are coming from with the Prinny thing even if I think you are misguided.

Gumshoe: You said:

That post by the penguins is bad news, pal. I don't like a journalist at the best of times, let alone when they're supposed to be investigating. That said, they really don't seem like the criminal type! Just... a really bad witness? Although some things there really raise my hackles, like their entire "case" on the Axems. This is why I hate those journalistic types - lots of talking, but they always seem to miss the key points, and it turns out useless, since you have to re-read the posts to know the context anyway.

and then

'though, if I'd been voting for Tony or the Prinnies before, it wouldn't be worth changing vote. The three of them all look pretty guilty to me, and they need to seriously start picking up the pace if they're gonna get anywhere soon, pal!

So... in the post above, you say that there is a case on the Prinnies but you believe that "they don't seem like the criminal type". The next post states that the Prinnies are included in the people you would keep a vote on if you had a vote on them with absolutely nothing stated about the Prinnies in between these two posts. In other words, you say things that annoy you about the Prinnies, state that you don't think they are suspicious, and then in the next post you say they are suspicious enough to keep a vote on in crunch time.

The Oddjob vote in Day 1 is based off Oddjob's waiting and seeing what is going on:

I don't like these "I'll stand and wait" posts, pal. If you're gonna take some action, take some action as soon as you can! Th-that's just... usually late for me! That's all, pal!
Both the Prinnies and Oddjob have done this here - although, at least the Prinnies actually present some reason for waiting, you know? Oddjob's just kinda standing around for the sake of standing around, and I don't like it one bit, pal.

It seems to me that Oddjob's reason for waiting is pretty obvious; the person who he voted for has not returned and he is satisfied with his vote and he is informing the world of his presence in crunch time.

---

So now for the Day 2 stuff:

Oddjob, on the other hand... reasons already stated, and poor logic on the Prinny vote. I've never liked seein' votes based on what people haven't done, pal - different playstyles an' all that. You should be voting based on what you can see, not what you can't, and everything I'm seeing from you is bad - you were stalling for time, flailing with your vote, made the decisive vote on the lynch and have used terrible arguments. Think it's no surprise for me to:

Can you explain what you mean by "I've never liked seein' votes based on what people haven't done"? Are you referring to Oddjob's harping on the Prinnies for supposedly being deceptive?

Whim, I personally understand the need to bow out. I was tempted to bow out myself before the FIERY SPIRIT OF DISCIPLINE FILLED MY SOUL! And you students, ESPECIALLY FLAY'S STUDENTS WILL NOW SUFFER! Uh, anyway. I think that blaming someone for wanting to quit when they've been gone for a long time (for whatever reason, school/work/life) is pretty ridiculous. Fair enough on the vote though, although I want to hear from the Weasels and such before anything happens too crazy.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Not buying the case on Gumshoe, he's done an adequate job of defending himself as far as I'm concerned.

The case on Oddjob...yeah, but eeeeeh. As far as I'm concerned Smithers did everything he did but worse. Gilgamesh, it's true that changing votes is not a sin, but Smithers not even waiting for a Tony defense post before switching doesn't sit well with me at all. It makes him look like he never had any actual intention of seeing Tony get lynched. Oddjob admittedly didn't wait for a Weasel post before switching but he was under time pressure that Smithers wasn't so I'm willing to cut him a little slack there.

Ultimately I agree that Oddjob looks bad, but I don't see how he looks worse than Smithers.

Not sure why suspicions of Whim have floated in and out through the course of the game. Tony mentions them to start the day and I recall seeing them from other people on Day 1 (the Weasels I remember, possibly others but I'd have to re-read to get specific names). She didn't post a lot on Day 1? Who cares? It's Day 1. What little she did post seemed fine to me - votes where they were merited, questions and opinions on other things. The only real thing she's done that makes me raise my brow is her apparent continuation of a Day 1 case when we have flips to work with, and that happened just now.

[Bill Hellsnake]

#120 Axem: so what, am I the only person around here who can't time travel? Because it looks like I'm getting a vote for having voted for a confirmed townie. If we reduce this to the actual objection, that I changed my vote from Tony to the Prinny Squad when you think/thought that the latter was acting scummier, then sorry, but while Tony hadn't improved in the slightest at that point the Prinnies had quite frankly gone out of their way to look terrible to me (wasted recap would be bad enough, but it was also horribly biased), so no, I absolutely stand by that vote change.

I'm not going to continue the OMGUS combo here, but leading out day 2 with a blunt one-pronged attack is hardly inspiring.


I was kind of feeling the need to back up Dick a bit, but it's becoming a comedy of errors.
#129 Dick: "I can't really say I'm surprised to see the Prinnies flip Town, pal - like I said, they played more like bad civilians than criminals."

Does indeed refer back to:
#77 Dick: "That post by the penguins is bad news, pal.  [...] That said, they really don't seem like the criminal type! Just... a really bad witness?"

But kind of completely forgets that the following happened in between:
#87 Dick: "'though, if I'd been voting for Tony or the Prinnies before, it wouldn't be worth changing vote. The three of them all look pretty guilty to me..."

The last of which had in fact been completely forgotten by his next post (#106), where he suddenly reverted to his old vision in order to then vote for the weasels, which is what Gilgamesh has poked at.

There's something rather rampant about this inconsistency given the amount of time to address it and the rather convenient implications of it, in that it looks designed to lead into a later vote swap that then wasn't offered (which was not prominent as of my last look at him as of #89). Voting on Oddjob's voting record is a bit of a messy endeavour, seeing as he pushed for the weasels before swapping to the Prinnies. In any case, as much as I would vote for him now, L-1 before everyone's shown up sounds like a bad idea.

Have the following for the record, though:

FoS: Dick Gumshoe

Neither the weasels nor Guildenstern have shown their faces yet, which is unhelpful given their growing grade A lurker nature. I'd still like to hear anything from them that isn't about the other (okay, the weasels did finally increase their scope to Whim as well).

Which otherwise for now leaves me with Tony. Little angry puppy Tony. I did not intend to strike a nerve that would be taken personally (although dude, if you're going to be so caustic then you should be willing to take as much as you give), but even on a re-read your assessment of Whim at #44 is about as non-committal as it's possible to get, even

...

Okay, so I need to go now, stopping literally mid-sentence there. This Sunday/Monday is bad for me and I'm off again, not sure when I'll be back hence posting this as it is. In short, no vote down but would be voting Dick, very much need the weasels and Guildenstern around, and still need to actually read/re-read Tony to actually judge that fairly now.

No time for ninjas, but looks like Tony's beat me to much of what I've said about Dick.

[Chad Hutchins]

Whim doesn't do much of anything. She harps on a weak case with the Weasels and that's frankly about it.  It is weird that she seems to dwell on... silly actions from early Day 1. I haven't ever found anything that definitively says "This person is scummy!" but her level of contribution to the overall cause seems to be minimal.

EDITTING IN NOW: Smithers: My point was that I, while trying to be as objective as possible on Whim, don't feel that I can be because I find her posts hard to read. I think she acts strange. I cannot quantify this in any way that is convincing to anyone but myself, but I feel like these concerns need to be voiced anyway.

Axem is proposing that Smithers didn't want to lynch me despite the fact I didn't defend myself. Smithers' justification for the Prinny vote was here. Yes, it is possible for someone to emerge as more scummy.

Smithers' List Of Bad Things
-Prinny Squad #66 and #69. I know you were gone for a long time and all, but walls of text are horrible for the spirit, and you didn't even need to write most of it. In fact yeah, having actually now read the whole thing I can only conclude holy hell do I want my time back. Pointless, harmful, full of holes, and easily the worst thing that's happened to the game so far. Let me know if you actually want me to point out specifics, but that will take ages and another wall of text to embark on, and the nods of agreement I'm seeing from other people looking at those posts makes me feel like there's not much of a need.
-Whim #68 inconsistency. Oddjob=Gumshoe in the actual text, and then Gumshoe>>Oddjob in the final ratings. Please re-address this.
-Prinny Squad #78 for what feels like another horribly forced case, this time on Ard, the latter of whom I agree with regarding the potential bandwagon set up.

In fact, I really don't think I can justify doing anything other than:

I'm as suspicious of Tony as I ever was, but it's almost like you're trying to get lynched here, and I'm willing to take the odds of Tony spontaneously combusting or getting better at this point.

To ape Whim, the top of my list looks like: Prinny Squad > Tony > (some mess of Oddjob, the weasels and Guildenstern).

On other quick matters, I'm not finding much to take issue with Dick, and of the quieter amongst us I'm yet to take real offense with either Gilgamesh or Whim. Particularly Gilgamesh.

I'm off now, unless there are immediate questions to follow. I'll see if I can get on before the deadline, but odds are this is my last post of the day.

is his discussion on the matter and I feel like out of all the votes aimed at the Prinnies it has the greatest degree of justification. The big thing that concerns me about Smithers is that he seems to give in strongly to the OMGUS-fu, not that he switched a vote to someone he considers more guilty than the person he is currently voting for.

Ninja'd, editted in some stuff above.

[Excal]

Day 2

Smithers (1): Axem Rangers
Gumshoe (3): Tony, Oddjob, Gilgamesh
Oddjob (1): Gumshoe
Weasels (1): Whim

No Votes: Guildenstern, Weasels, Smithers


With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.   51 Hours remain in Day 2.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Smithers, flips are the most solid pieces of evidence we have, so of course I'm going to form cases around them. I happen to disagree with your assessment that the Prinny summary was worse than an absent Tony whose case was a bunch of bad painting and general hooey, and the case you jumped onto was a case against a townie. I can only work with what I'm given, and I'm given an innocent flip on the Prinnies, so the best thing to work with is their train as far as I'm concerned.

Whim doesn't do much of anything. She harps on a weak case with the Weasels and that's frankly about it.  It is weird that she seems to dwell on... silly actions from early Day 1. I haven't ever found anything that definitively says "This person is scummy!" but her level of contribution to the overall cause seems to be minimal.

I acknowledged that her Weasel vote was weird, but I'm not seeing anything else wrong with her. What few Day 1 posts she had seemed to have a good amount of important questions and opinions. I don't know why you're that hung-up on not posting a lot on Day 1, plenty of specific users do it regardless of their alignment. Why aren't you bothering the Weasels about it when they didn't post a lot on Day 1 either and had far less content than her?

[Chad Hutchins]

I am waiting for the Weasels to post before making any judgments. I said everything that needs to be said up to this point about them when I, ya know, voted for them. I feel like they should at least be given some hours to post in Day 2 before levying any more charges on them.

[Maya Kumashiro]

Act I-II: Intermission.

Rosencrantz
Yum, overpriced snack food.  2 kroner for a røde pølser?  Come on.

Guildenstern
Well, we're here, sorry about the delay.  Problems backstage, Ophelia is being a bit crazy again and is refusing to go on-stage.  Will look over the Gumshoe case shortly.

Rosencrantz
Micro-thought to tide the audience over: it's brave scum that's willing to claim vanilla come roleclaim time.  So the Weasels get a bit of town credit in my eyes for that.  But, the Weasels knew that it was unlikely they'd be hammered by others (especially with a dual-vanilla claim), and were in the driver's seat for hammering the Prinnies whenever they liked.  So on second thought it wouldn't be that brave a lie to tell, assuming scum-Weasels.

Guildenstern
We'll be right back!  Just be sure to re-enter the thread once the lights start flashing.

[Maya Kumashiro]

Guildenstern
Additional disclaimer: Re-reading my post, it might come across that I'm trying to imply the Weasels only claimed vanilla after they saw the Prinny claim, since I phrase the decision as "especially with a dual-vanilla claim."  Since the Weasels claimed first that's obviously false, just bad phrasing there.

[Li Syaoran]

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK. FUCKING FORUM.

I just spent the better part of two fucking hours writing out a detailed justification of my cases and the forums ate it. Honestly. Fuck this shit.

Guildenstern and Whim. Guildenstern for never addressing points leveled against him, as well as inconsistancy (ex. Calling Gumshoe's argument against him "reasonable" and mine "incoherant babble" despite being the same thing). Cheered on both trains while commenting on posts without adding anything. Yeah, only Prinnies are cleared, but I'm town too. Take that as you will. His vote on me was made in his first post, "justified" by his second and "completely concrete" by his third. He then dances the rest of the day. Look them over, it's a fun read.

Whim being another who never really addresses points against her except in her one content post which is totally light (to follow). 1 whole post of actual content (here: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=4339.msg89631#msg89631) She attacks Gumshoe's arguments as "not making sense" when several people back the points he made up. It's a tacit defense of Guildenstern. Completely disappeared after voting Prinnies in this post. May be scum trying to tie herself to Guildenstern if he is not, but he's the one I'm more sure on.

Outside choice of Gilgamesh for pulling off great day 1 lurking and his vote not landing on either train.

##Vote: Guildenstern

I'm out for now.

[Maya Kumashiro]

Act II.  Scene I.

Guildenstern
On second thought let's just get down to business.

Weasels

Guildenstern and Whim. Guildenstern for never addressing points leveled against him, as well as inconsistancy (ex. Calling Gumshoe's argument against him "reasonable" and mine "incoherant babble" despite being the same thing).  Cheered on both trains while commenting on posts without adding anything. Yeah, only Prinnies are cleared, but I'm town too. Take that as you will. His vote on me was made in his first post, "justified" by his second and "completely concrete" by his third. He then dances the rest of the day. Look them over, it's a fun read.

Guildenstern
It is a fun read.  "the points levelled against him" - look, the sole legitimate point "levelled against me" was that I'd only seriously interacted with the case on you.  I "responded" to that by getting my opinions on other cases on the record ( http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=4339.msg89477#msg89477 ).  That was Gumshoe's complaint, which was on point.  Your point was:

Weasels of the PAST

At least Ard be talkin about other people. Guildenstoin just be name dropping people without really saying anything so far. He's trying to lay all low like while hidin' behind his fancy talk.

Guildenstern
Name-dropping?  Fancy talk?  This is either an attack on posting style or just a "I don't understand you!" post, when I feel my reasoning behind voting you at the time was pretty obvious (same as everyone else, "srs business time but let's make another joke vote!").  And the "lay low" comment was kind of silly, it was early Day 1 and I'd posted an averageish amount of times by then.  Nah, I'm still biting my thumb at that attack of yours.

Rosencrantz
Also, as a point of order, we didn't "cheer both trains."  We said we'd be satisfied with a Prinny lynch, because we felt the Prinnies looked worse than Tony (the #3 lynch target) or Guildenstern (#4 lynch target).  I think we can all agree that Mr. Guildenstern was pushing for your collective lynch over the Prinnies.

----

Meanwhile...

Guildenstern
Tentatively, I agree with the Axem Rangers on this one.  Gumshoe does have the one suspicious statement where he calls the Prinnies guilty despite elsewhere standing by "they're a forgetful witness!" (which I agreed with him about), and that should be held against him, but...  huh.  I think Gumshoe's scattershot approach might be just his style.  I'd like to think that we can do better than that for who we vote against.

Rosencrantz
We'll post this message to the King for now, expect another one.  Need to re-read Day 1, I want to attempt to get more of a read on Gilgamesh before voting.

[Maya Kumashiro]

Guildenstern
Right.  Well, I can't say I agree with anything the Weasels have been saying, but I am getting an aggrieved townie vibe.  Vibes are not enough to allay my continuing suspicions but let's look at the other options.

I just reread the thread and Gilgamesh is still a mystery.  He's made some points I agree with...  but mostly just hasn't made his presence felt much.  Short posts are fine, and they do have content, just...  hmph.  Wasn't around for the Prinny / Weasel showdown and still had a vote on Tony, not sure if I can read anything from that.  3 question marks out of 3.

Whim's been quiet but reasonable as far as I'm concerned; she probably has the highest ratio of "Yeah, I agree with that" of anyone in the game.  Obviously possible she's scum leading me, at least, up a blind alley, but meh.

Oddjob...  this might be too early, but a vague possibility would be an Oddjob / Weasel team to explain Oddjob's quick switch of votes.  Vote for the Weasels to get "I voted against scum!" credit early, back off when the Weasel train becomes serious.  On the other hand, while I disagree with it, his stated reason for switching the vote is plausibly townie (prinny's lack of mentioning self-defense).

Gumshoe I already stated that I found his defense modestly compelling.

So, among these options, I'm going to have to go with...

##Vote: Gilgamesh

My apologies if you were just not around much, but I'm getting the "stay under the radar while making just enough cutting comments to not be noticably lurking" feel.

Rosencrantz
Exactly what a certain other person I know has been accused of, now that I think about it.

Guildenstern
Quiet, you.

[Zerg Rush]

@Tony: Uhhhhh if you can give me a scumhunting method that always works 100%, please do? I don't buy it as something purely indicative of playstyle, and if it is your style then you should stop doing it as, like I said, it's an easy way to looking like you're talking without doing so.

Whim's reason for voting Weasels is lackluster; isn't there a simple answer for why he voted the Prinnies, vis-a-vis 'vote or die'?

Guildenstern positing an Oddjob/Weasel team but dismissing it because he thought Oddjob's reason for changing to Prinnies is plausible seems pretty bizzare to me. I can see having a better case than Oddjob, buuuut when he votes for me for the reason he gave (which doesn't even seem to involve actual perceived scumminess...)

Smithers raised some decent points on how Gumshoe was flip-flopping around on his supposed opinion of the Prinnies. I'm taking from this that he never actually had solid opinions on anyone and was just tossing words out there. Don't think a townie would mess up like that. Furthemore-

Jammin' Ninja: I was switching from Guildenstern, so I'd've had to switch regardless. If I could have left my vote on someone suspicious at the time, I would've not bothered switching, but since I had to, I decided I should at least go for the most suspicious suspect in my suspicions.

And yeah, then you eventually switched to Weasels, who wasn't on your original list. I don't get how your opinions could've changed so much by the end of the day.

[Tanaka]

On this contradiction that everyone keeps mentioning, all I can say is that I phrased it badly - 'guilty' was the wrong word. I would've happily kept my vote on the Prinnies at the time - nobody seemed particularly suspicious, pal, but the Prinnies had played badly. As it got later in the day and the Weasels still hadn't returned, I decided, as I'd said, that no contribution was worse than a seemingly bad Town contribution.

As it is now, I'm liking the Weasels even less - their little scuffle with Guilstendern reflects badly on them to me. I'd put them in at 3rd for me.
2nd, Whim. As I and others have said, low contribution, a lot of lurking, but generally good points when they're there. Difficult to read, but that little content is difficult to see as anything but intentional lurking.
Naturally, Oddjob is still the most suspicious to me, pal. Hasn't returned since my last post, so nothing's changed.

As for Axem's case on Smithers, I'll look through the documents on that sometime soon, pal. I'm a little pressed for time at the moment.

[Excal]

I think it's time for a votecount!

Day 2

Smithers (1): Axem Rangers
Gumshoe (3): Tony, Oddjob, Gilgamesh
Oddjob (1): Gumshoe
Weasels (1): Whim
Guildenstern (1): Weasels
Gilgamesh (1): Guildenstern

No Votes: Smithers


With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.  There are 31 hours left in Day 2.

[Tohsaka Rin]

I'm siding with Guildenstern on his little spat with the Weasels. The Weasel attack smacks of OMGUS and has already been handily defended. We also all know my thoughts on Whim and the suspices of her already. I don't see why Post 41 wouldn't also be considered contribution, for example.

I could also buy into a Gilgamesh train, should no one join me on Smithers. He's been the I-forgot-he-was-playing player this game and I'm naturally suspicious of those types.

Right now I'd feel comfortable voting for Gilgamesh, Oddjob, the Weasels or I suppose Tony as well given the nature of my case against Smithers. Still would not feel comfortable joining the Gumshoe train.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Double post because I realize that listing so many people as vote candidates could easily be taken the wrong way. I'm not saying "WE NEED TO LOP OFF ALL THESE HEADS". Those are assessments of who, right now, I would feel comfortable voting for at the deadline. Smithers is the only one I actively want to see dead.

[Bill Hellsnake]

#136 Axem: I'm not sure I can do much more than sit here and disagree with your 'Tony > Prinnies' position. I voted for Tony (at #51) primarily on the grounds of spectator reporting with a side of 'bad case pushed hard' and aggression, and the Prinnies came along with the biggest mound of spectator reporting for all to see, full of bias and forced cases, so unless I wanted to make a big deal out of Tony's aggression I can't see why I wouldn't chase bigger game.

I rather suspect this is going nowhere, so that's the last you should hear from me about it. What I do find odd here is your own lack of a response to Tony. After being on him for so long and hard yesterday, not a peep about him other than as context for voting for me? Sure it's day two and extra information and all, but dropping a case entirely without mention (even if it's just to make amends with his revival)? Funny how this sounds like what you're accusing me of but worse.

Ninja: oh, you're around. Well then, I have more to say, but let's get this out first while you're around to respond to it.

[Bill Hellsnake]

And jesus are you heavily set on this given the one trick wonder behind the vote.