Composer Battle Is Go! THE TREBLE CLEF IS YOUR DOOM!

[Corwin]

A clarification. I didn't say that you voting the other guy in the lead was suspicious, and if it came off that way, that was my mistake in phrasing. My intent was to note that it happened and that it's neither a scummy or townish move, but a fairly neutral one.

Anyhow, since you say you have net access back, I'd like to hear more detailed analysis from you, and not just on Excal even if you're voting for him. Unless he's the only one in the game you feel is suspicious. To avoid any potential smokescreening here, I'm content to focus on that and leave semantics and such alone.

[OblivionKnight]

Part 2
(and now this all looks like prodding for content, despite this being my plan for the day, oh well)

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13380#msg13380 (Corwin, Post#75)

Your scenario you outline is a point I'll concede.  To answer the now deceased Carth as well - paranoia with me?  Yes.  After having two games of defeat where I've unfortunately been the mechanism of destruction, I'm a little paranoid, and trying to think of ways to fix it from my end mostly.  Waiting for roleclaims is good, yes.  I...perhaps I was misunderstood or am misunderstanding what's being said, but I do agree with you to an extent.  People have to be put under pressure for something, but I'm just wary after the past games of putting someone down to the point where they can be nuked with good justification before they can get information out of.  Giving people a second chance (A second chance, hence the term "second chance") is fine, I feel - people are going to make mistakes.  Multiple second chances sounds a bit much, but having a back-up is fine, I feel.  Perhaps this is just me and my own personality and the like, but that's the way I am.  As for the exact hammer -'s, that's something should be based on the number of people, potential scum, in the game.  -2 to hammer early on is fine, I think, without much to go on, I don't think people are going to fire off someone without them getting a chance to claim/defend themselves.  But can it happen?  Yes.  Later on, I'd be a little more careful, unless town were battering scum to death (granted, being careful in that case is still important).  

In the context I mentioned, Tom/smodge had that fiery argument in...Touhou, IIRC.  That ate up a day, caused Tom to claim something he wasn't, and baffled town and everyone else for a while - he did die during the night, drawing a night kill, but he did dig himself in deeper, and had he survived, would have likely been nuked the next day.  You were playing there, IIRC, as scum, unless I'm mistaken.  

I already explained not going to smodge already, but to reiterate - I was expecting a modkill.  I should have noted that in my text.  My reasoning for not going after him was that, yes, I was supporting LaL, but knowing my own schedule issues, I figured something was up, since he usually posts someways, even if small.  I expected a modkill if that didn't change, and throwing a vote on someone in that situation, despite the LaL bastion, would look like an easy way out, to me.  I wanted to wait for a resolution of that first.

Ok, response from Carth meant to me I kind of explained earlier, but to go over it differently.  If someone has fucked up majorly and dug themselves in (Super, Tom, as noted above), a pile-on lynch wouldn't look as bad as if it were someone that hadn't done something of the sort.  That's what I was speaking in reference to (which, again, I apologize if it wasn't elucidated properly in my text).  That's the person digging themselves in badly, and being easy to defend.  Tom dug himself in pretty badly in Touhou - if he couldn't deliver, he'd be dead, piled-on, and it wouldn't look too bad (that specific voting instance, I should say) for anyone, since, hey, he made it too damn obvious.

(As an aside - Honestly, perhaps me talking about mechanics and gameplay isn't the best idea as everyone has said.  It's something that seems to inspire more hatred against oneself than anything.  With a newer character in the game, I thought that would be fine, but apparently it looks like helping them and seems scummy.  The first games I played, I was new and wanted advice, but questioning didn't get much in general.  Just something to learn, I suppose)

Huh, thought there was more.  If I missed any points, please do mention it.

As an addendum to part 1, section 3: I would also like to add that your original notation of "annoyance" was puzzlement (the above-mentioned post, actually!).  Where did this annoyance stem from for you?  

Those should be all the points you prodded me for yesterday, I think, unless I've mis-read something or missed something from that time period.  

Thus ends part 2.  Now to clean my brain for a bit to start the rest of things.

[Ranmilia]

Keeshi's actions around the deadline are not what she's being called scummy for.  In fact, that's something she keeps bringing up to distract from the actual case against her.

Oh? Since the day started I can't see anybody talking about anything she did but her actions around deadline.

Then you aren't reading all the posts from the people voting for her.  I've been on her since mid-day 1 and my case has remained the same and has nothing to do with deadline stuff.  The discussion of her deadline actions starts with Ryogo's early vote on her:  http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13681#msg13681

However, I come in voting for her here, nothing to do with deadline shenanigans:  http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13711#msg13711

Tom feels the same as I do (the apocalypse is nigh):  http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13726#msg13726

Excal tries to defend her by painting her deadline actions in a good light and dragging the case on her back to them, despite only 1/3 of the people voting for her making them their reason:  http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13741#msg13741

[quote="many people']
Without a lynch flip this is all WIFOM and heel-spinning.[/quote]

Definitely agreed.  I'm not comfortable with anyone voting based solely on Rat=town and deadline shenanigans.  I am also not comfortable with dragging this day close to deadline, because of what happened yesterday and the fact that we're still operating based on day 1 quality arguments and are unlikely to find anything more valid with additional time.  We are effectively in the 80+th hour of day 1, there has been enough time. 

I feel Keeshi is more likely to be scum - at this point it feels like she's playing a dead fish determined not to give any information at all so she doesn't implicate her scumbuddies and it takes us as long as possible to lynch her.  There is also a decent case against Excal, and the argument that his lynch may give us more information.  From the people voting for one/the other of these two I'd like to see some discussion about which one to lynch today.  From the people not voting for Excal/Keeshi I'd like to hear why you don't agree with the cases on those two and why you think your case is better.

[Hunter Sopko]

I keep wavering on Excal and Keeshi. Again I reiterate that Excal's single post today is not helping him at all and hurts him in my eyes more than helps him. Keeshi on the other hand, I'll agree with Andy's analysis and trust in my own hypothesis. Between these two things (and Alex's follow up) I think that has the highest probability of getting scum.

I'll be able to keep an eye on things today, so I can still change this if Excal comes out and just completely throws himself away, so...

##Vote: Keeshi

[Corwin]

I believe I've detailed my case already, Alex. I agree that in a lot of ways, we're still in a 'day 1' situation. I did append my case on OK today as whom I consider the most prominent lurker in the game thus far, with the most suspect content out of the lurker crowd. This may well change if he produces the content I want to see from him and he promised to do that. In that case, I would consider going for Excal. I had the same request of Keeshi that I have of OK, to provide content on people and not just spend the time in defense and debating minutae such as her pre-deadline actions which have been debated to death by now. If we entirely dismiss gut feelings, then I agree that she looks much worse, but still not as much as Excal does.

I'm not sure how much I need to repeat this until it sinks, but scum lurk by their nature, and it's happened in most if not all games here, and by catching actual scum any conclusions we make will be all the more productive. Therefore, LAL while the person in question is questionable consistently is superior.

[Ghen]

OK.  Much to respond to since I left yesterday.  I'll take it a post at a time with my replies.

-------------------------------

Keeshi's actions around the deadline are not what she's being called scummy for.  In fact, that's something she keeps bringing up to distract from the actual case against her.

I think I need a bit of clarification here.  If you do not think my attempts to obtain a lynch at the end of the previous day are indications of being scummy, then you are voting me for my actions yesterday?  You believe that my voting for Andrew because he had limited time to post is an indication of scumminess.  And that's the totality of the vote?  I just want to make sure that I did not miss any other things.

If the above was the only thing, then my comments on that issue were that I admitted to Otter's logic on the situation.  Once it was explained in detail, I can see where you all are coming from.  I conceeded the point and will in future games keep that in mind.  I'm not going to badger the point, just state that it comes from different Mafia experience.  It is my hope that it does not lead to my lynch.

If there was something else, though, please let me know because right now that is the only issue from yesterday that I can recall people seeing as scummy from me.

------------------------------

On Keeshi. She's really not doing herself many favors today, although it's also hard to blame her for being defensive under the circumstances. Still, you have to find someone suspicious! We're at three and a half days of gameplay here, everybody's got a decent amount of talking done. Care to call out somebody for something less objective than not posting? Textual analysis is overdue at this point, and the longer you go without it, the more comfortable I am with the idea of your lynch.

And this point I especially wanted to touch on.  The two forums on which I play Mafia are Mafiascum and an internal board here at my work.  In Mafia scum, days are usually several weeks long.  And in our internal board we have week long days most times.  Having just five days of posting to go through is not what I am used to seeing and yes, I am having a hard time trying to rush through my analysis of the posts.  Now, I am attempting my level best for a quick indentification, but when I rush too much, it feels more like I'm just going with my gut rather than that I have seen truely scummy behavior from which to draw a conclusion.

It is something I will definately keep in mind should I participate in future games.  But I will be providing my thoughts on people to date below.

--------------------------------

Andrew's analysis of what my being scum means.  Well, it was an interesting read.  WHat wipes out his logic for me, isx his saying that I should have stayed on Excal and waited for someone to come along to place the final vote (despite there not seeming to be anyone else around).  Now, IF someone had come around and posted they were available, I would have switched.  I said that several times.  The fact that people are still missing the math here is somewhat worrisome.  It reeks of trying to confuse an issue.

Can someone who thinks that my voting actions make me look bad (Andrew or anyone else) please explain the following to me so that I can understand:

If the only people around at the time of the lynch were people voting for Excal, why would it have been better to keep my vote there and send up prayers for a last second delivery from Non Lynch-hood from people who did not seem to be around, over trying to move the votes from the people voting on Excal to OK since with the 3 of us there at the time, we could have gotten a vote in.  Why is hoping for the best and crossing your fingers for a sudden last minute appearance better than making a decision and getting a lynch in? 

I have yet to see ANYone answer this.  If you can't, then was my logic was sound?

---------------------------------------------

She has also been very defensive today for someone who doesn't have very many votes on her. Excal is the one who had the votes quickly pile up on him, and she's the one thats gone into complete defense mode. I'm not really one to excuse Excal's one post though. Too reactionary for my taste.

Yes, I admit to having been more than a bit defensive yesterday.  That was mainly due to not having people understand my logic for trying to get a vote in.  It still confuses me how people fail to understand why any lynch is better than no lynch, but it's less annoying today and more that I'm over the issue and after these explainations for comments that were raised in my absence, I hope to be able to stop discussing them quite so much.  There are other things going on that I feel are better for me to focus on.  But those will be below.

-------------------------------------------

it's hard to see a group that would put all emphasis on personal defense in lieu of making cases on those one considers scummy, and she'd better be considering some people here scummy by now. I need to see her do a decent effort convincing us that her targets are scum and should get lynched.

I don't disagree with Corwin that I need to provide more content about those that I have analized.  I will provide it below.

-----------------------------------------------

And that reaches the end of the current posts up to the point I wrote this.  Now, this post is too long so I'm going to go ahead and post it and begin work on another post with my thoughts and comments.  It seems I am now tied with Excal for most votes and am 2 away from hammer as well.  As everyone is leaning towards the line of thinking that we want to cut this day as short as we can since there is no lynch information from yesterday to weigh into our decisions, my next post will also contain a role and name claim.  I do not feel that simply providing content, even compelling content, will deter most of the people voting for me to reconsider as we're close to people wanting to end the day.  I'd rather not drag it out too long myself, either.  Rather than hang and cost town something important, I'll just it all out on the table and we can go from there.  More in a  few minutes.

[Ghen]

Firstly, my name and roleclaim.  I am Richard Wagner and am a cop.  Last night I investigated Tom.  Would anyone care to guess what my investigations turned up?  Just see my first post today.  Tom is scum.  He hadn't really provided me much content to start picking apart and building a case which is why I asked him to post his thoughts and comments on the current situaions so that I could begin to dismantle them.  He didn't really provide anything of the kind until after I said I was going to leave yesterday after saying that I still considered him my best target.  His heated reply after I said I was going to leave, though, struck me as confirmingly suspicious.

NOW, because I feel that having laid my cards on the table just jeapordized my life from a possible NK, my thoughts on others for you all to consider:

OK - I don't really feel that he is scummy.  I would have lynched him yesterday for the sole reason that any lynch is better than no lynch on a Day 1.  Today, he would not be anything close to the top of my list.  His responses have been full of content, detailed and with logic that I do not agree with for the most part.

Otter - I don't have a good read on him, but I have to admit that I find both his misunderstanding of the time left yesterday as well as how we needed to have the full majority to lynch to be quite troubling.  Since he was one of the few people there at the time and could have done something to get a lynch in, I find the misreads an indication of inattention.  Outside of that, though, he hasn't raised any other scum alarm bells in my head yet.

Excal - From his post today, unlike others, I actually give him MORE credence than less.  He points out Otter's lack of attention and how it contributed to the mess yesterday.  This is something that I feel does need to be noted.  Inattention is always to be viewed with suspicion.  I do not feel him to be scum, but his behavior yesterday puts him still on my radar.

Now, people I intend to watch because either they are a completely neutral read to me (as opposed to wobbling back and forth between scum and town leanings), or else because they have done something I specifically think are worrisome:

Otter (see above)
Ryogo (his comment from yesterday is still on my mind.  I haven't seen anything else to indicate scum leanings, though, so he is not high on this list)
Corwin (flat neutral read)
Hunter (flat neutral read)
Alex (I would like to see your views on people other than me.  We know who you think is most scummy and you have laid you your case for such.  Even if you believe me to be scum, this isn't a game with a single scum.  Who else do you suspect?)

No one else do I have a solid read on one way or the other.  I'm sorry, but I am used to longer days to gather information and analyze.  I am doing my best to adjust my thinking and hopefully it will not as much of a problem later on or in future games as I get used to this faster pace.

Now, I am off to grab lunch and do errands.  I will be back online this afternoon sometime to answer any questions/comments that might come up in my absence.

[Ghen]

OK - I don't really feel that he is scummy.  I would have lynched him yesterday for the sole reason that any lynch is better than no lynch on a Day 1.  Today, he would not be anything close to the top of my list.  His responses have been full of content, detailed and with logic that I do not agree with for the most part.

This should read 'that I don't disagree with'.

[Veryslightlymad]

Current votecount:

EvilTom (1): Keeshi
Excal (4): Shale, OblivionKnight, Sir Alex, Otter, EvilTom
Keeshi (4): Ryogo, Sir Alex, Sir Alex, Andrew Rogue, Hunter Sopko
OblivionKnight (1): Corwin
Otter (1): Excal


With 11 eleven alive, it takes 6 to lynch.

EDIT
There's about 49 hours remaining.

[Corwin]

Well then. Let's hear from Tom!

##Unvote: OK
##Vote: Tom

A vote to make him realize the seriousness of his situation. We're in this to hunt scum. I cannot support any lynch today that is not Tom or Keeshi.

[OblivionKnight]

Part 3: Excal

Doing this post-by post as needed.  Going through every single post unless there's nothing to go off of.  This is stuff I had wanted to do day 1, and re-analyzing it.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13157#msg13157

Ok, first post.  Call out of Ryogo, which doesn't seem too bad.  Day 1, post #10, so we have jack nothing for the most part.  It was noted at the start of the topic that names are not a tell-all, but it is very early for a claim nonetheless - despite the fact they don't mean much.  Decent enough call on being curious for the early claim, as it is odd, though it really doesn't say anything in particular - granted, still something to look at.  I'm somewhat confused on the "tripping anyone else up" thought - what do you mean by that, Excal?  Are you saying it doesn't look like it would trip someone else up?  Looking back on it, that's an odd way to phrase it, whatever you mean.  Overall, not bad.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13180#msg13180

Mentions to put a 3rd vote on a "spurious, but fractionally real, cause to see if I can get something goin".  And he's got a good point here - 3 votes isn't going to hurt anything, and it does get some discussion starting.  The Otter comment...honestly, that's a bit off.  It seems like Excal is suggesting that Otter is suggesting he'd not have done anything if Alex wasn't able to beat him to it?  I don't get that - looking at the time differences, it seems like Otter probably was posting after Alex was (damnit, I need to set the time on the forums to a standard I use, as an aside), and made sure to edit in his own comments in regards to what Alex said.  It seems like Excal was/is calling out Otter there to say that he wouldn't provide content if Alex hadn't said something?  The, "suggesting" line strikes me as a push to put suspicion on Otter, or to put excess watchings on him.  This being done early on...is odd.  Now, granted, before that, Carth does say he wants Otter to talk more about the game and less about theory of the game.  I suppose Excal's comment could be in response to Carth's, a further push to make sure Otter talks about the actual game and not theory?  The wording still puts me a bit off.  

"Ryogo, don't sweat it too much.  We need to jump on the small stuff in order to get bigger better stuff to jump on.  Besides, day 1 is the day of someone's gonna get lynched for a really poor reason.  All you can really do is hope that your small screwup isn't the one that's gonna catch everyone's fancy.  And if it is, well, do what you can to leave something in your final words for the people who're gonna be continuing the job after you're gone."

Is the final section of the text.  Giving help to a newbie is good.  Day 1 is the day of someone getting lynched for a very poor reason, usually a small slip-up...ok, I can buy that.  Leaving something in the final words for people to continue the job...good.  The oddest part of this text is the wording about Otter, which I find...a bit suggestive.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13187#msg13187

This post struck me as odd.  This is the beginning of the "What the Hell is the Logic?" fad.

"Ryogo, you're still four votes away from hammer.  And oddly enough, even if those four votes were sitting in my back pocket, I've somehow refrained from using them."

Is he saying he wants to nuke Ryogo?  I was under the impression he had just said he voted to start a "spurious, but fractionally real, cause to see if I can get something goin".  This is also exacerbated by the next paragraph:

"No, you're more use to me as a conversation starter.  Both on the merits for lynching you (I'm sure there must be some!) or the merits for lynching me for so heartlessly tossing you up to three votes.  Though...  honestly, Alex seemed to be the only one phased by the fact that I tried to place a semi-serious first vote on you.  I'm fine with Alex for his response, Ryogo seems a touch concerned over his own well being, but I'll chalk that up to his wanting to actually play in his first game."

Wait...huh?  I understand what you're saying - he's more useful as a conversation starter, which fits in with what you said earlier.  But now...in between the other post and this second paragraph, you say that even if you you had the power to nuke him, you've...somehow refrained from using that power.  Alright, that's actually not an issue - the issue is pushing off on people in the next paragraph.  But to finish up this paragraph - Alex being the only one to put a question to you for a semi-serious vote?  It seems like Excal is setting a trap, or intending to trap someone or something here:

"But, Rat, Shale, Otter and Sopko.  Why'd you guys all blithly sail by that with nary a mention?  It seems a curious thing to pass by with either nothing, or a ho hum noting that we've got a really quick three-vote going here.  In fact, the more I think on it, the more that disturbs me."

Carth DID mention this, in post #16 (after Alex's calling out of Ryogo's "train"):

"I was planning to bandwagon someone, anyone from the very start. Ryogo was good enough for me. Two votes on one guy is more likely to create an interesting start than two votes on two guys. Nothing really yet stands out in particular to me as scummy anyhow. Good as anything to leave it on him. The usual 'everyone votes for everyone else' web of argument doesn't usually help much, I like this more."

So blithly sailing by that?  Carth's logic was already stated (god rest his poor soul).  It looks like you're trying to trap people - you stated earlier that -4 to lynch wasn't even a risk?  And now you're going after people who aren't arguing that you had put him there?  After saying that it wasn't a problem, you now make it out to be a problem?  Honestly, you blithly sailed by Carth's comments to put some pressure on 4 people it seems.  Why aren't you putting pressure on yourself and following your own thought process (convoluted as it is)?

To whit, all 4 of those people have commented on this afterwards, so they answered your question specifically.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13201#msg13201

"The thing is, Shale.  As has been pointed out, name claiming doesn't help one way or the other.  Everyone is covered, and I doubt El Cid's gonna bastard mod like Alex did in FFT.  I know why I jumped on him.  Because it was a great seed for debate.  But you seem to actually see some merit in looking at the claim.  Is it just because it's unusual?"

Wait....you put a vote on him with the original basis of "why the early nameclaim"?  Then go back on that logic in an attempt to trap people who went with that?  An early nameclaim is odd (and an early roleclaim even odder!), yes, which Shale remarked about in post #26:

"Claiming, even just nameclaiming, in your first post is unusual. Unusual things are worth exploring, especially early in the game when there's little else to do besides joke around. Like I said, being weird doesn't make it lynchworthy, but that doesn't preclude pressure votes. "    

And you still asked him, "are you seeing merit because it's unusual"?  Paying attention is important.  

"Rat, when are you planning to start jumping down people's throats then, if you don't mind my asking?  We have to start conversation sooner or later.  And while I admit that reading too closely early on just tends to lead to bad arguments that reveal nothing, that doesn't mean that we should be incapable of aggressive reading early on.  After all, we need to get our foundation somehow, yes?"

So is not unstating things you've said.  Aggressive reading early on?  In the same sentence, you say it's good and bad early on.  We do need a foundation somehow, yes, but didn't you say someone gets lynched for a bad reason?  And that we build from there?  You're...honestly, this is confusing as hell.  Rat was pushing for conversation with the votes on Ryogo - I was under the impression it had started, partly from YOU with that odd as hell logic of trying to trap people who should have seen the extra vote you added that was serious despite the acclimation that there was reasoning behind it but we should have seen it as an issue?  

Rest of the post...bleh.  Somewhat addled a bit on the "the mistake might not have happened yet" part, but not sure what to make of it.

As an interlude...why are you making a scummy point and trying to get people to pick up on it, when you yourself are saying not to make huge mistakes because they can get people killed?  Are you looking for suicide?

Now I will concede Corwin has a point that you did point it out.  But you kept the vote instead of dropping it, and also had almost ignored several of the comments about it (Carth, Shale), and ignored/convoluted some points (Shale) as well.  Zuh?

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13236#msg13236

Ok...a bit better explanation?  

"Let's begin with something very clear here.  My vote and the rational behind it were no accident, nor was there any scrambling to come up with a reason for it after the fact.  As such, I felt no need to remove my vote.  Of course, now I do have a reason.  We just went through prime time for Aussies, and still no Smodge.  And that is a troublesome development, so..."

Not really.  I am not very clear on it.  You were trying to trap people?  If that's it, I'm very clear, and I'm wondering how effective that can be on day 1, where, as you said, "someone will get lynched for a bad reason".  In this case, if people jumped on it, that's 4 people dead (one of which is confirmed town).  WHY was your vote and rationale no accident?  You still wanted the vote on him?  You did find Ryogo bad?  Or did you not find him bad, but wanted it there anyway?  The change to smodge...eh.  That's fine.  The agreement text with Rat is good too.  Still...I'm still not fully clear on the effectiveness of the logic you're using.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13312#msg13312

Mmm...

"Rat, you wound me!  You make it sound like I ever meant poor Ryogo any harm.  I didn't then, and like several people here, I've been getting to like him more as he goes along.  Despite his hesitant support of No Lynch given how he goes about it.  That vote, along with the pressure I laid on the people who didn't find it suspicious, was there entirely to get people talking.  And, with the possible exception of Tom, I'm honestly finding it a bit worrysome that some people still think I was seriously after him."

I thought you had said he's useful to you as a converstion starter, dead or alive (mmm...sexy women playing volleyball...).  Surely, dead means he's got some harm come to him.  While this is a good explanation, compared to what we had, I'm still...wary about it, with everything else that you've mentioned.  If you were pressuring him with a vote, you should have taken it off and thrown it to someone else when it was done.  Leaving it there makes it look like you WANTED him dead.  Considering you had said previously that your vote and rationale were no accident...why did you leave it on.  Yes, you said why, but really, why?  If it was just to get people talking, which it did, then why not jump to a lurker?  smodge had been off for plenty of time to go LaL on anyway, which is the best way to go.  Granted, yes, modkill, but that came after the smodge vote anyway.

"Now...  I suppose one of these days I'll figure out how to properly write one of these posts without a fire lit under me, or driven by some grand theory or something else.  But...  there's always a bit more research to do, and then an amusing tangent to follow..."

Uh...what?  One of these what posts?  Grand theory?  You really were trying to do something?  I'd like this explained a bit.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13384#msg13384

"...I'm not going to defend my duality"

...huh?  I thought you...did that?  I'm tempted to stop this now and just say the deal's done, but...you did try to defend it.  You did say there was a purpose to it.  Are you saying you wouldn't have explained things if we didn't have a new guy here?  (and you only mention scaring away Ryogo - Keeshi, while not new to mafia, is new to the boards - why not mention her?)  You would have LET us be confused by things?  An indignant post, mostly.  Though he does make a point that there is some trick reasoning in Andy's argument.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13444#msg13444

Mostly wondering why, if you didn't like Andrew's reasoning, that you took the vote off of him.  "I can't do anything about it now" isn't good - push it, and if you feel it's bad, keep it there.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13484#msg13484

"...I have no strong feelings at the moment"

Uh...I thought Andy's argument bugged you?  You changed your vote to Keeshi nonetheless, but say you do have one or two people you would put up there for targets, as the vote indicates?  

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13495#msg13495

Personal attack on Otter about why mafia is dying here what what what?  Then waving it off.  Much better way to have done that.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13533#msg13533

Vote for me on account of LaL.  Which is fine, but was I one of the people you mentioned earlier you had for a target?  I would assume so, since you had mentioned I should show up earlier.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13741#msg13741

Ok, this is the first and only post thus far after the last post.  The last-second switches...ugh.  I'm not getting it.  There was a lot else going on at that time period.  While I do admit there could be scum activity in here...I don't think Carth was breadcrumbing anything, and it's a lot of assumptions and what-ifs that will get us raped in the ass.

So!  

My vote on Excal basically goes for a lot of logic questioning.  I'm veryconfused, and the jump to Otter today almost seems like...well, a jump to pin something on someone else when things weren't going your way.  That's a lot of shaky thoughts to put on to Otter, so...yeah.  This isn't something I'm getting, and the attempt to trap and get people to jump into it strikes me as scummier more than town.  Town does not deceive on purpose.  

And Keeshi posts...and claims cop.  Oh boy.  

To be continued in Part 4: Return of the Keeshi.  And I thought this one took a while.

[OblivionKnight]

As a random note, Keeshi was my next in the string of thought-posts, so this just means I have more to consider.

[Ryogo]

Holy guacamole, I missed a crapload yesterday. Sorry, I had way too much alcohol in me to be of any use. And I've no gone from having near 10 inches of hair to being near bald. Woooo.

Anyways, on topic!
Keeshi: Her roleclaim is a shock, and early, and unless someone else comes forwards that can disprove her of her role, then I've got no choice but to believe her. Also, I missed the clarification on the rules the first day (Yes, even though I asked for it. I missed it when skimming through posts towards the end of the day), and didn't notice that deadlock meant "not 7 people". I thought as long as we had the majority, it would be fine. That was what my original basis of thought was against her, but my opinion stands even now. To me, it looked like she was protecting someone. But this claim can't be ignored.

##Unvote: Keeshi
##Vote: Tom

Tom has to get out here and try to defend himself. Or else the might CMT hammer will be falling on your head!

Another worry though. How can we tell you're sane? I remember Cid saying in the last game that the mod almost never tells which kind of cop you are. I'm assuming he would follow the same logic.

I've got some thoughts/major worries on what possibilities and situations could happen today, but I don't want to post them unless they happen. I don't want to give scum ideas of what to do to muck things up more.

Excal, yes. Looks suspicious still, logic is scattered in every which direction and has me confused to no end. I can't tell what to think of on Otter, or his reasoning behind voting Otter. Excal is still up there as a suspect, especially so if Keeshi turns out to NOT be a cop, and is claiming for the sole reason of to saving her skin, and not to help town at all.
 
OK, I'm not suspicious of now. He just was gone for way too long, which sucked big time for us. Hopefully it wont happen again.

Anyways, most of the posts today have been about the end day vote logic, part of a train I started. I still feel the same towards that, but their entire case shouldn't be built of it.

To sum up quick, suspicions lie on Keeshi, Tom, and Excal. By god, you'd better be telling the truth about you being a cop Keeshi, or you're up the creak without a boat, let alone a paddle..

[Ryogo]

Also, I forgot to mention, Sopko needs to post some more. I haven't forgotten completely about you.

[OblivionKnight]

Actually, before I do Keeshi...

Why did you investigate Tom and not myself or Excal?  Why the claim so early, and like this?  Do you know anything about your sanity?  What do you hope to gain from this?  Why not try to breadcrumb (like you were saying you were doing - calling Tom out to eat up his arguments)?

Another post of Doom coming soon.  I just want to get this sorted first.  Keeping my vote where it is, since I still find Excal scummiest with the logic, and want to see Keeshi's answers.

[AndrewRogue]

Not quite sue what to make of today's developments, beyond this.

##Unvote: Keeshi

Tom, what do you have to say about these allegations?

[Hunter Sopko]

::Stabs the brakes::

##Unvote: Keeshi

Okay... claimtime rolls and she gives us something juicy to mull. I question the logic on choosing Tom on all the suspicious people, but sometimes thats just how it works and if she's telling the truth has struck gold. She has breadcrumbed Tom a bit by mentioning his non-vote yesterday... and maybe it does explain trying not to stick out too far on the vote... hmm...

Always gotta hate when these 180's are pulled, but sometimes it just happens like that. Not running to the vote yet before Tom speaks though.

Also, I forgot to mention, Sopko needs to post some more. I haven't forgotten completely about you.

Says the man who has posted only twice today.

Ninja'd by OK: She did breadcrumb a bit, but her notes on Tom got sidetracked by going over the madness of yesterday, it seems.

[Shale]

Okay, so. Cop claim. I'm not about to pull off completely just because of that, and I still want to see more analysis from Keeshi - one of her big posts was pure self-defense, and the other names one person she has a town read on and six others who run the gamut from "neutral read" to "might be scummy, but then again maybe not."

[Shale]

Bah, meant to preview there. Fortunately, this time it doesn't mean my untimely doom!

Barring any major screwups later in the day, though, this is enough for me to avoid calling for her head today, and if it comes down to her and Tom I'd pick Tom. I'm very ambivalent about letting her claim dictate the lynch, though.

[Ranmilia]

Reasons I Voted Keeshi, in a simple list format for her, ordered from most to least scummy behavior:

- Never posted any reasoned, backed-up suspicions of anyone else, called anyone scummy, or made any accusations.

- Repeat of the previous line because it is by far the most important point and one that she keeps skipping over.

- Put a serious vote on someone for reasons that had nothing whatsoever to do with thinking they were town or scum, or even that their lynch would provide information helpful for finding scum.

- Cited contradictory logic for the above vote, which if followed by other players would lead to absurd outcomes.

- Constantly smokescreened discussion, went on tangents and haggled over semantics, all or nearly all of which was unrelated to finding scum and unhelpful.  (subpoint, this padded her post count without actually adding scum-finding content) 

---------

Now we have a cop claim from her and a guilty result on Tom.  I don't understand the people who want to hear Tom's reply - what could he possibly say other than "She's lying, I'm not scum, really"? 

What's more important here is Keeshi's response to "Why did you pick Tom?" which she has thankfully already provided.  That's about all we've got for judging the truthfulness of her claim. 

And... for me it's a difficult call.  If she wasn't a new player I'd call BS and continue to vote her, as that's a VERY shaky and improbable target given what went down at the end of day 1.  (Not Excal, not OK, not ME, the guy pushing your own lynch?  Seriously?)  She could easily be scum buying another mislynch before she goes out.  Unfortunately, accepting her as town also leads to a plausible scenario given her record of illogical play to this point.

So... rereading all her day 1 posts.

There's nothing there about Tom being suspicious to her at all.  Nothing.  Jokevote for him and some downright cordial conversation, which was characterized by Otter at one point as patronizing.  No early cop breadcrumb I can spot.  No "I'm investigating Tom" breadcrumb for the night.  Her vote for Tom at the start of today is even disclaimed as a "push to talk" vote, not a "you're scummy" vote.  She does not return to it or press the case at ALL, except for here:

As for specifics on my suspicions today:

Tom: His removal of a vote and promise to come back with no substance I find worrisome.  He does have an answer, but I do not know that I believe him.  I said yesterday that I would be watching him today and I have found precious little content in this new day even though I prodded him for some.  I find no reason to remove my vote from him yet.

Excal: the arguments against him have merit.  I would not opose a lynch there at the moment, although I do not feel more strongly about him than I do about Tom.

 

I just read through all her posts and that bolded part can only refer to this:  http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13240#msg13240
From very, very early day 1.

This just does not look like a cop with a guilty result to me, not at all.  There's no attempt to make her target clear to help town, the target itself is illogical, and there's no real pressure on the case after the supposed guilty result.  Given her interactions with Tom on day 1, I do think there's a definite possibility they could be scumbuddies... but I'm more sure on her than on him. 

As for her accusation of tunnel vision - I've discussed Excal at some length, OK (mostly yesterday, no longer feeling his lynch today), Sopko, Shale and Corwin, about as much as I feel is possible right now.  Which isn't much because we're still mostly on day 1. 

[Ryogo]

Yeah, its more of day 1, version 2.

Yeah, I'm still very suspicious of Keeshi, and very worried that she may not actually be a cop.

I do feel that she did breadcrumb a bit towards Tom. Considering that Excal, herself, and OK were the major topics of yesterday's lynch-gossip, I can see probable reasoning behind her Tom investigation.

1) Obviously, she would not investigate herself. That leave two candidates from the ones left.
2) OK had just disappeared, not done anything REALLY scummy. If I were a cop, I don't think I would waste my investigation on them when either everyone else is going to go after them anyways or they'll get modkilled if they don't get talking. This leaves Excal...
3) Who while suspicious, I can see people having greater suspicions on other people as well. She had mentioned at the end of the day that Tom's non-vote had really worried her. If she had investigated Excal, what would have been accomplished? He turns out to be scum, like everyone else already thinks? If she roleclaims with that, he'd be lynched and nothing would be accomplished, except we lose a cop for no good reason other than to support a day one theory. He turns out not to be scum? There'd be no way she'd roleclaim that. She could try and stop the lynch, but I dunno what good it would do. She probably figured he'd be going anyways, and you'd get whatever information on him you wanted with the flip.
4) SirAlex, while you did push for her lynch because you thought she was scummy, I don't think she saw you as scummy. There'd be no way you could know she was a cop (Not on day 1). She probably just figured you thought that she seemed like a scum from what she had said and done.
5) She did say at the end of the day she was suspicious of Tom, and started the new day out going right after him with a vote.

I'm inclined to believe her at this point and time, as I don't think we have much else to go off of. Other than the messed up, all-over-the-place logic of Excal

Yes, I agree Keeshi has been acting suspicious, but I'm going to buy her claim for now. My vote for Tom stands.

[Ranmilia]

Not so many posts today.

Bad cop logic

"There was a lynch train on them anyway" is not a reason to not investigate someone.  It is a reason TO investigate someone, especially when it's an even 2-way split like in this case.  With a modkill and a no-lynch, we're already behind quite a bit and really can't afford mislynching OK or Excal if there's a way to avoid it.  Like, say, clearing/condemning one of them with a cop investigation. 

[OblivionKnight]

Thought Keeshi would be on by now...

Anyway, as Alex said, I don't think that logic works, Ryogo. That's...kind of stretching.  If I were a cop, OK or Excal would be the primary people I would think of investigating, due to the fact that there was an exact split on them.  If it was that polarized, a cop investigation would be the ideal way to fix that issue - an impasse like that would be the one thing town wouldn't want to have to slug through for another day, where they don't want the same issue to pop up again and miss a lynch, giving scum another kill.  OK and Excal would be the ideal people to investigate, which is why asking Tom for his thoughts isn't going to help - we need Keeshi and her thoughts on why she did that to make any good, reasonable judgments.

Since she's not here yet, I need to get to bed after noms for work tomorrow morning.  Hopefully she'll appear before then.

[EvilTom]

A last-ditch cop claim? How cliché. Here's my opinions.

Well, I know Keesh's wrong, because I know I'm town. That leaves:

1) Paranoid/insane cop
2) Scum telling lies to pull a mislynch
3) Town telling lies


1) If this is the case, I honestly feel sorry for you Keesh, it's a crap role to receive (especially on your first game). It's basically a role designed to hurt town, and it usually causes significant damage as both townies think they're right and arguing against scum.

2) Sounds most likely to me. There's several of things I find terribly suspicious.
1st: Alex has beat me to it - why cop me when there were two candidates for lynch? It's a safe bet that scum wouldn't NK them, and town is most likely about to jump straight back on them since we had the unusual no-lynch scenario.

2nd: Why wait till two pages into day 2? My reasoning is two points, firstly that Keesh didn't want to have to make up any BS which could incriminate her later if she didn't have to. Once she felt the noose tightening around her neck, she picked one of the best candidates to 'cop', which bring me to point 3:

3rd: I'm not at all surprised Keesh picked me to paint scum, the other candidate would be Alex most likely, possibly Andrew or Sopko. Keeshi wated around for 2 pages for something like this: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13726#msg13726 - by picking one of the people who want her lynch, she's effectively maxing the population that is more sympathetic to her cause. By calling for mislynch on either myself, Alex, Andrew or Sopko, she's cutting down those who won't believe her.

3) Well, let's assume it's not this, but it's a possibility that's more or less the same as option 2).


Keesh has dropping scumtells all along, and there's a few things here that don't add up.
If I'm lynched now and flip town, Keesh can just say "Oh oops, I must be paranoid/etc" and we don't learn anything except waste another lynch, and accept another NK.

A cop claim should not be the end-all of claims. If we say "oh, this scummy person has claimed cop, we shouldn't lynch them but instead lynch who they tell us to", then there's nothing stopping scum pulling it every time and succeeding. If we allow a free-pass to everyone that claims cop, we'd never win.

Basically, I know I'm town therefore Keeshi must be bad in one of the above ways listed. Even lynching an insane cop will be just as good as lynching scum right now (it might even confirm me as town (unless she's paranoid), which is a lot better than mislynch). Anyway, I'm left with no other choice than to vote for Keeshi at this point, so I shall do so and hope others act on their instinct rather than just naiively trust a cop claim.

##Vote: Keeshi

[EvilTom]

Oops, forgot the unvote;

##Unvote: Excal
##Vote: Keeshi