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

[Shale]

Okay, Excal first. Basically...well, see his own post, midway up the page. He runs through a list of the bad logic he's used and doesn't even attempt to defend any of it, and the most egregious isn't even explained, much less defended. In short, the issues with his Day 1 and Day 2 posts stand, and it's only a question of whether you believe they come from sickness or scumminess. I've already been over why I don't agree that Tom's flip clears him, and I'd like to reiterate that Tom's only vote for him was cast early on Day 2, and it took all of an hour for him to start laying groundwork for a switch to Keeshi. On Day 1, all we've got is that Tom said he'd vote for Excal or Keeshi, and then didn't do either. I can't see that as decisive proof, and the mountain of bad behavior - the repeated self-contradiction, the bad logic, the nonpresence (three posts in the last two days!), the resignation - is compelling.

Alex has two main issues. First off, Keeshi. Post-claim, he was the most strident in calling for the cop's head, which is, of course, not a town-friendly activity. Yes, yes, Keeshi was acting plenty suspicious before the scum could have known she was a cop (barring rolecop luck, I guess), but it's hard to ignore that. Second, his extreme defense of Excal. Not only is he adamant about Excal being cleared by Tom being scum, but he's even going so far as to name everyone who was calling him out, even before Tom's flip, as suspicious (though not as much so as his main target) based on that alone. I've already said why I don't buy Tom's flip as decisive proof, but the statement that it's now retroactively scummy to have been suspicious of Excal's admitted bad play gets me (and only partly because it includes me). Nobody's denying that Excal was acting scummy, including Excal himself! (Well, except Alex, who only mentioned the lurking in his defense of Excal) Yes, if Excal is town, scum were probably all too happy to see him hang, but you're still saying that people should face suspicion for attacking somebody who was acting scummy. That's not good advice.

Now, this is where my suspicions start to attack each other and make my brain hurt. Because Alex's post about Excal is not the kind of thing I'd expect to see from a scumbag defending his ally. It's almost unequivocal when defense of a scumbuddy, especially one who's under the gun, should be nuanced so as not to appear totally wrong if he flips. It's unprompted when you want to avoid tying yourself to scumbuddies if you don't have to. Not to mention that it doesn't even speak to the scumtells he's made thus far, which makes it less convincing than it could be. If Alex is scum, then this looks like an attempt to vocally object to a prospective mislynch for the "I told you so" factor, viz. Taishyr on Mad Fnorder in Discworld, or me on...well, Mad Fnorder, in the newbie game way back when.

So, as a result, I've got two top suspects and I seriously doubt they're both scum. Which means, more or less by definition, I'd like to hear more from both of them. Especially Excal, who's had all of one post that makes a case on anyone since Day 1.

Corwin: This one's new, and I need to reread his posts again before I'd even consider seriously voting on it, but here goes. Basically, I saw this and it raised my hackles something fierce:

There are also only two votes in the game, so far. One on Otter, and one on Excal. No new issues have really been brought up, though Otter named Alex as well, and I have my own questions to him. Still, I don't see a sudden possible swing to Alex at this point.

So barring new evidence or analysis, the day appears to be a decision between Excal and Otter. I'm not particularly comfortable with either, but Andrew's earlier words about how scum can have a real life reason for lurking, too, come back to me. The same applies to any RL reason for suspect play, really. I believe Excal when he says he was ill. But that doesn't mean he's town, as scum could be ill as well, and just as townies can make mistakes scum can make slips.

He says this twelve hours into a 72-hour day, with a grand total of one vote on each of the two players in question. How the hell is that too late to make a case on the person you think is scummiest? Scum are going to discuss their suspects with blinders on, and this is very blatant instance of "This person isn't acting very good...but let's talk about somebody else!" Also, I can't shake the idea that his needling Carthrat on Day 1 isn't just friendly ribbing. Annoying townies is a scum ploy, as is friendly banter that establishes you as part of the community.

I need to read over Otter's posts from previous days. He's not a top suspect, but I don't have a firm town read on anyone right now, him included.

And as one final note, echoing what a bunch of other people have already said, Sopko and OK have been lurky for most of the game. Sopko's doing better today, just...keep it up, hm?

[Ryogo]

Ugg. Alright, this'll sound bad, with all the things that have been keeping me from posting the past few days but...

My computer just died on me. Again, for the 3rd time since I got it this Christmas, and I'm still waiting for one of the parts to come back in. I was loaned a spare video card from my friend, and now my motherboard has died. My posting/checking posts ability will have been cut down again, but I'll make the effort to keep posting as much as possible. I can go to computer labs and such on the university campus, and bum a friend's computer for a few minutes here and there (Which is what I'm doing now). I'll keep active enough to avoid the modkill for sure, but if town wants to take me out for the flip/believe that I'm truly scum for the crap thats happened the last few days, so be it. All I can say in my defense is that I'm town, plain and simple. Even though I know that doesn't go far in a game about deception.

Anyways, quick thoughts on Shale's post before I head off my bud's computer:

I agree. Alex's "proof" for Excal being cleared is shaky, at best. It's not something that clears Excal in my mind. At all. Both look scummed up at the moment, but I DO find it unlikely that both are scum. Its still possible though.

Hearing some more from both would be nice, as well as OK and Sopko. Get your voices out there, I'd like to hear your thoughts as well.

[Excal]

Ok, Part 1, Day 3: Excal

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14081#msg14081

I hope you're feeling better.  Bronchitis and being suck sicks.  This disappearing...bleh, honestly, real life sucks.  I can fully relate to that.  Except you did come back for a bit.  I'm wondering a bit at the, "The last few days have been full, and given that everyone was jumping on me for bad logic, I figured that I probably wasn't the party in the right, and so decided on rest/recovery instead of trying to continue on in the fray, especially considering that my best seemed to consist of taking a shovel and digging deeper with every go." section.  Mostly, the last part "...given that everyone...".  I know it's weird to disappear - I did that myself.  However, the reasoning...that's...a bit odd.  You were looking worse, so you stopped "continuing on into the fray"?  If that happens, I'd jump right back into the fray, if it were me (which I've been trying to do).  Disappearing for a bit, posting, then sticking back because you dug yourself in deeper - that looks more like an admonition of some type of guilt to me?  Nah, that's harsh - you are acknowledging you did some bad things for your exterior view at that point.  Admitting is good, and there's a bit of an explanation, so...I'm not too worried. 

OK, the rule is to play to win.  If you can't unmire yourself from your viewpoint enough to have common ground to talk with with other people, if you are beginning to get irrational in your feelings and arguments towards the game.  Then you are incapable of playing to win.  And if the only thing speaking does is encourage people to vote for you, then you are hurting your side, and therefore not playing to win.

Sure, it could be argued that dissapearing for two days also isn't playing to win.  But, given that that at least allows for the option of returning and contributing once more after the fact (assuming you don't get lynched in the meanwhile) then it is the better play.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14087#msg14087

Nice explanation of many things.  Granted, I would like to you to focus on some of the other issues people raised, and not just Otter's, but a lot of them were solved with just the Otter talk, so this isn't too major.  So, you were attempting to trap people?  As town?  You had no issue with making yourself a target if it got people talking? 

Perhaps I'm reading this a little too much, but it sounds like a huge smokescreen issue.  How...can this be good?  You said you were expecting flak.  What good could come from all this, except to obscure things?  Town needs clarity, and while I can fully understand perhaps not noting an explanation as well as you think you should have, clear it up quickly if that's the case.  Letting it fester is baaaaaaad for town.  Not good play.  We did get a good smokescreen out of it that day - and I will admit, I was part of that, but had I not had something come up, it would have all been to you, most likely. 

...which makes me start to think you might not be scum, since why would scum draw that much attention to themselves...unless you really were trying to make that plot work, trap people, get town to jump on them, and it failed, and people jumped on you?  It could go either way, but I do lean towards the scum at this point. 

"You've been waiting a while for a proper defense from me.  I'll start off with why you didn't get one before. "  Is not a good thing - are you saying you couldn't mount a proper defense at all until later?  Well, yes, you are - what I mean, more specifically, is that..."Are you saying that you knew you couldn't protect yourself well enough, so you had to wait to think of something?"  If all you said for your defense was, "I'm trying to make a hole and check on if people are jumping in it to go for a quick bandwagon without questioning votes", that might not be as contested.  Granted, that idea period still does not strike me as good town play.  Carth had even talked about it before-hand, saying he wanted to get a bandwagon quick to get things talking - you're saying you wanted something similar, but...far less helpful to town (namely, getting all the attention on you and pulling it away from others, which invariably has made us question a lot).  Carth wanted to bandwagon to get discussion going faster - you were bandwagoning to see if people questioned it or not?  Without thinking about the potential for doing what Carth had already mentioned?

"...no worthwhile defense I could offer".  Wow.  Just be straightforward and honest with the defense.  No worthwhile defense isn't a way I like that phrased.  If you think you have no words to dissuade someone...that's not good!  Talking is love for town, and trying to defuse a situation, even if you don't think you can, is important as all hell!  And talking about yourself is good - we were questioning you for LOGIC, which is something INTERNAL TO YOU.  Of course we want your thoughts! 

You admit to not being able to think clearly, and...were still going through with this gambit.  I'm honestly getting a last-ditch attempt to pick yourself up here.  I admit that you admit this wasn't smart, but...if you knew that, why would you do it?

OK, given that, at that point in time, I was mildly delirious, I'm not surprised that my logic was attrocious, and that I was not aware of my own state.  This is also the core of my situation, and the main piece upon which my defense relies.  Given that none of you were here and interacting with me outside of the game at the time, it is only natural that the only thing you have to take me on is my word.

I know you said you'd respond to me tomorrow in specifics (...today, I guess), so I will wait for that (and Corwin wants to hear more of your thoughts as well).  I just saw some of this and was baffled by it.  More to come when I see what you have to say.  A lot of my thoughts have been answered here, but I am still completely oogled by the thought process here and how it can conceivably help town - perhaps a very experienced town vs. inexperienced scum, but even then I can't see it doing much good. 

Anyways, that's my first response to you, I'll give you more after I'm done looking over the thread again.

Corwin, as for your question.  Given that Alex has made himself a target, I'm not surprised you're asking about him.  Of course, I'm not entirely sure what I think about him, and I do intend to read more indepth into what he's written.  Mostly, I'm of two minds about him.  First, there's a part of me that's inclined to favour him because he's flexible in his thought process, he's admitting that new information can make him reconsider his position, and he's taking action based on these new positions.  That's admirable thinking for town, and frankly, necessary.

That said, there is the valid points raised about him.  First off, he left hours before deadline on day 1, knowing there was no majority, and knowing his vote was not on anyone who could be lynched.  This is baffling, as he is one of the people who I would expect not to make a mistake like that out of ignorance, much like I do not believe Otter likely to do that.  But, barring them being scum buddies, it obviously must be a mistake on one of their parts.  Secondly, there is the whole hearted view in my defense.  This is the one I really want to look into.  Specifically, his views and attitudes towards Keeshi on Day 2 which seems like a similar case, and may be useful in showing if he does hint at having concrete knowledge of who is on which side.

I also find Shale's argument about Alex's defense of me to be interesting, as well as his follow up on Corwin.  But, right now, there's little more for me to say on that at the moment.

[Ranmilia]

So, reading the last couple posts, I'm getting the sense that an "Excal or Alex" duality is now being imposed.  I don't like this one bit. 

On Excal himself - people are generally right.  He is and has been acting very scummy.  Read my past posts and you'll see that I have mentioned him before and supported him as the case secondary to Keeshi both days (till the copclaim brought Tom into it).  The only point in his defense at all is Tom being on his case early - BEFORE he got the "only one terrible post on day 2" strike and at a time when he was a tossup lynch with OK.  My viewpoint right now is that I think the argument from Tom's behavior is more compelling and better to follow, since we know Tom's alignment for a fact, we know for a fact that the things Tom did are Scum Behavior. 

Excal's behavior?  No such luck.  Scummy?  Yes.  Flip evidence backing it up?  No.  Number of times townies have acted scummy and gotten mislynched in past DL games?  Tons.  General scummy behavior is one thing and makes for good cases in the absence of flip evidence, but following up on a scum flip is better evidence and should take precedence. 

What I'd like to see right now is thoughts from people on what Tom's flip means and what conclusions they're drawing from it.  I'm frankly uncomfortable with anyone placing any votes anymore that do not take the scum flip into account. 

That's where I'm coming from.  Going way back to the back and forth with Excal Shale quoted, I think it would be excellent if everyone else followed this logic and I will continue to advance it.  Realistically, I know not everyone's going to, but I have to do what I can, there's no other protown alternative.  I don't see a reason to sit back and wait for someone I think is town to be mislynched.  (Sidenote - that exchange, and some early day 1 stuff, is the only time I've talked to Excal, yes.  That's cause he hasn't said much of anything since then.  Read paragraph 2 of this post again, etc.)

Now, working from the assumption that Excal is town, based on evidence from Tom's behavior, yes, being suspicious of Excal is a strike on people.  Not an auto-scum test, obviously, since Excal was and is acting scummy, but it stands to reason that there are scum pushing that train.  Or, more appropriately, there have been scum pushing that train, back before Excal's scummy behavior compounded.  Otter's been pushing that train hard from the start, and that's one of the reasons I'm suspicious of him. 

What turns that into an actual vote on Otter is looking back at the rest of his behavior, or rather lack thereof - he hasn't done anything *but* press Excal, passively quoting and glossing over all other cases, even to the point of ignoring a suspicious copclaim/guilty result pair.  His responses to my case have further cemented my opinion, as they have consisted of (my paraphrased interpretations) "We can't tell anything solid from the flipped scum," "Well you did it too!" (in a situation that is completely non-equivalent, which he refuses to admit for some time), and... lots of calling me scummy.  Mainly for reasons like "He didn't answer all the contradictions I called him out on!", which uses inflammatory language (contradictions, "calling out," among others, note that inflammatory language is misleading and unhelpful to town and got me caught as scum by swing-vote Sopko last game) to make a point that is shaky at best to flat out wrong.  Most/all of the things he cited I had in fact answered, sometimes repeatedly.

For a most recent example, we've got this:

Conversely, at the end of day 2, he was happy to drop a hammer without hesitation, even though there was still a lot of time left in the day.  If he'd gotten it wrong, that would have looked pretty bad; after all, he was hammering so quickly that Tom didn't get so much as a second post in after Keeshi fingered him.  Now, if he'd been genuinely serious about his Keeshi=scum case right then (remember, he'd been making this case all day without relent), he'd therefore think it pretty likely that Tom was innocent.  If that's so, why was he so comfortable dropping the quick hammer, with his image very much at stake?  I can think of a reason: his image wasn't at stake.  As a fellow scum, he wasn't uncertain about Tom at all, but was confident that hammering him would turn out fine because it was a scumbus.

Which I in fact dealt with here:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13884#msg13884
noting that scum-Keeshi could very well be fingering scumbuddy-Tom to gain credibility.  And in the post where I hammered, noting that realistically there was no way people were going to turn away from Tom and there was no other productive discussion to be had that day.  "But Tom could post more" doesn't really work as an argument, since with scum-Tom, the fact that he was going to be lynched 100% would also be obvious to scum and they'd make sure he didn't say anything that would help town.  Town-Tom wouldn't have anything else helpful to say, either, he'd already given his pieces on Keeshi and before that on Excal.  I chose to hammer when I did because A. VSM was about to go to bed and I was curious and wanted to see the flip before sleeping, and B. waiting for late hammer has already cost us this game and there's NO REASON to drag a day like that out. 

[AndrewRogue]

Catching up right now.

[Shale]

Re: Alex. On reflection, I should say this explicitly:

I am suspicious of Alex and Excal, and for different reasons. However, I can't see them interacting as they are if they are both scum. This doesn't mean that there's a Keeshi/Tom sort of situation where one of them is scum and the other isn't, because the cases against them aren't linked; it means I am almost certainly wrong about at least one of them.

[OblivionKnight]

Bleh.  Little bit of an issue - I'm going to be gone the majority of tonight and tomorrow, most likely, I might be around 9pm EST tomorrow, so I can do a vote at that point.  Class ran late today too.  

However, seeing Alex pose the question of Tom's flip and what we feel about it, I'm going to go through him a bit (which I intended to do anyway, so...)

We know Tom is scum.  Sadly, we didn't have as much to go on as I thought we would, so...

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13148#msg13148

Mmm...

"Keeshi, metagaming already? That was fast! Don't forget that nameclaims aren't supposed to give us clues, as stated by the mod. Going after Ryogo's nameclaim might be a good idea in other circumstances, but here it's probably overzealous. "

I'm getting some Ryogo defense from this.  Jumping to his side to guard him right away at the start of the game, when votes are going to pile on for little reason, and when there was a reason to go after him (well, kind of).  Otherwise, random talk about timezones, advocating silence at points, etc. etc.  Mostly I make that as a bit of trying to stave off lurking attacks,  

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13208#msg13208

Tries to pull apart Carth, despite Carth's good explanation of the badnwagoning.  In fact, he pulls apart the text Carth used to make it seem more...well, bad.  

"I have no idea why there's a band-wagon going on. One or two votes are joke-votes yes, but a third? That's almost half way to lynch. This is... very strange, considering you've done nothing wrong. The mod himself said there was nothing in a name, as I've already stated. This is most concerning of Excal."

More Ryogo defense, and a slight attack on Excal.  So it seems like Tom's focused on Ryogo, Keeshi, and Excal so far, primarily defending Ryogo (alignment unknown), chiding Keeshi (town), and drawing suspicion on Excal (unknown alignment).  Now, the attack on Excal based on his logic and explanations makes sense - it's been the basis of a lot of arguments recently.  He also gives some support to Otter against Shale saying the nameclaim from Ryogo early was odd.  Then, finally, he calls out Ryogo for an odd vote, which was apparently due to a miscommunication of words.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13276#msg13276

Supports Keeshi after her explanation, gives a bit of meta-gaming (which, granted, was already mentioned by the mod, but still), suggests watching with 2-3 eyes.  Also massive masturbation for Ryogo.  Like, with expensive lube.  He then jumps back into giving Ryogo a bit of a once-over on what not to do, and gives some more advice.  Lynch stuff doesn't strike me as too bad.  Talks about smodge and some "Andrew post nowz" stuff.

...why the hell didn't we jump on him earlier?  This is shitastically fantabulous lurking here.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13339#msg13339

Ok, makes Carth a focus of this post (Carth is dead, and town).  He also mentions he picked on Ryogo, Excal, Shale and Carth, specifically.  He then joins in, supporting Carth's points against me, meta-ing things and going on about one of us being scum, not scum, both scum, not scum, whatever.  In particular: "If OK is town, the theory about Ryogo being scum falls apart...If Carthrat is town, the spat with Corwin idea falls apart and just becomes town infighting"  Mmm...does it really fall apart?  Is it possible he's trying to shift away suspicion from, say, Ryogo if I got lynched, and turned up town they way I was expected to?  Continuing, he disagrees with Sopko, saying that the case on me is good (which it does have good points - I admitted this), which looks like he's trying to set up something of a cure for people if they get lynched?  This scenario would give Ryogo and Corwin as scum, if that were the case.  Then he goes back to more "being nice to Ryogo".  

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13367#msg13367

Rat and OK can both be scum, but it doesn't FEEL right.  Probably because it's completely WRONG, but that's an aside.  "Do you think I'm wrong? Why? Rat's wording didn't seem like a bus to me. I guess I could be wrong.
Andrew, why are you so convinced that Rat and OK are scum? Rat seems like he's genuinely trying to help and pointing out things about OK that I'd missed."  Mmm...this feels so very off.  I'm not sure where he might have been trying to lead with this.  Except back to me, of course, trying to clear Rat...which would cause potential backlash if I got lynched.  

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13448#msg13448

Super quick post.  Nothing I really get out of it.  Questions Keeshi for more info, and wonders what Alex means, if he's suggesting Keeshi vote no lynch.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13503#msg13503

Say Rat had lots of town cred (he has even more now).  Says I will be a top option for a vote (then at the end, says it's Excal and Keeshi).  Puts a bit of pressure on Keeshi for sidetracking town.  Supports Andrew in the face of Keeshi's vote.  Andrew really was putting out a lot of good content, despite his noted restriction.  Then says he can't fathom Otter/Excal.  

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13708#msg13708

Bit of a lapse in time, but we're back.  Anyway, the beginning of Keeshi's assault on Tom to drop the cop clue.  Continues to push for Excal, saying, "let's continue, shall we?"

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13726#msg13726

Mostly attacking Keeshi, but, does call out Ryogo and notes he might be creating a smokescreen with his talk.  

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13874#msg13874

And the end.  Mmm...Kesshi blah blah, but then:

"2), [scum telling lies for a myslynch], 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."

Specifically mentions Alex, Andy and Sopko as good target-painting candidates.  Why?  To discredit Keeshi and try to get some support for them?  Against them?

What do I make of all this: Tom is weird.  Very much all over the place.  He was focusing a lot on Ryogo (generally helping him, supporting him, cheerleading, though did call him out a bit and try to draw attention here and there), as well as Carth/OK/Cor as potential scum mixes that require some sort of combination of matters to accomplish anything.  From what I can see here, he's fully right in saying scum wouldn't kill Excal or myself at night - we both would draw fabulous attention, and kept alive, both of us would probably be lynched.  I think this is why Keeshi really did the claim - to keep that from happening, and why she went after Tom - get something new.  Mmm...

So, I think I'm not very suspicious of Excal now, despite the shitty logic - his bit of explanation to me in particular...makes sense, though it's not what I'd do, personally.  So I think I can forgive that for the moment, at least.  It looks like he really wanted myself and you to take the fall, and I doubt scum would do that.  Shale...I get such a good town feeling from, though Shale is the most-least mentioned person in Tom's posts.  This is a gut feeling...Shale's...probably been on the fence, with regards to other things, though.  

Ryogo...it almost seems like Tom was really, really trying to play with him in some way.  Whether it was for protection or to throw fire on him...I'm leaning towards protection.  We aren't really focusing on him at all - we're still going after Excal.  Alex making sure we look at the flips is a good thing, and I am honestly pretty damn certain he's town.  This is good and helpful.  

Andy and Sopko look town from this spat - the last post, Tom mentions them as good targets outside of Alex for Keesh to "frame".  If we nuked Tom and he showed up as evil, we might get the idea to go after them because they could be too.  

Otter and Shale, as mentioned, have the least said about them I can find from Tom's posts.  

The Cor/OK/Carth thing I'm still having issues reading.  A little more of a logic bomb I need to work my head around.

So, scum from this, from my analysis, seem to be somewhere within the possibilities of Cor, Shale, Otter and Ryogo.  Preliminary, mind you - this is just an analysis of Tom's stuff, and I need to take a better look at the interactions to be sure.

[AndrewRogue]

For direct responses...

Corwin: Ryogo as scum would lead me to believe that the third scum is likely also someone who doesn't commonly end up as scum. As I said back yesterday, Carth's death feels like a serious aberration to me. My position on Excal is still tenuous; I've never been particularly sold on him being scummy, but I see where the suspicions come from.

Right now, as far as game goes... of the Excal/Alex/Otter trio, Otter going for Excal over Tom/Keeshi still strikes me as fairly strange. While I realize that he feels Excal is scummy, not dealing with the fact that we had a claiming cop and a claimed suspect just feels off. The matter needed to be resolved as soon as possible, and going for Excal on that day strikes me as just... off. A similar feeling hangs around on Day one where Otter let Tom's commentary just kind of slip by.

Alex has similar issues, but I don't see his indiscretions to be as serious as Otter's.

Excal... mrgh. I see the case on him, but the split on it is making me uncomfortable.

Ryogo... his flip really does make sense to me if he turns up scum, his non-presence has been shocking and his logical leaps have been difficult to stick behind. I really don't have a lot to go on him beyond "newb" play and gut feelings.

The other three are basically... all bouncing off each other problematically. As is, though, thinking back to Otter's day one play and the Tom/Keeshi antics, he stands out slightly more to me.

##Vote: Otter

[Corwin]

A few specific comments, maybe more on a more detailed read later.

Ryogo: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14117#msg14117

As a request, it'd be nice to have some sort of links/quotes/post number in the points you're responding to. While things are fresh now, inevitably we'll have to analyze past days as well, so the easier it is, the better.

Alex: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14128#msg14128

We know Tom was scum, we know he spoke in favor of lynching Excal day 1 and 2.  That, to me, supercedes Excal's behavior and makes me want to work from a different perspective now.  That perspective leads me to Otter, who did not vote on Excal/Keeshi even after the cop claim, has been passive on every case but Excal, has been extremely vocal on Excal, and is using what I consider to be very questionable methods to make his points.

I still think you're mischaracterising Tom's actions there. Excal was constantly under pressure and being voted for. Nowhere did I see Tom try to actively convince people to vote Excal, and it was more the joining of a bandwagon in an attempt to hide himself in a crowd without taking a controversial stand. Also, had he voted Excal day 1 the day wouldn't have ended with no lynch, which you seem to largely ignore (Keeshi was around and could've swung over to vote Excal as well to prevent the no lynch situation at deadline).

As for other people... I haven't been throwing out laundry lists of suspicion right and left because A. till now there hasn't really been cause for it and B. doing so has tended to be suicidal for me in the past, I'm sick of getting OMGUS'd for what I fully disclaim as shaky cases.  And C. I'm suspicious of pretty much everyone.  Sopko, OK and Shale, especially Sopko, feel lurkish to me.  Corwin's bought into a lot of bad logic and mischaracterizations, and seemed to be tied to Rat day 1.  Ryogo, well, feels like a classic wince-and-ignore newbie, which I'm a bit less wary of with Tom being sharp and scum and Keeshi playing terribly and flipping town.  Andrew... actually looks pretty good to me.  (But I'm not sure what that's worth, since Tom also seemed fine to me before he flipped.)

I'd swap OK for Andrew on the lurker-feeling front, myself. None are true lurkers since I haven't forgotten either is playing, yet, but OK has more content out there than any of them recently.

On the subject of bad logic and mischaracterisation, well... I think the same about you, as evidenced above.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14146#msg14146

Corwin: This one's new, and I need to reread his posts again before I'd even consider seriously voting on it, but here goes. Basically, I saw this and it raised my hackles something fierce:

Quote
There are also only two votes in the game, so far. One on Otter, and one on Excal. No new issues have really been brought up, though Otter named Alex as well, and I have my own questions to him. Still, I don't see a sudden possible swing to Alex at this point.

So barring new evidence or analysis, the day appears to be a decision between Excal and Otter. I'm not particularly comfortable with either, but Andrew's earlier words about how scum can have a real life reason for lurking, too, come back to me. The same applies to any RL reason for suspect play, really. I believe Excal when he says he was ill. But that doesn't mean he's town, as scum could be ill as well, and just as townies can make mistakes scum can make slips.

He says this twelve hours into a 72-hour day, with a grand total of one vote on each of the two players in question. How the hell is that too late to make a case on the person you think is scummiest? Scum are going to discuss their suspects with blinders on, and this is very blatant instance of "This person isn't acting very good...but let's talk about somebody else!" Also, I can't shake the idea that his needling Carthrat on Day 1 isn't just friendly ribbing. Annoying townies is a scum ploy, as is friendly banter that establishes you as part of the community.

Hackles rising, check. So what about what I said is actually wrong? What you're doing is twisting my words, misrepresenting what I've been saying as something sinister. Merely twelve hours into the day? One way of looking at it; another would be that the case on Excal remains from _day 1_ and only keeps on growing. So much has been said about it that I don't see it merely dying down... and for good reason, too, because the only one who seems to be clearing Excal right now (except Excal himself) is Alex, who is using a form of wifom and mischaracterisation to that end.

and this is very blatant instance of "This person isn't acting very good...but let's talk about somebody else!"

It is? Really? Who is this person that isn't acting very good that you're accusing me of diverting attention from? Do enlighten me before you ominously say it in the same sentence as casually throwing the word 'scum' around.

Bottom line is, people aren't voting. New cases aren't being presented. You yourself have done neither of those. And yet, you accuse me of trying to read the way this day is going to go? There are two votes on each of them now, from skimming, and a single vote on Alex. Tell me, how is this different from what I've predicted?

How the hell is that too late to make a case on the person you think is scummiest?

I think Excal and Otter look scummiest. I have to decide between them. I did.

[Ranmilia]

Quick post before bed:

I still think you're mischaracterising Tom's actions there. Excal was constantly under pressure and being voted for. Nowhere did I see Tom try to actively convince people to vote Excal, and it was more the joining of a bandwagon in an attempt to hide himself in a crowd without taking a controversial stand. Also, had he voted Excal day 1 the day wouldn't have ended with no lynch, which you seem to largely ignore (Keeshi was around and could've swung over to vote Excal as well to prevent the no lynch situation at deadline).

Cor, I don't see why you're trying to draw a distinction between those two actions.  I don't think it matters whether Tom was actively pressuring or joining a wagon or voting or not voting.  That early in the game, I think scum are just as unlikely to "hop on wagons" of other scum as they are to "actively convince people to vote" other scum.  What matters is that he expressed serious support for lynching Excal, and that's enough in my book. 

For the record, though, I do think Tom was applying serious pressure to the case, at least on day 2.  When Tom voted Excal day 2, the votecount was 3-1 Excal-OK.  You can say "Well that's just the fourth vote on a bandwagon," but if Excal was scum, Tom could have gone to OK and made it 3-2, making an Excal lynch that day much less probable, and at very little risk to himself.  "Ah, but what if OK's scum?  That's a reason Tom would be on Excal!" you say.  Well, sure, but that line of logic ends in either Excal being town or Tom AND Excal AND OK all being scum together, which I can't see in the slightest. 

Tom had no heat on him whatsoever, save from Keeshi, who was pretty sketchy at that time, and no pressing reason to be on the case of a fellow scum when there were other nice juicy cases like OK and Keeshi he could have jumped on instead.  The only reason I could see for him hopping on scum-Excal day 2 is that not doing so would be inconsistent with what he stated day 1... which begs the question of why was he on scum-Excal day 1. 

[Hunter Sopko]

Urgh. What a day... work sucks, sleep is good... awake now, sort of. I actually might drop, but I'll try to help as much as I can...

I do want to look over Ryogo and Corwin. I keep forgetting they're here. Ryogo especially...

Ryogo's been very on and off the whole game. He was present Day 1, but his play was, understanably, very green. But it ends very quickly and abruptly, when he goes from the "oh, go easy I'm new" to

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13368#msg13368

"hey, I'm going to be very observant and make a stand!". At the time this struck me as good, but now it's striking me as odd. It's not a gradual thing, it's all at once. After Day 1 he's been very lurkerish. I realize this may be the pot calling the kettle black, but has he really been attracting ANY attention thusfar? Day 2 he faded in and out with hardly a mention as we focused on other things. He was immediate in his turnaround on Keeshi's claim, not even pausing to hear sides. Hard to tell if this is a scumtrain tell, but looks like it could be.

Also, look at this...

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13264#msg13264

It's not part of any case against Ryogo, but an indicator for Day 1. No one has any excuse for the end of Day 1 stuff. Yes, it may be beating a dead horse in this, but if RYOGO knew far that far in advance...

For Corwin...

Corwin's been a lot better about keeping tabs than Ryogo, but thusly has escaped suspicion more than anyone else, I think. It's just gut feeling. He went through Days 1 and 2 mostly targeting OK, but also supporting an Excal lynch. He was also one to switch to Tom without so much as a debate.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13806#msg13806

So... I don't know. This is mostly looking back on Day 1 and 2. Most of today is hazy.

[Corwin]

Excal: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14162#msg14162

That said, there is the valid points raised about him.  First off, he left hours before deadline on day 1, knowing there was no majority, and knowing his vote was not on anyone who could be lynched.  This is baffling, as he is one of the people who I would expect not to make a mistake like that out of ignorance, much like I do not believe Otter likely to do that.  But, barring them being scum buddies, it obviously must be a mistake on one of their parts.  Secondly, there is the whole hearted view in my defense.  This is the one I really want to look into.  Specifically, his views and attitudes towards Keeshi on Day 2 which seems like a similar case, and may be useful in showing if he does hint at having concrete knowledge of who is on which side.

I find this interesting. Originally, I accepted Alex's claim about not being around after all, due to gaming or what have you. But I haven't really questioned it from the standpoint of why he wasn't around and whether I'm willing to believe he forgot we were going towards a deadline with no clear majority.

Alex's views on Keeshi seemed to resemble a bit of tunnel vision, something which I've noticed him get into a few games. Do you believe there's more to it than that? You mention looking for whether there are hints of this concrete knowledge. I haven't really spotted any during previous reads of the thread, so are you theorizing, or do you have something tangible?


Alex: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14166#msg14166

The only point in his defense at all is Tom being on his case early - BEFORE he got the "only one terrible post on day 2" strike and at a time when he was a tossup lynch with OK.  My viewpoint right now is that I think the argument from Tom's behavior is more compelling and better to follow, since we know Tom's alignment for a fact, we know for a fact that the things Tom did are Scum Behavior. 

Excal's behavior?  No such luck.  Scummy?  Yes.  Flip evidence backing it up?  No.

Alex, again: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14206#msg14206

Cor, I don't see why you're trying to draw a distinction between those two actions.  I don't think it matters whether Tom was actively pressuring or joining a wagon or voting or not voting.  That early in the game, I think scum are just as unlikely to "hop on wagons" of other scum as they are to "actively convince people to vote" other scum.  What matters is that he expressed serious support for lynching Excal, and that's enough in my book.

...

Tom had no heat on him whatsoever, save from Keeshi, who was pretty sketchy at that time, and no pressing reason to be on the case of a fellow scum when there were other nice juicy cases like OK and Keeshi he could have jumped on instead.  The only reason I could see for him hopping on scum-Excal day 2 is that not doing so would be inconsistent with what he stated day 1... which begs the question of why was he on scum-Excal day 1. 

Please excuse the selective quoting and boldening. It is the best way to make my point without drowning us all in blocks of text. The original context is easily found via the links (or by merely scrolling up).

In any case. The boldened parts are clearly related, and pretty much answer each other. It reads that Alex is saying the following:

The only (main?) point that clears Excal is Tom voting him early day 2 (the first boldened text). The only reason he could do that while Excal could still be scum is so that Tom does not look inconsistent with his claims from day 1 (boldened text #2).

My question, though, is thus: why exactly is this scenario, which you clearly acknowledge is possible by bringing it up yourself, dismissed so easily in your defense of Excal? In fact, it seems like the most logical version of events as supported by fact. Let's look at it again. Tom promises to vote... but doesn't. Keeshi, who is around, thus cannot switch to Excal, and Excal isn't lynched.

So why do all this? Plenty of possibilities. Scum couldn't possibly know Keeshi was cop day 1, so they could've hoped people would stay on her case and swung the vote over. Had Tom followed suit after his initial vote, would any of us have noticed? I know I was partially filtering out his posts, which was bad but the logic often pained me enough to do this. Also, Excal (if scum), like Tom, could've had some powers that were useful having. Excal could be the godfather, and end up 'cleared' by a cop town is almost assured to have. We could go on and on, but I just can't see how you're rationalizing Excal is town based on evidence that points in the other direction, on top of being largely suspect to begin with.

which begs the question of why was he on scum-Excal day 1.

And yet, he didn't have a vote on Excal when things went down. You're downplaying this, but I think it is very important as I've descibed above. He got the benefits of both worlds: he supported town on a popular lynch candidate, but also stopped just short of actually laying a vote. The latter could either be due to knowing Excal is town and wanting to avoid the assosiation for lazy people digging only through votecount posts and not much else, or due to knowing Excal is scum and trying to keep him alive (which worked, I must add, as Excal is still with us).

OK: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14178#msg14178

What do I make of all this: Tom is weird.  Very much all over the place.  He was focusing a lot on Ryogo (generally helping him, supporting him, cheerleading, though did call him out a bit and try to draw attention here and there), as well as Carth/OK/Cor as potential scum mixes that require some sort of combination of matters to accomplish anything.  From what I can see here, he's fully right in saying scum wouldn't kill Excal or myself at night - we both would draw fabulous attention, and kept alive, both of us would probably be lynched.  I think this is why Keeshi really did the claim - to keep that from happening, and why she went after Tom - get something new.  Mmm...

So, I think I'm not very suspicious of Excal now, despite the shitty logic - his bit of explanation to me in particular...makes sense, though it's not what I'd do, personally.  So I think I can forgive that for the moment, at least.  It looks like he really wanted myself and you to take the fall, and I doubt scum would do that.

I don't really like how he defends Excal here. The logic seems to be "Tom went after both of us, so I'm inclined to believe both of us are actually town. Agree with me, which incidentally clears me as town as well."

I'm interested to hear what Alex thinks of this. He believes Tom's actions clear Excal. Does he agree on OK?

And a question to OK. What do you think about my points to Alex in this post and previously?

So, scum from this, from my analysis, seem to be somewhere within the possibilities of Cor, Shale, Otter and Ryogo.  Preliminary, mind you - this is just an analysis of Tom's stuff, and I need to take a better look at the interactions to be sure.

This is a bit personal, so take it with the usual grain of salt. But I feel a disconnect between how OK analyzes Tom's references to myself, himself and Excal together (he goes  'Carth/OK/Cor' for himself and me, and 'myself and you' to effectively bring Excal into the mix later), and draws from this that he and Excal are cleared while leaving me in the list of suspects (Rat's dead and town, so that leaves only me of the four listed there). Was it because Tom didn't vote me? There weren't any trains on me, so to do that he'd need to start a case himself -- something Tom avoided doing this game, as he only tagged along for whatever seemed popular, citing others and then joining in.

Also, why do you group Shale with your suspects? You say:

Shale...I get such a good town feeling from, though Shale is the most-least mentioned person in Tom's posts.  This is a gut feeling...Shale's...probably been on the fence, with regards to other things, though. 

Does your gut feeling refer to feeling there might be something off about Shale despite him looking good? Is it about him feeling town, while logic points you elsewhere? Please clarify.

Also, who is your leading candidate for today?

Andrew: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14200#msg14200

Interesting look on Ryogo, but I don't feel we can afford to lynch just based on possible info gained from a flip. It's been said ad nauseum, I know, but he is new and I see scumtells from people who have actually been around as having more meaning.

Can't really begrudge you for voting Otter, since you hit the points about him that seem quite scummy.

Sopko: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14219#msg14219

I do want to look over Ryogo and Corwin. I keep forgetting they're here. Ryogo especially...

This is an outright lie, and worries me quite a lot. I haven't forgotten Sopko's lurking tendencies from the beginning of the game, even if he keeps on getting a pass on them, pretty much. To see him accuse me of lurking is not something I can keep quiet about. You keep forgetting I'm here? I find that incredibly hard to believe.

I also find it quite telling that Sopko picked the two people who have been suspicious of Sopko from the start and have been calling him out on it periodically.

For Corwin...

Corwin's been a lot better about keeping tabs than Ryogo, but thusly has escaped suspicion more than anyone else, I think. It's just gut feeling. He went through Days 1 and 2 mostly targeting OK, but also supporting an Excal lynch. He was also one to switch to Tom without so much as a debate.

The truth is getting twisted so much here that I can't call this a misrepresentation. It's a pack of outright lies!

I've been going after lurkers, which are people I've defined as having no or low content. I went after YOU, and only switched to OK, the other lurker for two reasons: everyone seemed content giving you a pass, like Rat, for some bizarre reason and OK had by that time gone far longer without content. What he did have out was scummy, so that's where my vote went. Day 1 didn't have a lynch, so I had no reason to switch from this target. While I supported the Excal lynch to a degree based on how scummy Excal seemed, you also omit that when the choice was between Keeshi and Excal, due to pretty much excusing Keeshi's behavior as newbish and having a gut feeling that she was town, instead of trying to help her by moving to Excal, I tried to convince everyone of following LAL and lead the way there. What is suspicious about championing a proven approach to the game that never fails to get scum if used decisively throughout the game?!

On my 'switch' to Tom, that is also being distorted! I was the first to vote Tom after Keeshi's roleclaim (effectively, being the second vote on him after hers). I specifically said I wanted to hear from him and for him to use the vote as a measure of how serious the situation he was in was. Also, was there any doubt that I'd considered Keeshi more credible throughout, and that I didn't buy into the crazy 'miller/insane cop' scenarios? And then Tom ended up being hammered before I could write a comprehensive post that would've formalized the vote (or turned it to Keeshi, if I'd bought Tom's explanation when he posted); am I to blame for that as well?

If I had any hope that people would listen to me at last and adopt LAL at last, I'd be voting on you right now. But I've seen how that's worked out here, so I'll just go with the scummiest of the candidates actually on the table and hope that the one I picked is scum.

[Ranmilia]

Corwin's answered his own question.  The reason I dismiss Tom being on scum-Excal day 2 for consistency is, as I said,

which begs the question of why was he on scum-Excal day 1.

No reason for Tom to be on Excal day 1.  "But he didn't actually vote Excal!"  Doesn't matter to me.  He still spoke in favor of Excal being scummy and that's enough.  I can't see day 1 Excal as having been such a popular lynch target that scum would feel the need to support his lynch at all, in any way.  Tom didn't need to buy any townie credibility - there's very little to be gained from the day 1 wagon anyhow, and he had no serious heat on him. 

Indeed, the fact that there was no heat at all on Tom, and nobody but Keeshi even mentioning him, most of the time, points heavily towards the theory that scum weren't bussing each other early.  If Excal was Tom's scumbuddy, and Tom was supporting his lynch, why wouldn't Excal throw some suspicion back on Tom for the townie cred hat trick? 

With regards to OK, I don't think this plays to his alignment one way or another.  Given the size of the game, there are almost certainly three scum.
- If both OK and Excal are scum:
that's all three right there with Tom.  Even a cursory glance back at the game is enough for me to dismiss this possibility, there's no way day 1 would have gone down the way it did.
- If OK is town and Excal is scum:
I can't see this either, given that Tom on two occasions had the chance to speak and vote in favor of OK's lynch and instead went after Excal.
- If Excal is town and OK is scum:
Then we know why Tom acted the way he did.  Definite possibility - but I can't see anything on OK making it a probability.
- If Excal and OK are both town:
Then scum were pretty happy day 1, and free to arbitrarily come down on Excal for whatever reasons. 

Conclusion:  Excal is probably town, no reading on OK's alignment. 

[Sierra]

Current votecount:

Excal (2): Otter, Corwin
Otter (2): Sir Alex, AndrewRogue
Sir Alex (1): Ryogo

With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch.

There are 25.5 hours remaining.

[Ranmilia]

So, deadline is at about 5 tomorrow for me.  I have class till 3 and may have errands after that.  Lynching tonight would be preferable, or extending the deadline to US evening if we're deadlocked.  Hopefully we can sort it out tonight, though... peoples?

[Excal]

Corwin, my thoughts on Alex were more speculative and theoretical than anything based in fact or suspicion.  Simply a case of airing my thoughts as I had them.  That said, rereading day two didn't show anything hinting at knowing something he shouldn't.  The only thing I could call Alex on would be his deciding to end the day early, but that also fits in well with the behaviour I've seen him have in most, if not every, game where he argues for early lynches.

Regarding Day 1, because that end of day has to say something, I find it interesting that the two people who didn't vote for the two major candidates were Evil Tom and Alex.  Tom said he'd vote in his next post, but despite it being 15 and a half hours between that post and day end, he never does show up.  I would also point out that, given who he said he'd be voting for, that he likely could have secured a lynch on me had he desired to.

This leads me to believe that either Tom was legitimately kept from posting, the no lynch was considered a higher priority than a mislynch, or (for you guys, who don't already know the validity, or lack thereof of this argument) because he made the dire proclaimation to get townie cred, while at the same time vanishing in order to avoid having to actually commit to the lynch on Day 1.  He claims his net was down, but if he was scum, he could have gotten a note to avoid showing up online until the oh so convenient twenty minutes after day end.  That said, I've got nothing on proof either way towards the first two cases.  Just, from where I'm sitting, if Tom's lying about his net access, then the scum were after the no lynch.

As for Alex, the last we saw of him was five hours before lynch, though Otter claimed to see him active in IRC at the time of Day 1's end.  When he returns the next day, he says he was caught up in gaming, and hence lost track of time.  He also professed surprise at the fact that there was no Keeshi train.  The reason I find this so utterly surprising is because of the fact that, by the time of his last post, the only person who had yet to vote was OK.  The only other votes after that were Keeshi and Rat changing their target.  This means that, when he left for the day, he was already the sole vote on Keeshi, and there was not only no heat on her for Day 1 left by then, but also no real chance of a train forming up on her at the last second.  To come back and claim that he was surprised there was no Keeshi train seems slightly disingenuous.

Finally, Otter.  He was the one who had the hammer.  Looking over the events at the end of Day 1, he was the only person who was both there and had the ability to land seven votes on someone.  He claims that he thought that a majority vote would have done the trick, in which case he could have tried to persuade Keeshi to switch.  Except that El Cid confirms twice, once in bold and two hours before deadline (therefore when it would have been easy to spot) that a majority vote would be needed.  This means that Otter had, in his possession, all the knowledge necessary to know that Keeshi had given him the only sure Hammer at that time, especially as they had just hit deadline and were in a very uncertain overtime.

Otter then also gains my attention for his mono-focus.  After all, it's not like having one case can stop you from trying to dig up information on other people.  Certainly, trying to get me lynched is an understandable goal.  But, this not only suggests that after I'm gone, you'll have provided nothing besides my death, and more to the point.  It also means that if anything happens to you, we'll have gained nothing except your flip, and its implications as they regard me and my fate.

Finally, there's his stance on Day 2.  Both Shale and OK, in their writing, change their focus to Keeshi and her claim.  They also both want to hear more from the various parties before they make any votes based off of it.  In both cases, they are paying attention, and it is their primary concern.  Ryogo, he brings up the possibility of sanity, in the same post where he just jumps in with Keeshi and votes Tom.  So, that possibility has been raised, but it's not mentioned by Otter when he decides to point out the merits of voting for Keeshi, and then ignores them completely.  Yes, his one post on Day 2 after the claim is one of the few not devoted solely to my death, and even that ends with there's a chance we'll pick the wrong one, so let's hunt down random unrelated third guy instead.  The sanity argument where it may be town/town isn't even brought up until Day 3 when he's catching heat for his decision to ignore the claim.

Finally, there's Ryogo.  I still need to read over the whole of Tom's connection with him, but I did notice one thing that no one else has brought up while back tracking.  In one of his early posts, Tom made a point of taking a list I had made for my gambit, and then quoted it, and bolded the list in order to apparently emphasize the fact that I had called those people out.  That list is brought up again exactly once, by Ryogo, where he also quotes it.

The more interesting thing in regards to him is on day 2 though.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13681#msg13681

 He starts off with attacking Keeshi for doing her best to stall the vote, and cast blame on her for the no lynch.  He also tries to use this as a sign that Keeshi tried to protect me (despite having voted for me in the first place, and switching to try and ensure the lynch).  Then, nothing until after her claim, when we get this.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13824#msg13824

He starts off by changing his vote to back Keeshi, and then uses the rest of his post to tear into her and the likelihood of her being sane, before running off on a tangent about myself.  The rest of his posts all have that 'I suspect she might not be a cop, but I'm going to trust her anyways' duality going on, which doesn't quite sit right with me.

As for everyone else, the only other person I have a strong opinion of one way or the other is Shale, and he seems to be generally townish to me at the moment.

[Shale]

Still at work, don't have a whole lot of time, but I've got some.

Hackles rising, check. So what about what I said is actually wrong? What you're doing is twisting my words, misrepresenting what I've been saying as something sinister. Merely twelve hours into the day? One way of looking at it; another would be that the case on Excal remains from _day 1_ and only keeps on growing. So much has been said about it that I don't see it merely dying down... and for good reason, too, because the only one who seems to be clearing Excal right now (except Excal himself) is Alex, who is using a form of wifom and mischaracterisation to that end.

and this is very blatant instance of "This person isn't acting very good...but let's talk about somebody else!"

It is? Really? Who is this person that isn't acting very good that you're accusing me of diverting attention from? Do enlighten me before you ominously say it in the same sentence as casually throwing the word 'scum' around.

Bottom line is, people aren't voting. New cases aren't being presented. You yourself have done neither of those. And yet, you accuse me of trying to read the way this day is going to go? There are two votes on each of them now, from skimming, and a single vote on Alex. Tell me, how is this different from what I've predicted?

How the hell is that too late to make a case on the person you think is scummiest?

I think Excal and Otter look scummiest. I have to decide between them. I did.

Okay, let's break it down further, then.

There are also only two votes in the game, so far. One on Otter, and one on Excal. No new issues have really been brought up, though Otter named Alex as well, and I have my own questions to him. Still, I don't see a sudden possible swing to Alex at this point.

How is that not expressing suspicion of Alex and then leaving it hanging? You say you'd have some questions for him...except you don't see any chance of him getting lynched today, which only makes sense if your "questions" involve him acting scummy. But you don't actually ask the questions, you just move on to cases already discussed. You're going to...what, say you see something suspicious about another player, but not even say what it is until tomorrow, when you may or may not be alive? Why? If you notice something that needs explanation, point it out! 

Bottom line is, people aren't voting. New cases aren't being presented. You yourself have done neither of those.

If the "order of the day," according to you, is Otter and Excal, and I talked about Excal, Alex, and you...how is that not new material? And if other people are slacking and that annoys you, why not do something about it and expand the argument yourself?

[Ryogo]

Alright. posting time! I'll do what you said Cor, to link/quote the posts I've been refering  I seem to be catching some heat from people for the lower showing I've had since day 1. Understandable. In my defense, however, it was the weekend and I was out and about with friends, and posted every time I was able/thought of it. Also, last night as I said, My computer died. Motherboard is fried, now have to bum computer access when I can. I know the votes haven't come for me yet, but I'm assuming they will soon with people thinking the way they are now. Vote for me on that reasoning if you like, but I'll tell you again, I'm town. If the only way to prove that is for me to flip that way, so be it.

Finally, there's Ryogo.  I still need to read over the whole of Tom's connection with him, but I did notice one thing that no one else has brought up while back tracking.  In one of his early posts, Tom made a point of taking a list I had made for my gambit, and then quoted it, and bolded the list in order to apparently emphasize the fact that I had called those people out.  That list is brought up again exactly once, by Ryogo, where he also quotes it.

Excal, I don't know which post you are talking about. Skimming through my posts, I didn't see any with a quote like that from Tom in it. I've quoted him once, and it is here:

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13517#msg13517

The quote I pulled had absolutely nothing to do with you! I talked about you later on for a bit.... But without that quote involved!

Now, I didn't want to not believe you about this posting, so I looked through a second time for this post, I think I see the one you are talking about...

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg13232#msg13232

Here is a quote from one of your earlier posts as well. I've bolded the important part.

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.

Notice the bolded text at the beginning? That's the text I pulled, although it doesn't say it's from you in my post. I just copied the names from the page, and pasted them into quote blocks, cause I was lazy. Either way, I didn't agree with Tom in that post, I agreed with YOU, Excal. That's why I'm finding it weird here that you're trying to use these posts to pin suspicion on me. And I don't like it.

You say I was suspicious of the way Keeshi acted. Yes, I was! I'm sure I wasn't the only one who felt the same way! It looked she was trying to stall the votes by switching around! And I still think that whoever is scum WAS trying to get the no lynch. That's why I still have my great suspicions about Alex. And now that you bring up that point about Otter, I have a greater suspicion towards him too.

To your comment about me and the after cop-claim post. I switched from Keeshi, not back to her. I dunno if that's a typo or not, but I want to clear that up. I also did what I thought was the better thing. If Keeshi was telling the truth about Tom, we'd risk losing a townie instead of a potential cop. I dunno about you, I thought it was the better move. I wasn't sure about Keeshi being a cop, but I didn't have much else to go off of at the time, and everyone else went one way or the other too. I chose Tom.

I find it really strange that you decide to try and use those posts from day 1 against me, especially when I agreed with you. And you didn't quote the post to show what I said, just that "I remember seeing that he said it looking over the posts". Others just don't seem to feel the same way I do about Alex, and there's less than a day to lynch. I'm changing my vote. This stuff doesn't go well with me at all.

##Unvote: Alex
##Vote: Excal

EDIT: Shale has posted. Arg, I always get ninja'd.

I forgot about that. I had been suspicious of Alex for a while, then Corwin showed some agreement. I cast my vote for Alex hoping to get that thought train running, but no one jumped on, including Corwin. That kind of worries me. If you've got the major suspicions, why not act?

[Excal]

I post things that look suspicious as I see them, Ryogo.  And just because someone agrees with me is no reason to believe them a saint if I find the reasoning or the circumstances suspicious.  As for the comment of you agreeing with Tom, it's more a notice that you both quoted that list, when no one else seems to think it worth noticing.  After all, it was just the people who had shown up, barring Alex who had called me out on that trick.

I'm also sorry if I was unclear in my wording.  After all, there was just the one quote there.  But you're right, I should have made it more clear what I was talking about.

That said, you're right.  Day is slowly coming to a close, and it's time to start making a stand so that people can make up their minds.  I've been holding off on this vote because I thought there might be some merit in following other cases, given that Ryogo, Alex, and Corwin (mostly for reasons related to his trying to turn this into a two person choice) all look like something worthwhile might come from a vote placed their way.  But, nothing seems to be starting, and I feel better about an Otter lynch than I do about any of the others at the moment.

So...

##Vote: Otter

[Otter]

Otter then also gains my attention for his mono-focus.  After all, it's not like having one case can stop you from trying to dig up information on other people.  Certainly, trying to get me lynched is an understandable goal.  But, this not only suggests that after I'm gone, you'll have provided nothing besides my death, and more to the point.  It also means that if anything happens to you, we'll have gained nothing except your flip, and its implications as they regard me and my fate.

Mono-focus?  I've questioned Soppy on unclear wording and I've made it clear that by now Alex looks as scummy to me as you do.  If I've spent most of my time talking about you, it's because you've been the best case for scum for most of the game -- which you've admitted ("Certainly, trying to get me lynched is an understandable goal").  And if you are scum, which I think you are, I don't have to "provide" more than your death.  For townies, killing scum is an end unto itself.

No reason for Tom to be on Excal day 1.  "But he didn't actually vote Excal!"  Doesn't matter to me.  He still spoke in favor of Excal being scummy and that's enough.

That's enough?  All scum have to do to disassociate themselves forever in your mind is "speak in favor" of one another being scummy on day 1 without backing it up with a vote, because there's "no reason" for them to do it?  The fact that you're suggesting that townies read an Excal-clear into this would be reason enough for this to be a valid scum strategy, and in fact a basic one -- there's plenty of precedent for scum bickering and making small cases against their scumbuddies early in the game to build exactly this kind of credit should one of them die later on.  That you're acting blind to this fact is really starting to make me think you're even more likely scum than Excal.

However, we're at three and three, so there doesn't seem to be much chance of switching to an Alex lynch this late in the day.  If need be, I'll roleclaim.  Three people haven't voted yet -- by my count we're waiting on Shale, Sopko, and OK.  I also would prefer for this to be wrapped up tonight.

[OblivionKnight]

Reading, posting in a bit.  Damn got delayed on my trip all freaking day.

[Ranmilia]

That's enough?  All scum have to do to disassociate themselves forever in your mind is "speak in favor" of one another being scummy on day 1 without backing it up with a vote, because there's "no reason" for them to do it?  The fact that you're suggesting that townies read an Excal-clear into this would be reason enough for this to be a valid scum strategy, and in fact a basic one -- there's plenty of precedent for scum bickering and making small cases against their scumbuddies early in the game to build exactly this kind of credit should one of them die later on.  That you're acting blind to this fact is really starting to make me think you're even more likely scum than Excal.

Except it was backed up with a vote on day 2, in a spot that made an Excal lynch extremely likely at that time.  I'm looking at the combination here.  You can't have it both ways and say both "Tom wasn't really on Excal" and "Tom was bandwagon-bussing the sure Excal lynch".  If Excal was scum, Tom could have jumped on OK day 1, and he could have gone to the Keeshi case and voted on her early day 2, but he didn't, and stayed on Excal instead.  There's precedent for scum making small early cases against each other, not serious ones that can lead to early scum lynches.  (Actually, there is precedent for scum following an early mega-bus strategy, I led it as scum in Phoenix Wright.  It turned out to be a horrible plan that led to the scum almost immediately being placed in an unwinnable position, not to mention being obviously risky to the point that I had to club the other scum into it.  I don't see a scumteam with Tom on it doing that.)

[Shale]

Alex, I really wish you'd at least acknowledge the fact that immediately after casting that vote, Tom started looking hard for reasons to switch to Keeshi. That does change how it looks.

[OblivionKnight]

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=673.msg14223#msg14223

Ok, to answer the queries from Corwin....

1) To an extent, that is my logic, but not fully.  I think Excal is still scummy based on his actions.  Based on the vote record...he's a little better in my eyes.  Tom seemed pretty random, but he still say on Excal as a target - he didn't support him and give a case for it, but he did jump on him.  That could go both ways - he could be jumping on a scum to look good, or jumping on a townie that had issues about them.  I think you're oversimplifying my logic a bit, but I suppose that's a way to look at it - I think there were two good cases of people to jump on day 1, myself and Excal.  I know I'm town - my question, at least from my end, is whether Excal is scum or not.  His logic was horrible, and that's why people jumped on him - his explanations haven't been that great either, mostly admonitions of weakness and apologies.  But I don't think a scum would jump on Excal, who looked like an easy lynch, like that.  He had originally said in a post that he saw me as a prime candidate and didn't understand the Excal/Otter thing...then hits Excal anyway.  It looks to me like he went for a weakened townie, especially considering his case was basically, "everyone else said it".

2) Your points to Alex, and his to you, are both valid, I feel.  Tom's randomness and difficulty to read isn't helping.  It's important to look at the vote records with a verified scum kill, but that gets us in circles a bit, sadly (whether that was Tom's intention or not, I will never know).  The point of me looking through Tom's posts and trying to analyze the voting patterns was to just get an idea of what his thought process might be - honestly, it's hard as hell to get down.  Looking at scumminess makes Excal look bad, but looking at the voting makes him like a little better.  It's kind of a toss-up between whether more stock is placed the flip info or on scumminess/lurkerness.  The lurkerness, I feel, is the bigger issue overall.  

3) Like I said, I was mostly going off of Tom's voting records for those people (hence, part of the talk above about vote records and scumminess/lurkerness).  The not being voted by Tom thing...a bit.  I know my alignment, and going just by votes (as I said, it's all something I wanted to look at a bit more - you don't give off any vibes of scumminess to me, being productive to town with discussion and concerns of importance for the group), you seemed to be the person he expressed the least issue with, of that group.  Which, yes, is due to the fact he just jumped ship as trains started.  

4) Shale is in the suspects list because, well...I have a very gut feeling he's town, but there might be something there (so the former).  The list I provided was primarily based on the vote record, to try to guide my thoughts on votes and who is scummiest based on actions and potential vote-lists from our verified scum.

Which, incidentally, leads me to go the other direction: Ryogo and Sopko are probably the two people I have the most worry about in terms of lurkerness (Excal in scumminess, those two in lurkerness...and since I'm thinking 3 scum, at least one of these 3 has to be town, and I'm honestly not sure which one I lean towards more in that case).  Ryogo could be newbie fun, or he's playing us real well, but there is a good bit of oddness to him.  He seems to wax and wane a lot, which, again could be newness.  However, what worries me about him is that he's very much reactionary and not doing much else new.  Sopko's somewhat similar, though him calling out Ryogo is...I don't know where that stands.  Him calling out Corwin is baffling - how can you not know Corwin's playing?  Me, I can understand, possibly...same with Ryogo, or Andrew.  But Corwin?  He at least says this is a gut feeling, so...eh...the general lurkiness and indecisivity of these two has me worried a bit.  Excal...well, this case is familiar, at least - mess of stuff the first day, second, and recap and kind of recovery the third.  Lynching Excal, even if he turns town, would be great on information, at least.  But I do have some doubts - I can see how this could be a townie just trying to trap people, and it backfiring, but I could see it the opposite way as well.  Honestly...LaL is the way to go, which makes Soppy and Ryogo probably the better choices (Excal has plenty of pressure and watchful eyes on him).  Of the two...Sopko calling out Corwin for lurking and misconstruing some data, as well as being a bit indecisive and non-committal is what gets it for me.

##Vote: Sopko

[Ranmilia]

Shale:  What do you want me to say?  I... acknowledge it?  It makes sense for scum to do, as Keeshi was also town and acting bizzare and scummy?  I don't think it takes away at all from my point, as Tom did still make the vote on Excal, and only switched after I came in attacking Keeshi and Keeshi went off on tangents about the end of day 1.