[Official] Choose Your Own Mafia - TOWN WINS

[Endgame422]

UNVOTE AOG

[Endgame422]

I really did not like Epis vote on AoG,especially after mets defense of him and the replacement/extension it was unnecessary to push him just because.
Noone likes HS here. Several have said they would lynch him and now we have the time to make it happen.
Ive been pushing it for ever it seems without any arguement from HS really.
Vote Hotshot
Ill switch to epi if noone is willing to join me on HS but hes my top pick.

[ptlowe]

I dont care which of the two. They both seem like scum.

unvote vote HS

[madmitch]

I;m sorry but who the hell is noone?

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

no-one

[madmitch]

lol

[Epitaph1]

I really did not like Epis vote on AoG,especially after mets defense of him and the replacement/extension it was unnecessary to push him just because.
Noone likes HS here. Several have said they would lynch him and now we have the time to make it happen.
Ive been pushing it for ever it seems without any arguement from HS really.
Vote Hotshot
Ill switch to epi if noone is willing to join me on HS but hes my top pick.

Really? How many times have I said that AoG is one of my scummiest reads? My vote on his wasn't "just because." I've said who I'm willing to pressure and lynch and AoG is one of them. dakky and I are the only ones willing to vote for mitch, so why should I leave my vote on him? It's a wasted vote at this point.

Funny you didn't unvote AoG after Met's gave his two cents on AoG.

Spoiler

I feel the need to vouch for AOG. As he says, this playstyle really isn't unusual for him. He strikes me as much more town-aligned this game than he has in other games, if anything.

I severly doubt that mets would say this unless it was his honest opinion and he was town. He knows if AoG flips scum at any point this post will be a pretty big strike against him,and i dont think he would even chance it if he were scum.
Hotshot may as well be advocating a nolynch with this post

As to who I'd vote to lynch other than wing... right now I don't see any of the cases as strong enough to lynch someone off of really, and no-one has been pressured enough to even get close to L-2 (although somehow we have 3 claims anyway lol). Even Mitch and AoG have been making more reasoned arguments than their usual.

Especially since he asked about the no lynch rule,then here he says noone is a strong enough case to lynch,which kinda implies that we ought to go no lynch.I still think HS is scum,but its going to have to wait for tomorrow unless we get the extension.

Probably because this was Mets' defense:

I feel the need to vouch for AOG. As he says, this playstyle really isn't unusual for him. He strikes me as much more town-aligned this game than he has in other games, if anything.

Looks more like his opinion of AoG's meta. I'm not allowed to vote for AoG because of this? This isn't a good reason NOT to vote for AoG. This is just Mets' opinion and that's it.

I vote for the same person as you and you get all jumpy, End. Are you going to bail on this vote if I vote for HS too? Remember that he's also on my list of people I'm willing to pressure and lynch. Do you actually want to pressure someone or are your votes just symbolic?

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

What makes YOU think HS is scum Epi?

[Whatsausage]

I feel the need to vouch for AOG. As he says, this playstyle really isn't unusual for him. He strikes me as much more town-aligned this game than he has in other games, if anything.

So we do have two players vouching for AOG. The thing about both vouches though, is that they say he is acting more town than usual.

waittttt. So, supporting a no lynch is normally scummy, but in this case because I'm advocating against a no lynch, I'm scummy? come on...the logic there isn't great.

The logic there is that a change like that is scummy.

What I know from these two things above; when I see a change in play, even if it from a player that normally appears scummy becoming less so, it trips a red flag in my mind.
However; mets' vouch has resonated with a few players, so we will probably have to let this lie for now.

@mets, I believe you misunderstood what epi's lists meant. You kept talking about them like it was a player and who was willing to vote for them, as opposed to what I believe it was: a list per player of who they were willing to vote for so that any player appears in enough lists, that player would be the lynch. While I don't really think this was the best way to go about it, I believe his logic was: any lynch is better than no lynch. It is like a perverted scum read list.

At this point, it looks like either HS, epi or pt. I know we got an extension, but it seems to be too late to start a direction other than these three. pt has already claimed, so all we can do with him is test it. Of these three I would feel the best about a lynch here. On hotshot, it appears he needs a larger amount of pressure before he will even wiggle. While it would be nice to place that pressure and get more out of him, I'm kind of at the point where we have more claims than we should on D1 (even if 3 were VT) and pushing for another doesn't really help us. This also go to epi somewhat. He has been an active poster and has come up with ideas even if they haven't all been good. I don't really think this is the place to go today either. Maybe I am just a stickler and should ignore the number of claims we have so far, but if all the claims we have so far are accurate and we get another out, that only helps narrow things down for scum (who will have a better idea if the current claims are accurate.)

Tim's claim is easy enough to test in other ways/ reduce a scum kill if he is scum.

So I believe we should lynch one of the VT claims.
So that probably means pt or no lynch at this point. unvote vote ptlowe (he did ask me to back my thoughts on him up with a vote earlier )

FP'd 2x

[Epitaph1]

Lack of activity and lack of substance. I can forgive the lack of activity to some extent because I understand RL happens and he's not the only one who's been relatively quiet.

But his lack of substance bothers me. He's given one real read so far, and that was on you, Wing, and that was just in one post. Other than that, he pops in to say he's busy and that he doesn't see any real cases. I know it's D1 and all, but plenty of people have been able to give some reads or at least gut feelings on people. Surely he can give us more than 1 read.

Someone said he's more of a D2 player. I'll take his word for it.

fpd

Too long. Will read later.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Just seemed odd to me as the little he has posted tends to agree with your reasoning closely

[Metsfanmax]

What I know from these two things above; when I see a change in play, even if it from a player that normally appears scummy becoming less so, it trips a red flag in my mind.
However; mets' vouch has resonated with a few players, so we will probably have to let this lie for now.

I of course have considered the same angle, and I'm not giving AOG a hard town read.

@mets, I believe you misunderstood what epi's lists meant. You kept talking about them like it was a player and who was willing to vote for them, as opposed to what I believe it was: a list per player of who they were willing to vote for so that any player appears in enough lists, that player would be the lynch. While I don't really think this was the best way to go about it, I believe his logic was: any lynch is better than no lynch. It is like a perverted scum read list.

Those two are functionally the same information, just presented in different ways. The way Epi chose is less useful, though.

At this point, it looks like either HS, epi or pt.

I think HS is the only one I would push other than Epi at this point. Hotshot usually is more involved than he has been. I don't remember him ever being this uninvolved on D1, even.

At this point the case against pt seems more to be that it's safe to shoot at him rather than that he's scum, which I'm not interested in. I understand your reasoning about not wanting more claims -- I don't want that either -- but let's not get tripped up the sunk cost fallacy. Those claims have been made one way or another, and they can't affect our continued scum-hunting.

[Metsfanmax]

Really? How many times have I said that AoG is one of my scummiest reads?

You've said it multiple times, in fact. Let's look at them:

Need to hear more from HotShot, Streaker, sausage, Army of God, benga and virus. After looking at their posts, I would be on board with pressuring any of them. These guys are in the bottom two tiers and really haven't added anything to the conversation. I'm willing to cut Streaker a little slack so far since he said he would be gone, but I expect him to pick it up. Heck, I expect everyone listed to pick it up.

Now, prior to this post, aside from jokevotes, AoG had said precisely only the following:

• I feel like Endgame is scummy. He's pushing so hard to try to get out of the joke vote stage when he's the only one that sees any danger. I feel like he's scum or an sk trying too hard to act townie
  
  unvote vote endgame

  yeah, FOS Mets. trying hard? I'm not the one freaking out and telling everyone to get out of the joke vote stage less than a 10th into the actual day

Immediately before the 10:02 AM post (CC Time), AoG did post something more substantive. It landed one minute before Epi posted, and Epi indicated that he had been fastposted, so it didn't factor into his decision to poke AoG for being quiet.

I agree for the most part. I bet the bomb is in the top five people (have fun thinking about that, scumbags). However, I actually think AoG is in the top three scummiest.

Note how in less than the span of two hours, AoG went from someone we need to hear from, to top three scummiest. There's no acknowledgement of the more substantive post at 10:01 AM, which was:

• haha oh god
  
  this is such a mess. Everyone's pointing fingers and there isn't any sense of a clear D1 vote.
  
  
  there has been a lot of questionable logic so far. All I know for sure is that power roles are more likely to be at the top of the draft, but role does not equate to a alignment.
  
  I think we should focus on the bottom of the draft. We're less likely to hit a power role player so it seems low risk-high reward.
  
  I'll unvote vote ptlowe for the time being since his "if I'm town, wing is scum" comment was weird at best. And I don't really want to splinter the vote even further.

Now it's possible that this was updated in Epi's views, but we don't get an explanation for why he's scummy. We just get "he's scummy." Continuing the next day:

What do you guys think about AoG? Take a look at his posts--it won't take long. He's one of the people that stuck out the most to me when I was reviewing quieter players' posts.

This confirms that Epi had already decided he had a problem with AoG based on the two substantive posts. But again, no reasoning.

Explain your town read on AoG.

He's hardly contributed anything to this game. Barely posts, states the obvious when he does post. His only read came when he accused End of trying to move past the jokevote stage. . . that's either a terrible read or it was tongue in cheek.

I'm leaning town on End btw.

End wanted to move past the joking and get down to business. I don't see how that can be construed as scummy.

Its trihard, especially the way he did it. If you notice it was actually AoG who took us out of the jokephase, but he did so by building a case. It wasnt forced, it waas a natural progression.

So, that's where you get your town read on AoG? His "case" was that Endgame wanted to get serious, which I find specious reasoning at best. Anyway, he wasn't the one who took us out of the joke vote phase

Now, reasonable people may disagree with WCG's analysis here. But at this point Epi has clearly already decided that AoG is scummy and is trying to make the evidence fit his view rather than allowing the evidence to mold his view. Which indicates that he's not out to actually find scum, but is trying to target AoG in particular for some reason. Needless to say, pro-town players don't do that.

But then, things get stranger:

I understand AoG's explanation of his vote on Endgame, but I still haven't liked his play overall this game.

Somehow the situation went from AoG's case on Endgame being "specious reasoning," to now Epi "understands [his] explanation." Again, no reason given for the remarkable shift in perspective. And again fitting the pattern of having an axe to grind against AoG, rather than admitting that he really doesn't have a case at all.

Next, we have:

My issues with AoG have to do with the lack of contribution in the game--I'm not going to make a long post explaining all that when I can do it in a few sentences.

No one really seems interested in pursuing AoG despite my multiple appeals. I'm not going to browbeat you guys into following this lead, especially when it's D1 and there isn't a ton to go off of. I put my suspicions on the record, if people want to come with me on this, by all means.

You hadn't been making any appeals or giving any reason at all. None of us followed the lead because you never made a case, you just kept on repeating how you've been on to him ever since he wasn't contributing enough in the first day or two. Now, it's reasonable to be suspicious of someone for not contributing -- but it's not like a lack of contribution is some special radar that only you are equipped with. If the only thing you've got on AoG is that he's not contributing enough -- well, we can all see exactly how much he's participating. You've got to do better than that for one of your top scum picks!

6.Army of GOD - didn't like his posts for a long time. He's picked up his activity since I started calling him out. I'm not as hot to trot on him as I was at first, but he's still on my short list.

Not much else left to say at this point. You don't have a case, and you never had one.

[Endgame422]

You dont have to answer to me epi,not sure why you think you need to.
You can make your own choices but i didn't like your vote and im less inclined to follow your vote and more inclined to vote for you.
Ill wait to see if HS is a possibility but if there isnt enough support im happy lynching you regardless of what you claim.

[subtleknifewield]

OK, guys, just letting you know I am here to replace virus90, and I will be reviewing the thread in short order.

[HotShot53]

Now met's case on epi has some good reasoning behind it... that's a case I can support. Creating inconsistent cases out of nothing to seem to be scum hunting is a common scum tactic (and one I use when scum lol). And since as others have said we do need to start consolidating votes more, I will unvote, vote epi

And I wasn't looking for a no-lynch in my last post... I just felt like a RNG could come up with as good of a list as I could since I didn't really have strong feelings on anyone really at that point.

[subtleknifewield]

Wing first off i voted benga before you did.
Your post seems to imply i wagoned on your vote,which is not the case.
Just because benga was last does not mean anything.
He may have been the only player who asked for bomb,or busdriver or one of the more random roles,and got it whereas several higher drafting players all asked for cop and ended up vanilla(see dakky)
As to HS his vote seemed like a weak bandwagon onto your(flawed imo)logic which he immediately retracted when i called it scummy.
If he thinks we cant read anything from the draft but then votes based on the draft why does that not raise some concern here?
He gave reason for his "jokevote" but gave no reason for unvoting it.
Lazy bandwagon+trying to appease people to avoid being lynched.
Assuming benga actually starts posting i have no reason to keep my vote there.
UNVOTE VOTE HOTSHOT
As to dakky claiming VT at random,i would put dakky as soft town based on that.

As I said, it was a joke vote... which implies a joke reason... I guess I should have paid more attention to everyone else's joke votes to make sure I came up with a more unique one. And my "reason" for unvoting was because... it was a joke vote. And since some people seemed to take it too seriously, I removed it.

Why are people claiming VT right off the bat without even any pressure? Isn't half a VT's job to appear more powerful and absorb kills instead of more powerful roles?

This post reads as town to me, whereas the post he quoted from Endgame, combined with earlier play, makes me think Endgame might be scum.

Why are people claiming VT right off the bat without even any pressure? Isn't half a VT's job to appear more powerful and absorb kills instead of more powerful roles?

I claimed because of the Wing's speculations, to show him he is wrong with assumption that top draft players (mets, Tim, epi...) picked the top roles like cop, doctor, bulletproof, double-voter etc. Since being 12th on the draft list, I chosen the role I believed is most useless, and still ended vanilla, which means someone above me picked it first.

Also, I agree with you on that, but how would one bait mafia in a kill... If you fakeclaim cop, someone will counterclaim and you will be lynched... and mafia will kill the counterclaimed cop. If you fakeclaim but the real cop stays silent, it might work but then you will be asked D2 who did you visit and end lynched D2. So either way you will get lynched and that is not good for town however you put it.

This post also makes me think scum...there really is no tangible benefit to claiming early, as has been pointed out.

You do not claim cop, you do not claim. That way mafia do not know what role you are, and if they guess incorrectly may night kill you.

Dakky you were 12th draft, Mitch was 14th. I am suggesting that players need the end of the list are more likely to be powerless. You two are confirming that theory. You claim was not required or in anyway helpful. There are very few circumstances in which it is beneficial for town to claim their role early.

I am not reading much into this, as both you and Mitch are liable to claim early for idiotic rather than scum reasons.

I get what you say, but then you shouldn't have stayed onto your theory for so long. And push it so hard.

On the other hand, you're not reading what I said - if I was 12th and ended up vanilla for choosing boring role, that could as well mean 15th pick chose something important and got the role.
All I'm trying to say - only mets got his wanted role, everyone else can be vanilla or have a big role, even by being 15th.

Yes, they CAN. Statistically, it is not likely, however.

I feel bad, I started this with my jokevote.

Does anyone have an opinion on Ptlowe? Or End's case on Hotshot, or AoG's on Endgame?

Firstly, I was on my phone when I confirmed. Your "theory" of my being skum is based on me posting twice. Second post was a joke vote would show that I voted sausage because he voted streaker than unvoted streaker. Making a mountain out of a mole hole like someone already pointed out.

Second, I believe your so hard after me because I got such good reads in my last game. This makes me a strong player. Gotta focus on someone when your scum and thats what your doing. Point, point, point and hope someone else gets lynched. Well if I get lynched or killed during day 1 or night 1 my fellow townies you need to lynch Wing day 2 because he is definitely mafia. Yes Im calling you out Wing. My scum meter is higher on Tim. Your defending of Tim is reminiscent of last game where Dakky defended Tim. So I personally think Tim is scum and Im sticking to my guns on this one. Not changing it. His post was very scummy and on top of that it took him a day to respond to mine and dakkys accusation. As before when he was mafia he didnt out right defend himself. Just said he was "busy" with work. Well I work 6 days a week and 12 hours a day and still have the time to make posts.

Posts by person since confirmation....Now I might be off one or two and sorry for that.
Virus 1
Dazz 1
TimWoodbury 6
Madmitch 8
streaker 2
endgame 13
epitaph1 4
dakky21 6
ptlowe 7
AOG 4
Sausage 2
Wing 12
metsfan 7
hotshot 3
benga 2

So let me ask you...we have multiple people with 2 posts or less...We should probably try to ferrit out which ones are keeping there heads down to survive day 1. Look at Dazza for example. One nasty post and thats it.

This post makes me look at WCG.

Tim,there definetly is a vigilante,they are definetly town.

How can you possibly know this, unless you are a town vig? If you aren't the vig, you have no way of knowing if town or scum got the role.

Hmmm...good point here. However, this post actually makes me think Hotshot is potentially scum. Sure he's got good reasoning, but why point it out? it could easily be a soft-claim and you calling attention to it makes sure your scum-buddy notices.

========

Since I have only so far read five pages, however, I am not making any sort of decision, not until I have fully caught up.

[subtleknifewield]

What happens if mafia/SK and the Bomb are the last one alive? They kill each other? LMAO.
fp'd

Lol, that would be a case of the aforementioned tie possibility

[subtleknifewield]

OK, I got a question. Does the bomb explode and kill anyone who targets them at night, or only those that target them for killing?

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

OK, I got a question. Does the bomb explode and kill anyone who targets them at night, or only those that target them for killing?

All who target, its in Mars FAQ if you;ve made it that far yet.

[subtleknifewield]

I have, but I am asking because I only see situations where they mention that the bomb dies. It's not 100% clear in the FAQ if that happens because of targetting, or being specifically targeted for a kill.

[Marashu]

OK, I got a question. Does the bomb explode and kill anyone who targets them at night, or only those that target them for killing?

Bomb - You are the bomb. If you are successfully killed at night you will explode killing all players that targeted you.

Only triggers if killed. If killed, it hits all players that targeted the bomb, whether or not it was for a kill action.

[Epitaph1]

First, the VC on me: Wing, Mets, madmitch, HS.

Notice that Wing, mitch, and HS all voted for me after I accused them of being scum. OMGUS what?

---

Mets, you're calling the kettle black, my friend. You voted me after I tried to start organizing a lynch by trying to find common suspects. You thought it was cluttering up the game and scummy. I was trying to get something going, you didn't like that approach, and here we are.

But now to put together a case against me because of my suspicion of AoG is as you said "trying to make the evidence fit his view rather than allowing the evidence to mold his view." That is exactly what you are doing to me right now. You found my list exercise scummy and now you're trying to paint all the noise I made about AoG to be scummy too.

In response to Mets:

Really? How many times have I said that AoG is one of my scummiest reads?

You've said it multiple times, in fact. Let's look at them:

Need to hear more from HotShot, Streaker, sausage, Army of God, benga and virus. After looking at their posts, I would be on board with pressuring any of them. These guys are in the bottom two tiers and really haven't added anything to the conversation. I'm willing to cut Streaker a little slack so far since he said he would be gone, but I expect him to pick it up. Heck, I expect everyone listed to pick it up.

Now, prior to this post, aside from jokevotes, AoG had said precisely only the following:

• I feel like Endgame is scummy. He's pushing so hard to try to get out of the joke vote stage when he's the only one that sees any danger. I feel like he's scum or an sk trying too hard to act townie
  
  unvote vote endgame

  yeah, FOS Mets. trying hard? I'm not the one freaking out and telling everyone to get out of the joke vote stage less than a 10th into the actual day

Immediately before the 10:02 AM post (CC Time), AoG did post something more substantive. It landed one minute before Epi posted, and Epi indicated that he had been fastposted, so it didn't factor into his decision to poke AoG for being quiet. It did factor into my post. I responded to him in the same post, which you omitted:

fpd

I agree in part, disagree in part. ptolwe doesn't crack my top list of suspects.

I agree for the most part. I bet the bomb is in the top five people (have fun thinking about that, scumbags). However, I actually think AoG is in the top three scummiest.

Note how in less than the span of two hours, AoG went from someone we need to hear from, to top three scummiest. There's no acknowledgement of the more substantive post at 10:01 AM, which was: See above. I had already taken this lackluster post into account in my previous post. Just because I didn't describe AoG as "my top three scummiest" in my prior post doesn't mean that he wasn't one of my top suspects at the time of my prior post. You're trying to act like a suddenly changed my mind in such a short span, which is not the case.

• haha oh god
  
  this is such a mess. Everyone's pointing fingers and there isn't any sense of a clear D1 vote.
  
  
  there has been a lot of questionable logic so far. All I know for sure is that power roles are more likely to be at the top of the draft, but role does not equate to a alignment.
  
  I think we should focus on the bottom of the draft. We're less likely to hit a power role player so it seems low risk-high reward.
  
  I'll unvote vote ptlowe for the time being since his "if I'm town, wing is scum" comment was weird at best. And I don't really want to splinter the vote even further.

Now it's possible that this was updated in Epi's views, but we don't get an explanation for why he's scummy. We just get "he's scummy." Continuing the next day: This was AoG's 3rd post. Were you looking for me to make a case full of quotes at this point?

What do you guys think about AoG? Take a look at his posts--it won't take long. He's one of the people that stuck out the most to me when I was reviewing quieter players' posts.

This confirms that Epi had already decided he had a problem with AoG based on the two substantive posts. But again, no reasoning. You're right. I did have a problem with AoG at this point. He was tripping my scumdar. I was asking if he was doing the same for anyone else. Is that wrong, Mets? Is it really scummy to see if anyone else was getting a scum read on AoG at this point? Or should I have quoted all of his posts and said what I thought about each one to make a potential mountain out of a molehill at that point?

Explain your town read on AoG.

He's hardly contributed anything to this game. Barely posts, states the obvious when he does post. His only read came when he accused End of trying to move past the jokevote stage. . . that's either a terrible read or it was tongue in cheek.

I'm leaning town on End btw.

Thanks for quoting my reasoning that you were clamoring for above. I stated simply why AoG was tripping my scumdar.

End wanted to move past the joking and get down to business. I don't see how that can be construed as scummy.

Its trihard, especially the way he did it. If you notice it was actually AoG who took us out of the jokephase, but he did so by building a case. It wasnt forced, it waas a natural progression.

So, that's where you get your town read on AoG? His "case" was that Endgame wanted to get serious, which I find specious reasoning at best. Anyway, he wasn't the one who took us out of the joke vote phase

Now, reasonable people may disagree with WCG's analysis here. But at this point Epi has clearly already decided that AoG is scummy and is trying to make the evidence fit his view rather than allowing the evidence to mold his view. Which indicates that he's not out to actually find scum, but is trying to target AoG in particular for some reason. Needless to say, pro-town players don't do that.

Yes, I did think he was scummy and had already said why--you already quoted it. Targeting AoG? I've pushed Wing, mitch, and HS. Yes, I'm going to push people who I find scummy. That's what you do when you're town.

But then, things get stranger:

I understand AoG's explanation of his vote on Endgame, but I still haven't liked his play overall this game.

Somehow the situation went from AoG's case on Endgame being "specious reasoning," to now Epi "understands [his] explanation." Again, no reason given for the remarkable shift in perspective. And again fitting the pattern of having an axe to grind against AoG, rather than admitting that he really doesn't have a case at all.

Way to skip quotes. You failed the mention that AoG explained that his vote for End wasn't for getting serious but rather that End was trying too hard to appear townie.

So, the reason I softened a bit on AoG at that point is because he explained his vote on Endgame was for reasons other than previously stated. Now, how am I still targeting him when I read his explanation and take my foot off the gas against him? You act like I had laid out this elaborate scheme of a case against AoG at this point and it was falling apart. All I had been doing was putting on the record that I found AoG scummy and I had already mentioned why.

Next, we have:

My issues with AoG have to do with the lack of contribution in the game--I'm not going to make a long post explaining all that when I can do it in a few sentences.

No one really seems interested in pursuing AoG despite my multiple appeals. I'm not going to browbeat you guys into following this lead, especially when it's D1 and there isn't a ton to go off of. I put my suspicions on the record, if people want to come with me on this, by all means.

You hadn't been making any appeals or giving any reason at all. None of us followed the lead because you never made a case, you just kept on repeating how you've been on to him ever since he wasn't contributing enough in the first day or two. Now, it's reasonable to be suspicious of someone for not contributing -- but it's not like a lack of contribution is some special radar that only you are equipped with. If the only thing you've got on AoG is that he's not contributing enough -- well, we can all see exactly how much he's participating. You've got to do better than that for one of your top scum picks!

Again, I had asked people what they thought about AoG and said why he was rubbing me the wrong way multiple times. You're acting like because I didn't make some grandiose case against him, that I must be scum. You've just proven through this massive post that you can quote someone a bunch of times, give your commentary, and try to spin it however you want it and it doesn't amount to diddly squat. Why waste all that time making a long post when you can get your point across in a few sentences?

6.Army of GOD - didn't like his posts for a long time. He's picked up his activity since I started calling him out. I'm not as hot to trot on him as I was at first, but he's still on my short list.

Not much else left to say at this point. You don't have a case, and you never had one.

So, was the point of your whole post to vindicate AoG or make a case against me? If it was the former, you seem awfully damn confident that AoG is town if you're town as well. There's no way you could be that confident in him unless you can just read him like a book.

If the point of your post was to make a case against me, then you have officially called the kettle black. You didn't like my list exercise and now you're convinced that I'm scum, so you're going to go back and try to make it look like whatever I've done is scummy.

Mets, if you're town, we are just not on the same page right now. Did you want me to assemble a giant post about all the reasons I'm convinced that AoG is scum on D1 before I voted him? I've said why I find him scummy, you disagree--so what? The biggest problem I have with your treatise is you act like I had no basis for my opinions on AoG when I have been giving my reads on AoG throughout the game and it's not like I've tunneled against him the entire game.

tl;dr

Just because I didn't make some long post full of quotes does not mean that my opinion and points regarding AoG are not legitimate. I have given multiple reads on AoG throughout the game and they have evolved as he's participated more. Just because Mets doesn't agree with my read on AoG and I didn't make some giant elaborate post explaining my vote on AoG does not make me scum.

[Metsfanmax]

Mets, you're calling the kettle black, my friend. You voted me after I tried to start organizing a lynch by trying to find common suspects. You thought it was cluttering up the game and scummy. I was trying to get something going, you didn't like that approach, and here we are.

I had my suspicions of you before that thing happened. However, unlike you, I didn't randomly start making ungrounded accusations and then later try to vindicate the original accusations. I waited until you did something I felt was outright scummy, because until then they were just suspicions and I didn't have a strong read on you, and then I posted them.

But now to put together a case against me because of my suspicion of AoG is as you said "trying to make the evidence fit his view rather than allowing the evidence to mold his view." That is exactly what you are doing to me right now. You found my list exercise scummy and now you're trying to paint all the noise I made about AoG to be scummy too.

You don't know that, you're just randomly spouting this off because you don't like that I made a case against you.

I'll respond to a few of the things you said, but I don't want to turn this into a giant quote war.

Immediately before the 10:02 AM post (CC Time), AoG did post something more substantive. It landed one minute before Epi posted, and Epi indicated that he had been fastposted, so it didn't factor into his decision to poke AoG for being quiet. It did factor into my post. I responded to him in the same post, which you omitted:

fpd

I agree in part, disagree in part. ptolwe doesn't crack my top list of suspects.

I know it factored into your post, as I said that you had been fastposted, indicating that I knew you saw the post. However, what I actually said is that it didn't factor into your decision to "poke AoG for being quiet" -- you had already decided he was being too quiet before your tastes when you started composing the posts. You obviously didn't change that analysis when you saw the new post. I wasn't criticizing you at this point for not responding to it, I was merely setting up the context for the next post you made.

Note how in less than the span of two hours, AoG went from someone we need to hear from, to top three scummiest. There's no acknowledgement of the more substantive post at 10:01 AM, which was: See above. I had already taken this lackluster post into account in my previous post. Just because I didn't describe AoG as "my top three scummiest" in my prior post doesn't mean that he wasn't one of my top suspects at the time of my prior post. You're trying to act like a suddenly changed my mind in such a short span, which is not the case.

This and other things you're saying have convinced me you missed the basic thesis of my lengthy post. Which, to be brief, is: THAT'S THE POINT. You had already decided AoG was among your top scum picks even before AoG's third post. Because he had two posts in the span of about four pages, neither of which were very lengthy. I was merely pointing out in this part that you are now revealing your actual intentions, i.e. that you had decided he was scum without any other reason than he wasn't participating much from pages 3 through 5 or so. You had no case, he just tripped your "scumdar" by not really doing anything. And look, while I'm all for pushing inactives, it's not a case to point out that someone is inactive and possibly scummarining. It's just a statement of facts.

Somehow the situation went from AoG's case on Endgame being "specious reasoning," to now Epi "understands [his] explanation." Again, no reason given for the remarkable shift in perspective. And again fitting the pattern of having an axe to grind against AoG, rather than admitting that he really doesn't have a case at all.

Way to skip quotes. You failed the mention that AoG explained that his vote for End wasn't for getting serious but rather that End was trying too hard to appear townie.
...
So, the reason I softened a bit on AoG at that point is because he explained his vote on Endgame was for reasons other than previously stated.

This doesn't exactly help your case. Because AoG didn't explain that this was his case, or change his mind, he simply repeated what was in the actual original post you targeted:

I feel like he's scum or an sk trying too hard to act townie

So either you are literally terrible at reading comprehension, or you were directly twisting his words initially to make him seem scum. Possibly both. In any case, begone with you.

Again, I had asked people what they thought about AoG and said why he was rubbing me the wrong way multiple times. You're acting like because I didn't make some grandiose case against him, that I must be scum. You've just proven through this massive post that you can quote someone a bunch of times, give your commentary, and try to spin it however you want it and it doesn't amount to diddly squat. Why waste all that time making a long post when you can get your point across in a few sentences?

Hey I got a vote out of it from Hotshot. That's not diddly squat!

As for why I wasted my time... good question. I was really bored this morning maybe. I almost never spend that much time on a mafia post.

[Metsfanmax]

OK I slightly messed up the tags in that last post. And it was too long anyway. So here's the tl;dr version expressed as a progression of posts:

I feel like Endgame is scummy. He's pushing so hard to try to get out of the joke vote stage when he's the only one that sees any danger. I feel like he's scum or an sk trying too hard to act townie

His "case" was that Endgame wanted to get serious, which I find specious reasoning at best.

my case wasn't that Endgame wanted us to get serious. He was trying so hard to act town.

I understand AoG's explanation of his vote on Endgame, but I still haven't liked his play overall this game.