I’ve got to agree. I felt all along that the bandwagon against peeker built up steam awfully fast, and was based on pretty thin reasoning, but I can’t understand his reluctance here. If peeker is vanilla Town, as he has claimed, then I can’t imagine how revealing his PM is going to help Scum, as he said a while back.
peeker, come out with it. Otherwise, I can’t see any other conclusion than you’re lying about something, or perhaps everything.
[on soapbox]
That’s the second time I’ve seen someone accuse the bandwagon of “building up fast.” Without names or specifics, it struck me both times as a general smudge on everyone voting for Peeker. And general smudges make me suspicious. If you feel the bandwagon here has built up fast, who exactly are you finding suspicious?
USCDiver? It was his case, so I’d expect him to vote for Peeker.
NAF? He had already placed a vote on Peeker earlier, so voting again isn’t much of a stretch.
Me? I was hoping Omi would chime in, and Peeker’s case had an oddity that caught my attention, so I was happy to move my vote over. Peeker’s waffling on who or what he misread seems most scummy to me.
Ed? He chimed in, did some research, added to the case, and then voted.
Mahaloth, who seems to have based his vote off of Peeker’s (non)defense?
Drain Bead, who believes both NAF and Peeker are scum compatriots?
Cookies, who also seems to be curious about Peeker’s relative silence at that point?
Rysto, because Peeker lied to town?
Idle, who was swayed by the case?
Wanderers, who saw desperate back-pedaling in Peeker’s defenses?
Guiri, with several huge additions to the case against Peeker?
Lilflower, who is convinced it’s an actual slip?
(If I’ve misrepresented anyone’s reasons for voting for Peeker, forgive me.)
There’s plenty of very good information in that list. Anyone here could analyze when someone voted, or how. Their wording, their timing, their reasoning. The interaction between voters, the counter-arguments, and the defenses. There’s almost certainly opportunistic scum hiding in that list. It’s totally fair to believe that the bandwagon has happened fast. But it does a disservice to the town as a whole to throw out general smudges on everyone who voted for Peeker, or to dismiss the case as “pretty thin” without a shred of corroborating evidence or a case against anybody in particular. Whether Peeker is town or scum, he did waffle on who he misread. He won’t reveal his role PM. He did allude, whether mistakenly or not, to information he shouldn’t have. Those are facts, and there’s nothing “thin” about them.
Too long, didn’t read version: I’d rather see specific cases built against players, rather than general smudges. Thanks for your time. 
[off soapbox]
Actually, my vote was because **peeker **hadn’t defended himself up that point.
Most recently, F11 on GB. I wasn’t scum but I recall **Ed **saying he used similar reasoning when deciding who to Night kill (sorry, Ed, if I’m putting words in your mouth but that’s what I recall).
Do you mean your reasoning for why you were a target? I don’t see a response by Drain Bead. I see one from **brewha ** (post 1297) (who says you might be lying but I don’t see you jumping all over him/her). Then I see **Stanislaus ** (post 1299) saying you could have been targetted by a vig or PFK and yet, you don’t chastise him for being non-sensical either. **Telecontar **mentions it in post 1302 but doesn’t say he agrees or not, just that we should spend some time trying to figure out scum motivations for kills.
Peek…just post your PM already.
In other news, Omi has made a brief appearance floating the idea of a sub, but Hal has wandered off. Last post was from 4 days ago.
Well, my vote was based on the same case as anyone else, but I wanted to give peek a chance to explain. Since he has not done that and has not shown his role PM to us, that seals the deal.
If Peek dies and is Vanilla Town(“niller” as he says apparently), it will be rather annoying. I hope this isn’t some point he’s trying to make about how a vanilla can hide their pm and still turn out to be vanilla.
I can’t think of any solid reason not to post it.
I believe I’m one of those people you are talking about. I don’t have any cases to make against any players in that list, which is why I didn’t make any. I said all along that I wasn’t as convinced about peeker’s guilt than many others seem to be; in fact, the more I thought about it, the less likely it seemed to me that this was anything more than an honest mistake on peeker’s part.
It did seem odd to me that 18 hours passed between Mrs. McGinty’s first mention of the issue and USCDiver’s post and vote, and then there were 7 more votes in less than 2 hours. But as I mentioned in post 1387, I didn’t see any obvious attempts to deflect the issue to begin with. And the votes came so fast and furious after USCDiver’s post that it’s hard to pick out any as being particularly suspicious.
With 12 people voting for peeker, I’m pretty certain that some of them are Scum, and I hope to god that some of them aren’t (or we’re all in *big *trouble). But I’m not seeing anything jumping out at me in the voting record right now. If peeker winds up getting lynched, then a reread after his alignment is revealed will hopefully reveal something that isn’t apparent now.
As far as describing the evidence as “pretty thin”, I admit that might have been a bit overstating my point (or is it understating the evidence?) My point was that I didn’t think the issue was nearly as suspicious as many others do, as I had pointed out previously. That being said, I find peeker’s relative lack of defense, his general silence, and his refusal to post his vanilla PM to be much more suspicious that I saw his posts last Night.
Actually, kind of the opposite.
We killed zuma on Night 1 thinking that people might think it was the Scum trying to frame me.
Yup.
As for the other responders, I can’t lay claim to any in-depth reading of the past few days yet, but my issue with lilflower is not and never was her suspicion that I might be lying; it’s her attack on the logic of my conclusions that triggered my response, because it’s trying too damn hard to find alternate explanations that don’t involve Telcontar and the others. (And her using that overstretched case as implied evidence that I am lying, as evidenced by her characterization of it all as simply a baseless smudge.)
If all Brewha said is that he considers I might not be telling the truth, that’s not a problem. Stanislaus is not a problem, because his mention of vig or PFK includes something that I do consider a possibility even if I haven’t mentioned it (PFK); and he didn’t include the real stretch that lilflower did, the attack-as-frame thing.* Nor did he try to characterize my whole post as a baseless “smudge”.
Drain Bead, btw, said something along the lines of “I can’t immediately see why she would lie about this, so this might be reasonable.” And maybe I should be more skeptical of that response, come to think of it.
Idle, I know that you are tired of discussing this, but my vote remains on NAF because if he still had the book, he’d still be hanging onto it. I don’t see how his suspicious behavior changed. Storyteller told us
It’s odd that no one has come forward with an observation of seeing the book taken. (Unless peeker would like to change his story once again?) I remain unconvinced that NAF does not still have the book. He can’t tell us how it was taken or by whom, just that he no longer has it?
In my experience no role is played with any amount of consistency to make assumptions like how likely or unlikely one is as a player to be targeted by that role, let alone carrying that assumption from game to game.
I don’t have a bone to pick with anything else in your post, Normal. I’m just surprised to hear that you think about it that way it.
Outing yourself as being able to see things at night puts a pretty big target on your back.
I would love for you to explain the logic of my actions to the group, because I am having trouble following why I would go dancing around publicly crowing about having the book and wanting to keep the book and making a big public show about it…and then pretending to no longer have it.
I want to know what you think I am up to with that, because it is beyond me.
Huh? This all seems pretty obvious to me. I think a scum would go after the book, and would want to hang onto the book. You got the book during the day, so we would know that you had it. Why wouldn’t you try to make the most of it, trying to make yourself look town with it? You tried to make a case that it would be good for town for you to hang onto the book, but were starting to get some heat over it and so either pretended to not have to book, or gave the book to a scum buddy.
Eh, that’s not exactly what I was trying to get across (it was more of a “taking what she said at face value, which I currently have no reason not to do…”), but close enough, I guess. But whatever. Trying to speculate who attacked you and why is near-pointless right now. Honestly, until you came out, my best guess involved Chip dying protecting Oy!, or HE was vigged. I have no idea what both Chip and whatever killer we have out there saw that made you both worth protecting and worth killing.
Barring roleblocks or more successful protection, we had two kill attempts last Night. I can’t see any reason for one of them to have been a Town-aligned Vig (unless we had a compulsory Vig taking out Chip, which you are claiming to not be the case, so there goes that idea), so my guess is that at least the two kill attempts last Night came from anti-Town forces. But down the path of trying to speculate about reasons lies madness. Until you learn who was trying to kill you, trying to figure out the why is…well, not a waste of time…maybe an exercise in futility?
What I can tell you is that as Scum in the early game, I have never once used a Town player’s votes as motivation to kill them. In late game that might be a factor (and usually at that point, the “framing” thing comes into play just as much as the kill-those-who-made-cases-against-us does), but in early game as Scum, you’re using your NK to actively try to knock out power roles. Maybe something you said caused both Chip and a killer to conclude that you’re a power role?
and maybe cast a "shroud of darnkess’ to hide who has the book?
So, peeker. I am gathering that you do not want to post your PM for some reason. I can see no pro-Town reason for you to do that. If you are unwilling to post your PM, can you at least state your reasoning for not doing so?
Uh, I think he said he doesn’t want to give the scum a sample one to use for a fake claim.
Or did I imagine him saying this?
Seeing as the Scum already have a sample one for a fake claim, that’s silly.
Right, so I have no idea what he said then. Peek, what is your point in not posting your PM?
