You keep saying this. You keep saying I think they’re all suspicious or scum. You’re wrong. I’m only suspicious of you, OAOW, Guiri, and Drain Bead. I have not an ounce of suspicion for anyone else in this game, right now (other than the usual “who knows who is scum or not?” suspicion that goes along with being Town).
You four are the only people I’d bet to be scum. At least one of you, maybe more.
Nobody else.
Starting to sweat, are you? 
I just want to quote this again since it’s brilliant. It’s what I’ve been trying to say the last four posts or so, only far better put.
Scum would obviously know my 180 degree turn on NAF wouldn’t be scum oriented. So they’d most likely figure it came from something else (me finding out some kind of info that made me change my mind–I.E. an investigator of some sort).
So those who asked me questions that appeared to be “What info did you get that NAF is telling the truth?” are more so on my radar than others.
Guiri asked this almost verbatim in post 1220.
Quote: “Apart from his claim, do you have any reason to believe he no longer has the book?”
TO ME, this reads like a very subtle way to ask if I was given any info or if anything happened, overNight, to make me change my mind.
To be more specific, it’s something I can see scum asking if they THOUGHT I was an investigator and wanted to gauge my answer/reaction to more or less prove or disprove their guess.
For some reason, Telcontar doesn’t think this is, IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, fishing…which I think is being deliberatally obtuse. It certainly could be fishing. And saying it’s not is being, at best, delusional.
Not to disagree - but to add:
Assuming for a minute that the book was not stolen by Scum. Then I’d expect it would make sense for them as well to believe Idle was the one stealing it. And trying to push him into saying something about it.
And assuming the book was stolen by Scum. I guess the same could be said for Townies trying to figure out if Idle stole it…
To be honest, I do run into a bit of NAF’s “scum don’t need to fish” business here. Because they don’t. If they bother to think about it the right conclusion to draw is obvious. I think context means a lot, and I’m not sure you can distinguish a curious, “hasn’t quite thought it through yet” scum from a suspicious townie very reliably. I DO think a townie might tend to be a bit more aggressive about the question and a scum a bit more diffident (which Guiri is), but I wouldn’t want to draw a conclusion on just that. It’s enough for me to want to review his posts, though.
Also, I think the best scum-hunting is probably among the people who are questioning you but not voting for you, Idle. (Yes, I know I fall into that category myself. Not sure where OAOW does.) There are conflicting motives here. You were selling BS, no question. So, yay, opportunistic vote! But you’re also probably an investigator – if you’re forced to claim, you might be protected. If there’s just a bit of suspicion on you, on the other hand, they can all but guarantee a clear shot tonight, with clean hands on their part – they might push it, but not too hard, you know?
I need to do a review.
Yeah, no one has heard of it before expect for those familiar with Evil Dead which had the exact same role (burned a scum and died Night One). It’s even referenced in the PM Idle posted.
And as mentioned the Godfather wasn’t a Deadite in that game.
@ Idle, you stated as a fact that NAF no longer had the book. I specifically bolded that section of you post when I quoted it as the only way you could have been sure of that fact, after all your suspicions of NAF previously, was that you either had taken the book or knew that NAF no longer had the book because one of your fellow scum had taken it. My initial question was about this statement and your apparent confidence. You accused me of fishing in this post when in fact I was poking you.
<disembodied voice>
*Hi, Idle Thoughts * 
</disembodied voice>
Was in response to TexCat here, as a possible reason why no one has come forward as a witness to the alleged theft.
That was just a little too snide and not content-rich enough for my tastes
:eek:
Why am I suddenly thinking about Idle dancing around singing “I Touch Myself”?
I apologize. Since it was haunting my psyche, I wanted to infect the rest of you.
@ Cookies – yay me. Another post I missed.
I agree with this. What’s the big deal about being investigated?
If you aren’t a deadite, then you’ll come back clean. (Unless Idle lies, in which case we’ll lynch him soon enough)
[quote=Suburban Plankton;13025276
I just went back and reviewed all of your posts to see if there was a bunch of suspicious behavior that I missed on first read. I didn’t find a whole lot. there were a couple posts that might have been seen as fishing, but not anything that would have pegged you as likely Scum to me. In my opinion, your reaction to Idle’s FOS is far more suspicious than anything you’re done previously in the game.[/quote]
Fishing is not a Scum tell?
Fishing is a Scum tell?
You don’t understand the difference between totally non game related fluff, and subtly pushing suspicion without actually committing to calling the person suspicious?
That explains a lot actually.
<fixed coding in quote above>
Fishing is not necessarily a Scum tell. I saw a couple of posts that one might interpret as ‘fishing’ (Idle certainly did). I personally didn’t see anything overly Scummy in them at the time.
maybe if you provided an example.
I think that’s a valid point.
I think we do need to look at the why in fishing and not just that someone is fishing.
For while it often can be something a Scum might want to do (as Idle points out) it’s also something a confused and lonely Town player might want to do in order to understand (as Normal pointed out, I believe).
That said, it’s a perfectly reasonably situation on which to base an investigation
I’m also inclined to believe Idle’s claim. I read all of the contorting about his change of heart, but never found it to be a compelling case and didn’t feel inclined to wade in and pick a side on that particular issue. As hindsight is 20/20, hopefully there are some clues in the interactions with him.
Peeker, your stubbornness is misplaced if you’re town, and I just can’t understand why you needed so many people to point out that a Vanilla PM had already been posted in the game before you would even acknowledge it. And you still haven’t acknowledged the other issue that has been repeatedly been called out, that the scum may only have a limited number of fake claims and would be wanting to guard them closely.
Whatever principles you are trying to play by, they don’t look very Townish from out here.
I’d say that ‘fishing’ is more suspicious than ‘not fishing’, in the sense that it’s something, which in most cases (but not all) is more suspicious than nothing. But as has been pointed out, a Townie often has at least as much reason to fish as a Scum, because they generally have even less information. It should certainly be a factor in investigations, just not the only one.
So now all we need to do is all agree on a strict definition for ‘fishing’
Three now, if you count story’s sample PM.