I think you are a) reading too much into ‘voting records’, and b) misstating the facts.
By my count, I was the 13th person to vote for Romanic out of 23. that’s not exactly a “late vote”. And you might note that it was the first post I had made that day. Romanic’s “there are 4 scum” post came in at 3:54 in the morning in my time zone. By the time I got to work, read through the thread, and posted, it was 8:31 AM, and 12 people had already voted. And if you look at the folks who voted ‘near me’, you see the following:
Telcontar (498) - Scum
Rysto (500) - Town
Astral (507) - Scum
Suburban (516) - ???
Oredigger (527) - Town
Hal (529) - ???
Peeker (531) - Scum
How exactly does that support my being Scum?
My vote on peeker, on the other hand, *was *late. That’s because I didn’t vote for him based on his ‘slip’ like many others did. I felt (and still feel) that his ‘slip’ was not based on PIS, so it was not worthy of a vote. I voted solely based on his lack of defense and refusal to post his PM. I addressed this earlier, so I’m not going to go over it again now.
And my lack of vote at the end of Day 1 was due to the fact that I was out of town with no access to the board for the last 60 hours or so of the Day. I mentioned that before the game even began, again when I confirmed receipt of my PM, and again before I left on my trip. Perhaps you missed all of those posts when you were doing your analysis.
As far as the fact that I never " placed more than one vote in a voting ‘phase’": I place votes when I think there is enough evidence that a person is Scum to warrant a vote. I don’t place votes to ‘pressure’ people, or to ‘send a message’, or for any of the other reasons that some people place votes. there’s nothing inherently wrong with the ‘vote early, vote often’ mentality, but it’s not the way I play the game.
which really wasn’t snide o a smudge as it contained no real game content. It was strictly a joke
which isn’t a joke at all and is game content
My post 1468 was comment on another game but was directly related to a comment made in-game about possible scum strategies
so, I didn’t see where I had subtly pused suspicion without actually committing to calling a person suspicious. (Unless you’re referring to the "maybe it was idle’ comment, which I clearly thought would be understood as a joke and not a smudge of peeker or anyone else.
I didn’t “make an issue” of it. I asked a question about it. Because I wanted to get more information. Because “more information” > “less information”.
I read the Dawn post, and it did not occur to me that Astral was the Tiny Demon. When I read Oy’s post suggesting he was, I went back and reread the Dawn post trying to figure out where he (Oy) got that idea from. After rereading, I could see where the connection might have been made, but it still wasn’t crystal clear to me. Then I posted asking if there was something that I missed, or if Oy was simply making an assumption.
I saw nothing suspicious at all in Oy’s post. Where did you get the idea that I did?
I think the advantage to have a full Day is that any town with Night actions would have time to think about how they want to proceed toNight. I don’t think I’m comfortable leaving **Telcontar **alive at the end of the Day, though. I don’t know if town needs to take the chance that either we don’t have a vig or for some reason, the vig kill doesn’t go through.
I think a good option would be to see how things progress and if discussion is totally stifled because everyone has voted and left, then maybe we can discuss ending the Day early.
Mid/late, then. The only thing that can really be looked at with a bandwagon like that is whether you were instrumental in starting it; you weren’t.
OK.
It doesn’t. It’s a data point that supports my overall impression of you as having been ubiquitous but non-aggressive.
In itself this is fine by me – I didn’t vote him at all, you’ll note. But neither does it support that you’ve had much in the way of honest suspicion, because you didn’t vote anyone else, in all that time. As well, there were a couple of posts in there that rang false at the time; I’ll find them and bring them forward eventually.
Indeed I did, my apologies on that one. You’ll note I never got the chance to actually do what I wanted to.
You’ll have to forgive me, then, because I’ve never seen you play as town. If you do do this as town, I have no way of knowing. And I don’t vote to pressure or send a message either, yet always find plenty of people to vote for, so that’s not exactly an excuse.
Not that you really need one, for this stuff. It’s not an exact science. I probably wouldn’t have brought it up at all, except that NAF did, and I was curious to find out how my top suspects checked out. Turns out my impression of “vaguely scummy” for you and Guiri is dealt no real blows by the voting record thus far.
Maybe it’s perceived tone that I was objecting to at the time? That comment, combined with the one liner about Idle (which I understand was a joke, but it all builds) combined with other posts like these
In particular that last one which you explained with this (bolding mine):
Built in my mind to a subtly case of smudgery against me. (Well not the first quote up there, but the others.)
It might not have been your intent, but look at it from my perspective. I was getting needled by someone who wasn’t actually coming out and voting for me or even directly accusing me of anything (for a fair bit of time).
It felt off. I mentioned it, in what I felt was a fairly glib way because I don’t think it means anything but at the time I was finding it exasperating. In retrospect, it was late and I was tired and probably shouldn’t have been all that exasperated.
Oy equates Asral/Trickster/scum with tiny demon.
Not having really read the write-up, you have no idea where he might have gotten this idea. I’m fine with this so far. I’m NOT fine with you now professing you found nothing suspicious there, because that’s obvious scum PIS if it’s not supported anywhere in public.
So now you go back and check the write-up, and it’s quite obvious: tiny demon talks about doing nasty things with its friends, winds up dead at the end; there’s a dead scum Trickster. I’m fine with this, too. So why even mention it? It IS crystal clear, once you’ve read it. What can you possibly expect Oy to add? It’s like you thought you had the germ of a PIS argument going there, then when you realized it wouldn’t fly, you still couldn’t quite shake it; and your response to Oy’s post is how that came out.
I find it very hard to believe your explanation here.
Mahaloth had a vote on Telcontar for a portion of Day 1, for mostly metagame reasons.
(I did correct Mahaloth’s broken quote of Ed in my quote, but with the changes to nested quoting, the quote that Ed is referring to doesn’t show up…I think)
OK, I can see how the “How convenient” comment might come off as snide.
My apologies for that. Though I do stand behind the concept that it would have been a convenient thing for a Scum to say while in possession of the book.
To get back to the present time though, this has made me think of something else.
Did the original Evil Dead, the original have an investigator besides the religious figure one (like Idle)?
Because your comments about possession of the book do lead me to believe that we must have one. Otherwise, why would a book make you appear Scummy when Idle’s investigation was impervious to being tricked?
Note: I am not fishing for an investigator nor asking one to claim.
That’s interesting. The idea that there was scum brainstorming going on makes me wonder who gave support to that argument.
I need to look more carefully later, but on a quick scan DB isn’t looking all that great to me. But there might be confirmation bias going on with that. Anyone else see opportunisitc cases being built against me? At the start of Day 2 would be a good time to look as well.
(Yeah, I am asking others to do work for me. It’s not ideal, but it’s what I got right now.)
Oy came to a conclusion that I hadn’t come to. I reread the write-up and didn’t see any concrete evidence to support his conclusion. So that left two possibilities:
There was no concrete evidence, and Oy was making an assumption
There was some concrete evidence, and I completely missed it.
Thus my question. If I had missed something, I wanted to know what it was. As I stated to Oy, I didn’t find his conclusion unreasonable; I wasn’t arguing with him or asking for justification. Only asking for additional evidence,* if it existed*, that I might have overlooked.
It may have been crystal clear to you that Astral was the Tiny Demon, but it wasn’t to me. I don’t know what to make of the zombie squirrel who is rapidly losing body parts, either.
I understand that as Town, we look for any behavior that seems “off”, that might allow us to unearth Scum. And as Scum, we look for any behavior that seems “off”, that might allow us to build an argument against Town. I’m not sure which you are, but it seems like you’re trying hard to build a case against me here, where there is none to build.
