I know I read them all, but I don’t remember any of them. I keep a notebook of every post that I think has something substantive to say, and none of your other posts made it in there. Is it your opinion that we need to exhaustively review someone’s entire posting history before we are permitted to comment on them?
Thanks. I didn’t like his “Exciting!” post either. I’m not sure if it was a scum tell or just his callous disregard for other townies, though.
Jimmy Chitwood is right, of course, about the important distinction between a wolf and a townie, even a crazy and obnoxious one. Fair point. I may soften my stance later in the Day, and I may find someone I’m more ready to call out for being a wolf, but for now I’m leaving my vote on Plumpudding.
I would just like to reiterate my fallback request – if you’re not going to vote for Plumpudding, at least join me in pushing him to the fringes of the discussion. Another Day dominated by the Plumpudding Show is not good for Town.
So in other words, I haven’t made any substantive posts and there aren’t very many of them and I’ve been lurking in a sinister fashion, but going back to read that small pool of non-substantive posts would be “exhaustive.” Got it.
I’ll help ya out.
In other words, four separate posts where I made a point of letting everyone know that I was still keeping up and giving time frames on when I’d be around. Hope that helps.
Just to circle back to this — I don’t agree with this reasoning nor this vote. As an attempt to cast suspicion, it feels forced. Not vouching 100% for Thing Fish, but I don’t find anything scummy in his voting or his rationale.
In agreement with others, I am not seeing Plums posting as scummy, just a confused townie who is not as incisive as he thinks he is. We could also probably do with just getting on with the game and not focus so much on what is not likable about his posting style.
Anyway
Thingfish - I agree it is just three words, but scum slips are rarely long. If it is a scum slip.
his statement of protecting Septimus really jumped out to me as smacking of too much knowledge and retroactively applying reasoning for his vote.
OK, point taken. Do you think it’s suspicious that those four non-game-related one-line posts in the course of a 12 page thread didn’t stick in my memory?
If I were going to re-read all of someone’s posts, it would be someone I thought was scummy. And if you will recall, this whole argument was started by your reaction to a post in which I said I had “relatively low suspicion” of you. You are just one in a long list of people who have made arguments I thought were poorly thought through, most of which I haven’t had the time to specifically respond to. In your case, your argument was directly related to the lynch of septimus, so I addressed it while analyzing said lynch. I’m now a bit more suspicious based on your goalpost-moving attack on me today, but honestly, I have spent far more time thinking about you this afternoon than I did all of Day One put together.
Sorry, I absolutely can’t agree on the first part with you. My first Mafia pitted me at the very end against 2 others (I had the deciding vote) and I really learned to appreciate that there is strength in numbers.
That’s why I didn’t snip the last part, in fact. If you ever believe you’re voting against Townfolk, take a step back and look at the whole thing objectively. Worst thing a Townie can do is annoy you (and believe you me, there are players whose style makes you wish they hadn’t signed up. Plumpudding is a feather-weight in that respect)
Wait, which is it? Did I say that on purpose as part of my diabolical scheme to make myself look townie, or did I accidentally say it, not realizing that it would reveal my perfect knowledge?
And why don’t you find the detailed explanation I provided in post 768 convincing, or at least worthy of a response?
This starts to look to me like an attempt to quickly undercut Thing Fish and his cogent, pro-Town wrap-up of Day 1, perhaps to stall it from gaining any traction.
:smack:
Wrong again. Only two of those were one-line posts. You still haven’t read them, have you? And one of them is the header to the substantive post that’s in your notes!
C’mon, man! At this point I’m just feeling disrespected. 
Alright, I promised another post on TexCat. After this I’ll stay shut for a while as I have people to meet and a dog to mourn. I may not be the most eloquent, or the easiest to follow, but I hope you atleast try.
Keep in mind, my case was for a DAY ONE vote, and for a day one vote this one is quite substantial. Having at worst nothing to go after day one, this is A LOT.
FOS on people with a good reason to vote Dante G ON DAY ONE.
This should be obvious. If you can’t see why this looks like an attempt at misdirection, read the quote over an over again.
This we’ve already hashed through. It’s probably me reading too much into nothing and I’ve apologized already.
None of these points were addressed. Still haven’t been addressed.
Never acknowlegded.
Never acknowlegded.
At this moment, I didn’t lean much any other way on her, and voted myself. I felt she had either slipped up bad, or just forgot something and I waited for her to answer.
I went back to her posts, and saw these again.
So clearly she is either lying, or misremembering her own posting history. Still no answer by the way.
A bullshit wagon-hop without any substantial reasoning behind it. If you still feel she has added anything to town’s benefit during this game, read her posts.
I got suspicious and I felt it was best to put some weight behind my finger.
This should be quite self evident.
This should also be self evident.
Weaseling, nitpicking and no defense other than “poor me”. Why I object to that should also be quite evident.
And she still isn’t.
The last sentence here is over the top, I agree, but the rest still stands.
Again I have to explain why her objection to the tie-breaker tactic is wrong.
And I even felt I had to explain myself.
Hint, hint, your statement is scummy TexCat, his is not. He actually explained himself in the very same post, you did not, and still haven’t…
As I point out here.
This was actually an honest question. If you feel mischaracterized, in a game where you’re basically guaranteed to be mischaracterized, why not just explain yourself instead of continuing to play victim. Unless you think that’s the only way for you to survive.
Pointed out the contradiction in her vote on me. I’ll quote this one again:
Playing the victim. Still not one point given an answer. I’m not convinced.
I lost Septimus. Her vote on the other hand, offers no insight other than her “supposedly” agreeing with Johnny Bravo. I don’t really believe that either. I think she knew Septimus was town.
Am I ambiguous with what I want? How about if she answers thoughtfully on ONE point of mine?
Answer below.
Answer below.
Am I not making myself clear?
And yet another baseless wote, I would guess to save her own hide.
So town, I ask you, how on earth has TexCat benefitted town? What has she contributed with that has lead to any good result at all? She was a GOOD DAY ONE vote. She could either be scum, or a very unhelpful, obstructing town. Now I’m afraid it’s too late, but there’s still a chance. I’m keeping my vote on TexCat for now, but please TexCat, if you are in fact town, explain yourself properly. Make a good defense. Back it up. Stop painting yourself as a victim and tell me and everyone else why we should trust you. We need to lynch the right candidates and if you are not, tell us why.
To the rest of town, if you can’t see what I’m talking about, take off your fucking blinders and read my post again until you do.
(I’ve skimmed through the thread, and if things continue the way things seem to be heading this is a lost game. Remember, Day one we could loose town, now we can’t.)
You seem to be taking “I think X is town” and calling it “I know X is town” and I don’t see a justifcation for that.
I did not know that. Doubt if I’ve ever come close. 
I agree with almost all of this. Wolves got lucky. Chronos was NK’d because he was town-read by most players. It’s unlikely that scum could have gotten him lynched.
I did have some small hope that scum might have thought that I was a power role, since that was my primary objection to the Biotop plan, that it exposed or might accidentally lynch a power role. They might have thought I was protecting myself from exposure or lynch. Alas.
Ouch! This post screams scum to me. Is this scum patting itself on the back? Crafty adversaries, relishing their victory, indeed. Especially when followed by this post.
A lot of words but really never says anything. Says more than once that he’s looking closely at something or someone?, but never says anything about it or them. And I have no idea why he thinks scum are so clever. Or who he thinks those clever scum are, other than saying he was suspicious of me because Chronos was.
Sangfroid, if you are town, we need more than promises that you are looking closely. We need results and analysis of those close looks.
On Plumpudding:
I originally thought that Plumpudding was misguided town stuck in a Tex tunnel and unable to see anything outside. Then when he persisted and got more vehement, I thought he must be scum protecting scum!Septimus whose wagon was building. That was obviously not the case.
I am back to the opinion that he is misguided townie, but have no idea how to get him out of the tunnel aside from my death.
I am still mystified by how he can be so certain (and wrong) that I am scum on so little evidence. I do have a niggling suspicion that he is scum and is going to use this tunnel to avoid voicing opinions on anyone or anything else in the game.
TL;DR I have no clue what’s up with Plum. :dubious:
Okay! This post I mostly agree with! I’m not sure it screams scum, but you’re right in it mostly saying nothing. **Septimus **an **Chronos ** were **HUGE **losses. To “bounce” back at this moment will require a big effort of those of us town.
I might be misguided. We don’t have the luxury of a few expendable vanilla’s anymore, so even though I’m keeping my vote for now, I feel I will have to be a lot more sure than I was last day to go through with it, especially if other suspects appear.
After pleading for others to post a lot, I myself will be posting only a little over the next few days as I am covering for my boss at work while she is on vacation. I will still be reading several times a day.
I was wondering if making a wild ass guess at who all the wolves are would be a helpful tactic. Bear with me a moment. While most any wild guess would most surely be wrong, there are some suspects who lead to others (Example: If Prof. Pepperwinkle then TexCat…) There are people we each believe are town. (Example: My example here is Bayard, who probably would not have gone to all the trouble to write that long post with spoiler if he was wolf, IMHO). Thete ate players who, if we suppose them not guilty
Then there are the people we don’t have a read on.
The puzzle of this game is really determining five wolves, all of whom need to be exposed to win.
Sorry, meant to hit “preview” and instead hit “post.” Sucks playing this game from a phone.
There are players, if we posit them not guilty, then it makes others less likely to be guilty (Example: If TexCat is not guilty, then **Prof. Pepperwinkle ** is not guilty).
I am not even sure if such a thing is worth doing this early in the game. Still, when I make a list of whom I think are surely town, and those whom I think are probably town, it leaves a number of players, many who must therefore be wolves. Looking at the whole problem may not result in anything worth posting, but it just might.