Idle, it was extremely helpful because up to that point, I hadn’t even considered Scuba_Ben. It opened up a whole new line of questions and logic for me. And it is hard work to do a full summary. I just did **Zeriel ** and it took me all damn day. I think it’s harder to do one on someone else than it is on yourself. I don’t mind giving kudos where I think kudos are due. I enjoy getting them myself from time to time. There wasn’t anything false about it.
Well, then, like I said, it must have just been mean to read/take things wrong…and while I’m not going to totally dismiss it or erase it from my mind (I think that’s kind of impossible in this game :p), I do take both of your explanations with ease and they work well enough for me. Which leads me to remark now that I’ve never heard that phrase before, but it certainly gave me a good laugh.
Please note, the above “mean” is supposed to just be an em and e–“me”. I have to stop posting with my eyes closed.
This wasn’t here when I just made my last post (and follow-up correction).
I understand what you’re saying but it just read (and still does some, I’m not going to deny it) off for some reason to me…mostly on your part. Although that very well could be because I already have suspicions of you (boy, doesn’t history repeat itself?) and am looking closer at your posts, in particular.
But I hear what you’re saying (or see, rather) and I agree that it could go the other way too. At this point I’ll take your explanation at face value.
About 43 Hours left in the Day. There is a total of 13 out of 25 votes cast.
** MadTheSwine ** (2) - Hal Briston, Kyrie Eleison
** Pleonast ** (2) - FlyingCowOfDoom, Idle Thoughts
** Scuba_Ben ** (2) - Fretful Porpentine, Queuing
** Zeriel ** (2) - NAF1138, Hockey Monkey
** Captain Klutz ** (1) - SnakesCatLady
** fluiddruid ** (1) - Captain Klutz
** Hockey Monkey ** (1) - fluiddruid
** Malacandra ** (1) - Pleonast
** Queuing ** (1) - Scuba_Ben
Please welcome zuma [Ver. 2] back into the game; he will be taking the place of MonkeyMensch who has not repsonded to any of my prodding over the last week or so. An updated player list will follow presently.
Alive
2 USCDiver
3 Idle Thoughts
5 Hockey Monkey
7 NAF1138
8 sachertorte
9 SnakesCatLady
10 Malacandra
12 Kyrie Eleison
13 Hal Briston
14 Pleonast
16 Fretful Porpentine
17 Nava
18 Pasta
19 FlyingCowOfDoom
20 Scuba_Ben
21 Queuing
22 Zeriel
23 zuma [Ver. 2]
24 ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
25 DiggitCamara [Ver. 2]
26 HazelNutCoffee
27 MHaye
28 fluiddruid
29 MadTheSwine
30 Captain Klutz
Dead
11 Mtgman - Non-Believer - Day One
4 zuma [Ver. 1] - Citizen - Night One
1 Kat - Cultist - Day Two
6 storyteller0910 - Monk - Night Two
15 DiggitCamara [Ver. 1] - Crusader - Night Two
Substitutions
** Kyrie Eleison **(Repl. ** Clockwork Jackal **)
** Nava **(Repl. ** Captain Carrot **)
** Kat **(Repl. ** ArizonaTeach **)
** DiggitCamara [Ver. 2] **(Repl. ** Autolycus **)
** Zuma [Ver. 2] **(Repl. ** MonkeyMensch **)
Crap, have we really had 5 people sub out? Crazy man, I think that might be a new record too.
grumblegrumble…damn subsititutions…do you slackers have any idea what kind of hell this plays on my spreadsheet?? grumblegrumble…
Time is short, and internet access lacking, so I’m going to cut to the chase.
I’d like to order a vote for Hockey Monkey with a FOS on Hal, HazelNutCoffee, and Scuba Ben…and a side of fries. To go.
Justification in chronological order…
#319
It may not seem very compelling to lead off with this seemingly innocent post, but it keeps sticking out at me. If they’re scum, they wouldn’t have had a chance to speak in private until that Night, and this post just keeps striking me as scum discussing scum strategy in broad daylight.
Similar deal with #329.
#492
Casting suspicion on confirmed-town Diggit[ver1].
#498
Hazelnut makes what could be considered at least a small nudge towards an early role-claim being potentially pro-town.
#730
If my theory is correct, and Hockey and Hal are in cahoots, this would be how I might phrase a water-muddying post if I were Hal. The potential implication of Hazelnut and Scuba is much weaker, but since they are involved in conversation in these posts that are sticking out to me, I think they are at least worthy of notice. They could, however, be innocent townie decoys.
#884
Hockey’s “this bandwagon makes me uncomfortable, but I’m gonna jump on it anyway” dunk vote for the late, confirmed-town Mtgman.
#1215
I get a general scum vibe from this whole post, topped off by her calling me out due to a comment I made about a town-killing bandwagon that she was on, and I was not on. Just doesn’t sit well with me.
#1252
I’ve already echoed the observations of others, but I just wanted to point out yet another dead townie post that I largely agree with. This is one of storyteller’s.
#1405
I’ve previously stated my dislike of the logic used for this FOS list, see #1430
Aaaaand forgot the availability update. No internet at home until Monday at the earliest, so you will likely not hear from me until Monday morning, if I’m still alive.
Huh…FOS on me aside, that’s a very compelling argument you’ve put together there, Cookies. I had completely forgotten about the FOS I had leveled against Hockey Monkey in #730 until you pointed it out there.
You’re incorrect about she and I being in cahoots, but it all still fits anyway (perhaps even moreso from my perspective, knowing that I’m town). Hmmm…going to have to put some serious thought into a vote switch here…
Hmm. I wasn’t trying to nudge anyone. I was just saying that there could be circumstances where early role-claims could be helpful. I also finished off that post by saying that such discussion was premmature anyway.
I find it suspicious that you would find this scummy, since Diggit, a confirmed townie, was the first one to suggest that power-roles should out themselves after a few Days. I was responding to his idea. Why don’t you think his suggestion is scummy yet mine is? Is it simply because he’s been confirmed town? Shouldn’t that prove that the suggestion of an early role-claim being possibly pro-town isn’t necessarily a scum tell?
Hockey was calling Diggit out for the very same reason you are now calling me out. You cited her suspicions of Diggit as justification for your FOS. I am not sure what to make of this.
I’ve tried for the last 3 hours to access the board to respond to Cookies, and now it’s midnight and I have to go to bed. I’ll respond as soon as I can tomorrow when I get to work.
Cookie’s analysis crystallizes stuff a lot for me, especially since she cites posts and reveals things that I can then catch.
For example, Hockey Monkey in two consecutive lines in post 1215 both says to suspect one-off votes the most and that the bandwagon (of which he is a part) potentially hides scum. Following that, he’s basing all the substantiative parts of his Day 3 analysis (I continue to be irritated by the spurious reasoning on the vote/unvote patterns of AZTeach/Kat) on my supposedly bandwagon-starting vote after agreeing in 1215 that the one-offs are what’s highly suspicious to him.
vote Hockey Monkey
Just in case you didn’t get the memo, Hockey Monkey is female. 
Welcome again to both DiggitCamera (whom I forgot to welcome back earlier) and zuma.
Normally this is where I make one last post before I head off for the night and catch up a bit but not too much has happened since I last was here. I guess people are getting ready for their weekends.
But in any case, while I’m here I guess I’ll weigh in on the current topics/votes at hand.
While I’m suspicious of Hockey myself, I haven’t yet had much of any read on HazelNutCoffee at all. I don’t know if this is because she doesn’t have scum signs to show or if she just hides it very well. Hal has tripped my meter way back on Day One (mostly over the post where he thought the Apprentice should send a message somehow, in a post, that signaled the Oracle–something anyone might be able to notice) but it wasn’t really that strong at the time and has sense faded into nothingness. And I’ve already said my two cents on Scuba Ben. If you put a gun to my head (please don’t) I’d say that I didn’t feel that all four of them were scum…and I think the odds are also probably highly stacked in the non-favor of it, but it’s very possible one or even two of them are. Right now, to ME personally, I’m most suspicious (of those four that seem to be the current names pushed around) of Hockey with Scuba coming in second, but not anywhere near number one.
And both of them are far behind, in my mind, who I’ve seen the most shady characteristics/posts/behavior from, and who currently has my vote…then again, I have had more time looking at him and noticing things than the other two.
Just my two cents…and my goodnight. Hope you all have nice evenings. 
(colour removed)
If that was ArizonaTeach’s intent it backfired spectacularly…
Zeriel smudged me. AzTeach reacted (or overreacted) with a vote for Zeriel. On being challenged by others, AzTeach then withdrew his vote, which attracted lots of suspicion.
So AzTeach defended me and voted for Zeriel. You seem to regard this defence as scum defending scum. Remember that scum will defend town in order to gain that person’s trust, as has been pointed out several times in this game. Heck, scum will vote for scum in order to confuse the trail, so the quick vote/unvote for Zeriel can be used as evidence for Zeriel’s scumminess.
Also, note again my voting post #1264, where I decided that Malacandra was likely town and I didn’t want to vote for Kat, so I made a ‘throwaway’ vote. If I were scum trying to avoid voting for AzTeach/Kat I could have done so much more easily by simply voting for Malacandra. This would have been seen as entirely reasonable, since I had earlier stated I was suspicious of Malacandra and I did not remove that suspicion until I actually made my vote.
One thing I have learned in this game is that there is no predicting what scum will do. And defending youself by trying to throw suspicion on another player (in this case Zeriel) is a scummy move of itself. I admit to being tempted to change my vote to Hockey Monkey since I also find her suspicious, but for now I want to get all the attention I can on you.
Um, yeah…pretty weak. There are several new players to the game and there was some brief discussion about scum voting patterns, and all I did was tell people not to get caught up in thinking that scum are going to vote strictly by party lines. Something most of us know already. I can see your point, but no, that’s not what I was thinking.
I called **Diggit ** on something I found fault with. I misunderstood, he explained, and I dropped it. Weak again.
Hate to burst your bubble, but I am not in cahoots with anybody. I asked **Scuba ** what he meant…he said he didn’t say it…I quoted where he said it…he said he must have made a mistake or been thinking about the psychopath. **Hal ** thought I was trying to out the secret role, and I explained that I only wanted clarification because there were so many nuances to the rules and roles that confusion was easy. I was satisfied by **Scuba’s ** answer and **Hal ** said he was satisfied with mine. It was dropped. You seem to have already decided I am scum and are reaching for evidence in any discussion I’ve been involved in.
I’ve said before that’s where I thought my vote should go. Bold (read stupid) move for scum to place a vote like that, on a bandwagon, when they didn’t need to. I commented on the bandwagon because it sure did grow fast, and I still think that a couple of the people involved in it swung the vote from **AZTeach ** to Mtgman. (I’m currently voting for one of those people.) If I were scum, I would have stayed far far away from that one.
Probably doesn’t sit well because I was commenting about you. I found it odd that you would post with only a comment about how we likely won’t find any scum on the Mtgman bandwagon. You normally post with more than one thought. Why won’t we likely find scum there? But you think I’m scum and I’m on it. I think you may know full well that I’m not scum, and that post was just what I thought it was…an attempt at redirection from one or more of your mates.
I very much respect storyteller, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t wrong sometimes. As a monk, he knew that I am not a monk. But that’s all he knew.
You don’t like it ‘cause I FOS you. The logic is sound.
Yes, if by compelling you mean weak, then it’s very compelling. I already went back through the **Scuba ** thing.
Expected. But I stand by my voting analysis. The reasoning there is sound. **Pleonast ** is second on my list because of his involvement in the **Mtgman ** dunking. I have been sticking my neck out and calling people on what I think is odd behavior and I’m catching a lot of flak for it. I really went out on a limb with my vote for **Fretful ** on day two. I’m just town trying to do what I think is right, and unfortunately for a lot of townies it comes off as scummy.
It was not my intention to defend myself by throwing suspicion on Zeriel, I was pointing out that, of several interpretations, you have selected just one. I even prefaced my comment with a ‘heck’, to show that that was just an example of another interpretation. Incidentally, in my notes I have 'Leaning town" against Zeriel.
You say “One thing I have learned in this game is that there is no predicting what scum will do.” By that argument, you can take absolutely any comment or action and call it a scum tell. Take another look at my post 1264 and see if you can come up with a scenario which explains why scum would do that, rather than taking the easy out of simply voting Malacandra.