KILLING PUPPIES??? Why, you must be some kind of … monster …
First, I apologize for not posting. This is turning out to be a lot harder when you’re playing than It is watching from the peanut gallery. I agree that my reason for my initial vote was silly, but I felt it was important to get something out early rather than waiting. My thoughts on the first day vote are that we have about 25% chance of randomly guessing a wolf and the only way to improve those odds is to get a scum or two to make a mistake. There is only a couple of ways that someone can actually know someone else’s alignment on day one. The Wolves of course know what everybody is (unless there is a SK) and masons would know each other. I’m currently trying to chart who seems to be protecting who. I’m not really feeling great about my vote for Sario but it did create A bunch of controversy and I don’t plan on changing it. I will be traveling on Friday but will be following on my phone. I will try and post my chart tomorrow (after I figure out a good way to get it out of MSSQL and into a post.)
Ive been toying with making The Spreadsheet of Suspicious Snuggles as well. But man am I lazy about it. I look forward to yours.
I was planning on not posting until I get off work tonight and have time to respond to some of what others have said in the past real day. But I can’t let this go.
IRConfused, please take some time to at least look at why many of your co-players have found at least some non-“silly” reasons in THIS game to vote for a Scum candidate. Yes this game is hard, but so what? That doesn’t relieve any Town player of his/her obligation to try and find Scum. In fact it increases your responsibility to help the rest of us out by pulling your share of the load. Sario may be a wolf again this game. We do not know yet except by what he posts this game. Other games do not effect this one. Therefore your vote makes no sense and is indeed silly, but also unhelpful. You talk about percentages in your post and then continue to hang onto your non-serious vote for what happened in a previous game. Why?
We need you to vote thoughtfully. Because even if your vote is based on a very small factor at least we can learn something from it. Everyone else is putting themselves on the line. It’s tough and a bit scary, but that’s what you do in this game. Voting for Sario because of previous games makes me think you are not really trying to catch Scum in this game. Non-hunting is a major reason I am voting for Prof. Pepperwinkle right now. But at least he is sort of trying as of late. Why should I not switch my vote to you?
Sario, how’s that re-read going? It’s been two days, I don’t think our chatter is that perplexing.
Vote Sario.
Previously on Hooker’s Morning Review:
I’ve read Prof P’s Post 226, obviously. So we pick up here:
It makes no sense to vote or suspect Sario based on previous games as scum without additional evidence. So, does that evidence exist? I like Astral’s Posts 80 and 81 on the subject. In summary, there may be reasons (my hair trigger vote [later unvoted] for his hair trigger vote on Prof. P for bringing up a no-lynch), but being “fated to always being Scum” (IRConfused Post 55) is no better than a shot in the dark. Dead Cat later “defends Sario” post (IRConfused Post 60) by saying IRConfused’s actions are suspicious, which is largely greeted with reactions of “WTF, IR Confused?”
Back to things Sario has actually said. Post 120 expresses growing confidence in his vote on Prof. P because “there seems to be some momentum.” I think that’s not good reasoning and would like to see better reasoning than “everybody else is doing it,” and I get it in Post 150. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but thin evidence is to be expected on Day One. The post, for the record (“you” is Prof. P):
Sario gets some townie cred from me for post 156 for pointing out the lurker/Sario/scum connection that Prof P was referencing in his posts. (Basically, Sario has been both a lurker and scum in multiple games.) Townie cred for explaining why Prof P might throw the hollow accusation. (I think Prof P viewed this as more of a whimsical statement and knew it was exactly as hollow as it is. Sario seems to have taken it as such and built his case based on other things. Townie points for that too.)
Prof P actually mounts a large case against Sario in Post 226 and brings up valid points. I think he overstates the, but if I were in his position, I’d be trying to do something similar.
Where do I come down on Sario? A weak sum lean, but that will quickly be eroded by continued lurking (3rd lowest player post count at the time of my check – Suburban Plankton and IRConfused are lower.) Prof P, the leading poster, has 8 times more post, and I’d say the quality is better.
PCM wins the cheese post award (Post 76). It’s not a scum/town tell, but it also contains one of the earlier votes for Prof P based on the Prof P/Biotop/Toomba “unofficial mason” post. Given that PCM played with Prof P and Biotop in the game they were mason, I’m a little surprised PCM’s interpretation is that it’s serious. Still, it’s decent as Day One evidence goes. Astral agrees in Post 81. (Astral posted agreement before I voiced agreement.)
I agree with PCM’s Post 143 where he states that Prof P is mischaracterizing why he is voting for Prof P. It’s pretty clear that PCM’s vote is based on the “unofficial mason” post and not a lynch the loud vote.
Page 4 includes one post by PCM, and that’s about ending days early. No scum hunting, analysis, or other townie actions. He has no posts on page 5 as of this writing. This is not good, PCM.
In my head, the top three posters are, in order, Prof. P., Astral, and me. In reality, snfaulker is #3. Full credit where it’s due for creating a record and posting. It’s a mixture of fluff (fine in moderation, and it is), hunting, promises of follow-up, and the follow-up.
As discussed on pages 2/3, pointing out breadcrumbs is a debatable topic, so no points deducted, especially for a new player. Posts 111-115 are an odd little exchange with Astral showing responsiveness and explaining some actions, so that’s good. Post 164 gives townie vibes for admitting to being too cheese-centered but promising better posting now that there’s more information. The promise is followed up by an exchange with Prof P ending with Faulkner’s vote on Prof P. (I participate in some of the follow-up.) So here we have a promise of more action followed by more action. I disagree with the conclusion (a vote on Prof P), but I generally find the exchange to be justifiable from a town perspective.
Then an unovte from Prof P and change to Sario in Post 237 after Prof P’s massive “don’t lynch me” Post 226.
I have a town read on snfaulkner. I think Biotop is reading in too much.
Tomba is midway down the list of posters, so not one of the egregious lurkers. Post 40 proposes the idea of lynching the experienced players (naming Astral and Mahaloth). This idea is bad enough for me to immediately put a vote on him and for others (Texcat, Suburban, perhaps others) to denounce it. To his credit, Tomba drops it. The lynch-the-experienced concept should be revisited in mid to late game, with the loud also considered.
In Post 94, Tomba accuses Astral of seeding a case against him. I don’t read Astral’s posts that way since I agree that Tomba needed a sideling glance (and briefly had my vote on him for it). Astral further offered that bad ideas are sometimes just that: bad ideas and not scummy action. My interpretation if the post is that of a paranoid townie.
I have a moderate townie lean on WF Tomba. I think it’s a hangover from the last game where was the paranoid gun owner.
VOTE IRCONFUSED
There is significant discussion of IRConfused under my section on Sario.
IRConfused has six posts as of my check. First is the “PM received” check-in. Second is a vote on Sario for his scummy history in previous games. I think there’s justification for voting for Sario, but this isn’t it. This is a bad post. Post three is a post saying weekend posting will be limited – no scum hunting or analysis. Post four (Post 60) accuses Dead Cat of defending Sario. Post 67 (IRConfused’s fifth) smudges Prof P for arguing for lynch the lurker because it’s self-serving. I think lynch the lurker should be used either in the absence of evidence or in conjunction with evidence against the lurker. I think the general consensus is that it’s a valid and moderately effective, especially in the absence of better evidence. So I don’t like IRConfused’s post again.
We next see IRConfused in Post 242 (175 posts later!) apologizing for not posting and saying that the game is harder than expected. I’m sympathetic to the comment on the difficulty, but the rest of the post isn’t helpful. There’s a promise of posting a chart. This effort might be enough to undo my vote, but I talked myself into it.
I’ve said a fair amount on Prof. P so I’ll summarize. I think Prof P’s light-hearted comments have been taken far more literally than they were intended. This is the danger of being loud: you say things that can be used against you. I think there’s enough to cast a vote, but I think there are better candidates.
I want to address consistency with previous play as it pertains to Prof. P. He’s not behaving consistently with how he has in previous games. I think that’s because he’s in a position of suspicion that he hasn’t been in previous games, but I can’t be certain. I think he’s town.
My leading candidate is IRConfused and that’s where I’ll leave my vote for now. If voting Sario will save Prof P, I’m okay picking my number two candidate. Both have records thin on posts, but the few posts they’ve made give off whiffs of wolf.
Here’s a summary, with strikeout from Johnny’s most recent official summary (Post 212).
Prof Pepperwinkle - 5 votes: (Sario 38)(Precambrianmollusc 76)(Dead Cat 100)[del](snfaulkner 170)[/del](Biotop 211)(TexCat 218)
Sario - 4 votes: (IRConfused 55)(Prof. Pepperwinkle 191)(sfaulkner 237)(Astral Rejection 245)
IRConfused - 2 vote: (Octarine 160)(HookerChemical 246)
snfaulkner - 1 vote: (Suburban Plankton 127)
Astral Rejection - 1 vote: (WF Tomba 94)
Mahaloth - 1 vote: (Dante G 129)
Biotop - 1 vote: [del](Texcat 50)[/del] (Mahaloth 124)
Dead Cat - 0 vote: [del](Hookerchemical 122)[/del]
Seems to be a bit of a bandwagon building on Sario. I’m torn: on the one hand, I think getting rid of a lurky player would be good. On the other hand, players I’m already suspicious of are joining this bandwagon. Maybe Astral and Prof. Pepperwinkle are both wolves.
**HookerChemical ninja’d me! I wasn’t going to post another count, but TexCat’s sadface tugged at the withered strings which hold my heart in place.
Official vote count, t-minus 23 hours to deadline.
Prof Pepperwinkle - 5 votes: (Sario 38)(Precambrianmollusc 76)(Dead Cat 100)(Biotop 211)(Texcat 218)
Sario - 4 votes: (IRConfused 55)(Prof. Pepperwinkle 191)(snfaulkner 237)(Astral Rejection 245)
IRConfused - 2 vote: (Octarine 160)(Hooker Chemical 246)
Biotop - 1 vote: (Mahaloth 124)
snfaulkner - 1 vote: (Suburban Plankton 127)
Astral Rejection - 1 vote: (WF Tomba 94)
Mahaloth - 1 vote: (Dante G 129)
**
If we approach this from the assumption that you aren’t suspicious of me, how would you rate the Sario lynch, and various people’s reasons for suspecting/voting for him? That would be more helpful than reflexively rejecting it because I happen to be on it.
Aaawww. Thank you! 
Paranoid, Riggs?
I think the suspicion is fair. I concede Astral can play a good scum (this is a compliment, not an accusation), but I don’t buy the arguments against Prof P.
I think there are three positions to take: vote for one of the leading candidates (Prof P, Sario - I don’t think either vote would be unreasonable), try and get enough votes on a candidate you think is better (Vote IRConfused. For a better lynch. IRConfused Day One - this ad was paid for by HookerChemical), or concede a throw away.
If you’re hoping for option 2 with Astral, the consensus seems to be that the case is thin. If you’re confident in it, let’s hear more. If you’re going with option three, relax and stand your convection but don’t expect us to come over.
I agree with this. Thanks, Johnny Bravo. The counts are appreciated. Sorry to steal thunder.
If I weren’t suspicious of you, I would probably be voting for him too, because I do believe that lynch-the-lurker is a decent strategy.
I kind of wish I hadn’t nailed my colours to the mast quite so firmly, so early (rookie error I guess), because I’m seeing some good reasons for voting for Sario and IRConfused (and I was already leaning scum towards them both). But if I change my vote now and am wrong, that will look bad. On the other hand, if I change my vote and it’s right, that would be better (for the game I mean, in both cases).
On balance, I still feel like I have a strong read on Prof P, but I’ll try to review again tomorrow to see who else has voted for him and whether they may have ulterior motives. At the moment the only two current voters for Prof P towards whom I have a scum lean are Sario and PCM.
I also think it’s unlikely Sario and IRConfused are both scum, since the latter voted for the former early in the day, which would be an odd scum-on-scum move I think (unless they plan to unvote at some point, I suppose).
If I were Sario, I would be trying to post more, the fact he hasn’t does seem rather suspicious.
You absolutely didn’t. Nothing to apologize for. I’m of the opinion that the less the mod is seen, the better, which is why I initially hadn’t planned to do another update at all. 
Regarding other people’s reasons for voting for him: Eh. It’s all rather thin suspicion, as is always the case on Day 1.
Good. If I die, go get Sario.
We should be careful not to allow the Wolves to engineer a tie.
Well, there are six votes for people besides myself and Sario. Yours is one. If you use it wisely, there won’t be a tie. (Paid for by the Don’t Lynch Prof. P. - He’s Our Friend Committee)