Mini 942: Gonzo Mafia - Game Over!

[Percy]

Vote: flinter

She probably didn't even read her role PM!

[Percy]

And I'm happy you are here!

Thank you! I should also say hi to all the people I've played with before, because you are Good People (But Maybe Scum).

@hohum

: Do you think xRx is the only person "looking for someone to lash out at"?

[Percy]

I've noted the fact that you [Vi] would sooner play to maintain your status than to catch scum.

Are you talking just about this game, or about other games as well?

xRx's vote/attack on Zachrulez looks terrible. I have a personal dislike for people who misrepresent and abuse meta arguments, especially when you contrive one to create a case that your target has already partially answered (the Locke/zach interaction from just before).

I checked out zach's link, and it looks like 5 votes in 148 posts before being mislynched. Importantly, zach replaced in after the RVS. xRx (1) backs off immediately, and (2) without acknowledging the fact that zach replaced in after the RVS. If that game is his only game with zach, then he has no precedent to work with whatsoever as to his behaviour in the RVS.

I find xreck to be inproductive. Voting for votehopping is not so great, asking for games and then saying the person clearly is concious about his scumplay, is almost setting someone up. But this doesn't have to be done by scum, and I think it is "bad" play.

Sure, it doesn't

have

to be done by scum, but do you think it's

more likely

to be done by scum? Why are you dismissing this as a scumtell altogether?

if you are scum, and someone makes a point against you that is quite ridiculous, what do you do:

A calmly explain why it is ridiculous.
B call that person a moron, etc.
C something else (please explain what you would do)

Depends on whether I'm scumhunting too (multiscum games), but I'd probably avoid explaining and letting the evidence speak for itself (with a link or some such). Overdefensiveness is a scumtell that has worked for me in the past, and I try to avoid it myself.

The thing with Reckoner is he made his first non-arbitrary vote with a no-good reason and even when corrected keeps trying to insinuate Zach's up to no good based on... nothing. Not great.

Strong agree, also lolz.

I don't want to put xRx at L-1 yet, but I understand that early bandwagons are designed to pile on the pressure, and xRx has reacted poorly. His "Unvote whoops well are you going to kill me because if not let's forget it ever happened" is another example of that.

[Percy]

I'm not happy with xRx, and I'm not that interested in giving him much latitude simply because he was bandwagonned first.

I don't like hohum's play so far. Sound and fury, signifying nothing, excused with belligerent "I'll pressure who I want!". I find it scummy. If he has played like this before as town, I'd appreciate a link.

I don't like ortolan's agreeing with hohum about your "post restriction", as much as I don't like hohum asking about it.

I'm reserving judgement about flinter. Depending on her next post, I'll probably switch to one of the above three.

[Percy]

Regarding post restrictions: I'm not convinced it's a post restriction. I think people who are jumping on Vi and

demanding

that she

explain herself

seem to be both (1) opportunistic and (2) paranoid.

Also, how would you have preferred I acted in response to hohum's post if you apparently found my reaction scummy?

I don't know why you concluded that it was a post restriction. Some reasoning and/or conclusions based on this stance of yours would have been nice.

Still, I re-read you in ISO, and I find myself with a townish read, simply because in most other cases you explain yourself well, and I think it speaks to townie motivations.

Percy: I would have voted if I thought that action made Reck more likely scum.

I understand that. What I'm asking is why you've dismissed the case on xRx, even though it's more than just "voting for votehopping", which in and of itself you seem to suggest is "not great" and potentially "setting someone up".

[Percy]

Also, I would like flinter to answer her own question and tell us who she suspects, if anyone. Last time I checked, she suspected nobody, and she still hasn't voted.

[Percy]

@hohum

:

I don't remember demanding an answer from Vi. I remember asking a simple question and your reaction to that is far more telling than her non-answer. Strawman much?

Well, that's certainly how I read this:

It's a fair question and if he is under a post restriction

we have the right to know about it.

(emphasis mine)
Also, she did answer:

This is not a post restriction (certainly not an objective one), and I don't think hohum asking about it is pro-Town when there are certainly better things he could be asking about.

My personal take on theme games is that the scum

usually

don't know a lot about how the game works, about the same amount as the town, but that they can use such knowledge more effectively if it's discussed openly. This may be inaccurate, but it's certainly how I design my games.
Even if this isn't true, but especially if it is, I prefer to keep the focus on reads, reasons and opinions than trying to prise information out of the setup. An early focus on setup in theme games is at the best anti-town, imo.
An important caveat is that focus on setup should occur, but it's best left until endgame. That way, inconsistencies emerge more naturally as the setup hasn't been continually discussed over the course of the game.
So yeah, I have a problem with it, and I guess that is "too bad". It's more along the lines of a playstyle criticism/theorycrafting right now, but I can see early signs of scumminess in approaches like hohum's.

@Vi

: I think it is the weakest of scumtells, but I'm not going to discount it.

As for kyle, his (1) weak agreement with xRx's vote, (2) weak attack of xRx's bandwagon and (3) no other substantive contributions is noted.

FoS: kyle99

.

[Percy]

Answers

@Vi

:
1. Demonstrating to hohum that you had answered the question and whether I believe you are two different things, so I don't see the inconsistency.
2. I think scum are more likely to be paranoid in a theme game, but I agree with your assessment, which is why I called it a weak scumtell.
3. I FoS. I do it in all my games. And I remember New Age Mafia very well.
4a. I don't believe flinter commented on the weak agreement with xRx's early vote, which develops the picture flinter was painting.
4b. Either way, I don't see why you're saying my behaviour is scummy. Even though flinter has brought up some analysis of kyle that I agree with, I was still happy with my vote.

Also, I like to devote a good hour to a post at least. I spent two hours last night on my moderation duties, and another on a game I'm in with an approaching deadline.

@hohum

:
I've said all I wanted to on the subject. Blaming me for this conversation

continuing

is also ridiculous. I've made my position clear.

@ekiM

:

I don't want to put xRx at L-1 yet, but I understand that early bandwagons are designed to pile on the pressure, and xRx has reacted poorly. His "Unvote whoops well are you going to kill me because if not let's forget it ever happened" is another example of that.

Why didn't you want to do that?

For me, L-1 = claimtime. I liked (and still like) much of the case against him, but I wanted the game to develop a little more so I could be sure of my read on xRx and get a better read on the other players.

Questions

@flinter

:

@the people saying I should search for points against people: if I do that, I fear I go the reckoner-way: trying very hard to find something, and as a result making cases on town just as easily as on scum.

I'm confused. What did you mean by this?
(My first thought is that you're suggesting zachrulez is town, but that's very bizarre and inconsistent)

@kyle99

: As has been pointed out, you have no idea of xRx's scum meta. I just spent thirty minutes reading xRx's most recent scum games, so I think I have a good handle on it. Could you articulate exactly what aspects of xRx's play "fit his town meta well"?

@xRECKONERx

: You have mentioned twice that you have a meta-town-read on Vi, but you've retracted that now. What made you think that her play was town-Vi?

[Percy]

Would you be happy with an xRx lynch today?

Yes.

I think flinter's attitude of "scumhunting leads to dead townies" and what may very well be as slip on her part regarding knowledge of zach's alignment is what is keeping my scumdar pinging like crazy, but I think xRx's fading into the background when the heat came off him is scummy as hell.

I just went to check on that post to find out what happened to the xRx wagon, and it disappeared quite quickly. He has

no votes

on him right now.

Unvote
Vote: xRECKONERx
HoS: flinter

(inb4 Vibaawww)

I like the lynches of both of these players.

Looking at the two wagons, I think DDD is the easiest to criticise for wagon-jumping. I've been very wrong in my reads of DDD before (as I'm sure he'll be happy to attest to), and I know he's a fan of the wagon, but it seems like he's phoning in his performance in this game so far.

@ortolan

: You unvoted and re-voted xRx in this post. Explain?
Also, why did you abandon the xRx wagon in favour of the flinter wagon?

@Mod: It appears as though there is an error in this votecount - ortolan was voting xRx.

[Percy]

@flinter

:
I already quoted it for you:

@the people saying I should search for points against people: if I do that, I fear I go the reckoner-way: trying very hard to find something, and as a result making cases on town just as easily as on scum.

I took "the reckoner-way" to mean that you thought he tried too hard to find something, and made a case

on town

through nitpicking.

Now if you said "through nitpicking, you can make bad cases", then that's closer to what you're trying to imply that you've been saying all along. But it's not what you said. You've said things like this:

the harder you are going to look for scummy people, the more likely you are going to find town who made a small mistake.

See, the thing is, no-one is going to get lynched over a "small mistake" - whilst that first mistake might attract votes, its their subsequent play after a wagon forms that really determines whether they're going to be the lynch or not, compounded with the reactions from other players etc., so I simply don't understand this attitude. I want to avoid criticising your playstyle (it might work for you), but I am concerned at the attitudes you've displayed towards xRx which you are excusing with it.

Also, your characterisation of my play as "going with the flow" is a ridiculous knee-jerk.

[Percy]

EBWOP: ...towards xRx

whom

you are excusing with

your playstyle

.

[Percy]

@flinter

: Do I support the notion that you should scumhunt "effectively" from the start of the game? Of course. But "effectiveness" is judged at the end of the day, not the start.

@DDD

: You are right. I think I've played two games with you, and I've found you scummy both times

@ortolan

: OK, that makes sense. Still would like an answer to my other question, but that can wait until tomorrow.

@Mod: Please disregard that last post, I didn't know Unvotes were necessary, apologies.

[Percy]

"MODDING GAMEZ LULZLULZLULZ" <-- srsly, how many games are you modding at once that it takes 2 hours to get through? If you're really this busy perhaps you should rethink taking on additional games.

*takes a deep breath, counts to 10, deletes the expletive-laden post he originally wrote*
I would appreciate it if you didn't make sweeping statements when you have no idea what you are talking about, and don't try and manage my time and my commitments, kthx. I'm making an effort to post in this game once per day, and some days I post more than once. I think my activity/content levels are pretty good, actually. Lurking has been a problem in this game (kyle99, xRx, ortolan to a lesser extent), but the fact that you accuse me of it is

ridiculous

.

It's one thing to clarify your position but it's a whole different thing to go on an offensive based on shit that you yourself are throwing on the fan.

If you look at the exchange, you'll find that I have been clarifying my position, rather than "going on an offensive".

See, it's your over-defensiveness is the problem, not my play. I get the feeling that all you've ever read of my posts are the things that deal with you, and I actually think that's your attitude towards most of the game.

Your over-reaction to ortolan's comments, as well as your laughable attempts (yes, you've done it twice now) to brush it off after ortolan called you and voted you on it is scummy as well. I didn't like the way you characterized xRx early on, either.

Finally, you accuse others in this game of lurking, but you've basically refused to participate in this game until I've responded to your satisfaction; for example, I have no idea what you think of flinter or kyle99, two players who have attracted suspicion from others.

Hey hohum. Let's go back to xRx; he had more support and I think he needs the pressure more.

I think it's interesting that when I comment on hohum's vote, I get blasted; yet when Vi does the same (interesting in itself; I don't know why Vi wants hohum as his own personal attack dog), his response is far more measured and considered:

I can get behind an xRec lynch, if for nothing more than the sheer volume of shitposting.

I'd rather wait for Percy to respond to my last post before I change my vote though, mostly because I have a major problem with anyone that stands over a fire with a can of gasoline in one hand and a cell phone ready to dial 911 in the other.

This interaction doesn't sit well with me.

Unvote, Vote: hohum

For:
1. Overdefensiveness (both wrt myself and ortolan)
2. Malicious misrepresentations of my play
3. Inconsistent interaction between different players and selective reading of the game
4. Overall active lurking and lack of content.

I think hohum needs just as much pressure as xRx right now, and I think he has a better chance of being scum.

---

However, still liking my xRx case; his play seems to have gone from "construct bad cases with poor justification", to "RUN AWAY!!", and is now devolved to dropping in and offering colour commentary without giving opinions, reasons or reads.

HoS: xRx

, willing to lynch.

My read on flinter is getting churned up in WIFOM the more I see; for example, I think the cry of "ad-hom" is poorly justified, as describing someone's

efforts

as weak and not genuine is not an attack on a person, but I don't think that speaks necessarily to her scumminess; I think her vote on zach is weak, which is mildly scummy, imo. I like my abridged version of the case against kyle99 a lot better than hers also. There is a squeaky voice that's telling me she's town, however, and I don't really know why - perhaps it's because

I've seen rhetoric like the defence on xRx before

from her, and whilst she was scum in that game, she forgot the fact that she was scum (as evidenced by her surprise at winning and her absence from the scum QT), so I think it's actually an example of her town play.
So, I'm not sure. I'm very confused about flinter. I will re-ISO this weekend and come to some sort of conclusion.

Still waiting on kyle to clarify his meta points, also.

[Percy]

At least have the decency to replace out if you don't want to play any more.

[Percy]

Percy: you have yet to point out how I'm misrepresenting your position, so until you do your vote reads like OMGUS.

1. I've pointed out two instances in the post above.
2. I'm not voting you because you're voting me. I made my reasoning quite clear.

Try reading my posts, rather than just seeing the vote and crying OMGUS.

Also, whilst ortolan's post count is less than yours, I've got a much clearer understanding of what he feels about the events in this game. I'm calling you out for selective reading because that's exactly what you're doing.

As for your vote reasons, I've already responded to most of them, and they're all really bad.

[Percy]

@Sotty7

:

He has a point about Ort's selective reading and I'd like Percy's input from that.

I assume you're referring to this:

Also percy likes to bitch about selective reading but he isn't calling you [ortolan] out for it for some reason, only me.

Now I see hohum calling ortolan out for lurking, but I don't see him making any arguments to back up the charge of selective reading. I personally don't see ortolan as ignoring a

part

of the game, just not posting very much. My specific charge against hohum was this:

Finally, you accuse others in this game of lurking, but you've basically refused to participate in this game until I've responded to your satisfaction; for example, I have no idea what you think of flinter or kyle99, two players who have attracted suspicion from others.

...and I already responded to hohum like this:

Also, whilst ortolan's post count is less than yours, I've got a much clearer understanding of what he feels about the events in this game. I'm calling you out for selective reading because that's exactly what you're doing.

In summary, I find your question bizarre, and I'd like you to give me your input on what you think hohum's point was, and why you thought what I had already said was insufficient.
(Also, you didn't answer ortolan's first question, which is essentially the same as mine, which is why I'm asking it again.)

---

Kyle has done zilch, all game.

Quoted for truthery.

---

I re-ISOed flinter, and the WIFOM I already mentioned continues to chew me up. I feel like she was getting a lot of heat, stuck to her guns and tried to explain her reads and remain consistent. Even though I disagreed with her, I was finding it difficult to attribute scummy motivations to her play as a whole, and I'd say the slot is leaning town for me, but the points I brought up in my last post are still valid. Jack's entrance hasn't changed that, and I think zach's reaction was interesting; he's next on my ISO list. I'd like for Jack to explain his Sotty read, though.

Also, I found Vi's reaction to Jack rather curious; in particular, I thought the hohum and unvoting points were both obvious and not very scummy, and it seems... inflated, somehow. I want to look at Vi a bit more closely.

So I haven't said much of anything too interesting about this interaction, but it's late and I'm just going to post what I've got. I'll do some more reading tomorrow on these people.

---

I don't listen very well at all when people abandon reason. It makes me want stick rusty objects in their eyes...

Dude,

calm the fuck down

. What is wrong with you? I know you've got the "I was speaking in hypotheticals" plausible deniability going on, but this is insane.

I still really like my hohum case. People are talking about the attention

I'm

getting, but I think hohum is being largely ignored, and I think that should change. xRx still feels like a good lynch, and I can't believe the way kyle99 has been coasting so far. I'd say it's far more likely to find scum amongst these three than in flinter/Jack.

[Percy]

I don't know how I feel about this "wanting to replace out = scum" argument, applied to either xRx or flinter/Jack.

However, I acknowledge that he's playing the devil's advocate here and pointing out hohum's hypocrisy (hohum tacitly implies that it is clear-cut as xRx=scum, flinter=town), and his other points against hohum are good; in particular, I like post 274.

Saying your vote is final means you're not interested in pressuring anyone else in the game. Add to that the fact that flinter replacing out

drew no comment from him at all

is further evidence of his selective reading and general scumminess.

hohum is scum.

[Percy]

I never implied flinter was town, percy. You're putting words in my mouth.

That's why I said you

tacitly

implied it.

Just the opposite is true, in fact.

1. You may have implied she was scum in this exchange, but it reads more like "go away, stop being annoying, let's lynch xRx" than "you are scum and this is why".
2. You're missing the point by making these vague allusions. Her replacing out wasn't worthy of notice, but xRx's threatening to replace out was good enough for you to lock on with your final vote.
3. This is really 1+2 - if you did actually think she was scum, why did you ignore her replacing out? Surely it would have made you

more

likely to notice such behaviour if your read was genuine.

I've only got one vote. If I could vote all 3 of them I would.

That there sure is some

actual

OMGUS. Please keep being really obvious, scum.

[Percy]

kyle lied/forgot about not playing with xRx as scum. Doubly so. However, kyle is clearly a player who lurks, says stupid things and has to be replaced in many games, as both town and scum.

I think replacing out is a shitty thing to do, but I'm not sold on it being a scumtell, especially in this instance. I also think the "scumtell" is a weak excuse to do less scumhunting D1 from both townies and scum alike. It feels like some players have decided to say "whatever, let's just lynch someone who's not me because I'm active and they're not", and then immediately become far more inactive.

I'm not interested in going after lurkers unless I don't have other leads this close to deadline. I think lurkerhunting is way too easy to do as scum, and it gives us less material to analyse later (both in opinion analysis and vote analysis). I think lurkers should be handled with prods and replacements as much as by the playerbase, and anyone who puts a lot of emphasis on the playerbase-side is either lazy or scum.

Of the lurkers, I think the case against xRx is the strongest. I'm still willing to lynch him. I will of course vote for a lurker if there's a threat of No Lynch, but I think my hohum case is pretty good, and most of my points are standing without response from hohum.

I'd like to hear from kyle's replacement rather than lynch him at this stage. I don't have a read on kyle beyond VI.

I think it's strange that Vi admonished the town thusly:

"Town Fragmented And Useless; Petition Signed For Fewer, Larger Bandwagons", end quote.

...yet votes for someone without any votes on them two days later, four days before deadline. Also, the admonishment comes just after I first posted my case on hohum, and I thought it smelt a little like a chainsaw behind "Pro-Town Advice". I've already noted the interaction between hohum and Vi, and this isn't making me feel any better.

FoS: Vi

[Percy]

@ortolan

: You seem to have discussed the flinter/Jack slot only in this post and this post. The key note seems to be this:

I also can't shake the feeling flinter is just coming up with a convoluted excuse to vote someone who she thinks is an easy target (and conveniently avoid more populous/viable bandwagons).

So why doesn't this apply to your kyle vote? Or your Jack vote?
Have there been no developments in your case on flinter since you voted? No comment on Jack's play?

[Percy]

@ortolan

: Firstly, the search tool is here.

It seems like your kyle vote was "suspicious person replaces out = scum", and I think this is a weak reason to vote someone. Turns out you agree, since you unvoted straight afterwards and put your vote on Jack. I think the reason for his FoS is clear, and I don't like players voting for someone because they don't explain their (negative) gut reads.

I liked this post of Vi's, and I agree with most of her reads, so I'm still very undecided about him.

However, I have a town gut read of DDD right now, even though I think he's an anti-town player.

Also,

I think it's entirely likely that flinter replaced out of here because she didn't like us/the game.

This is the read I get too. The best point raised against flinter has been this one by zach, but I'm far more inclined to follow ekiM's interpretation of these events than zach's.

@Sotty

:
First of all, I'm glad you've decided to step up, defend hohum and answer the case against him!

Secondly, you failed to respond to this rather lengthy reply I made, including a question I put to you:

@Sotty7

:

He has a point about Ort's selective reading and I'd like Percy's input from that.

I assume you're referring to this:

Also percy likes to bitch about selective reading but he isn't calling you [ortolan] out for it for some reason, only me.

Now I see hohum calling ortolan out for lurking, but I don't see him making any arguments to back up the charge of selective reading. I personally don't see ortolan as ignoring a

part

of the game, just not posting very much. My specific charge against hohum was this:

Finally, you accuse others in this game of lurking, but you've basically refused to participate in this game until I've responded to your satisfaction; for example, I have no idea what you think of flinter or kyle99, two players who have attracted suspicion from others.

...and I already responded to hohum like this:

Also, whilst ortolan's post count is less than yours, I've got a much clearer understanding of what he feels about the events in this game. I'm calling you out for selective reading because that's exactly what you're doing.

In summary, I find your question bizarre, and I'd like you to give me your input on what you think hohum's point was, and why you thought what I had already said was insufficient.
(Also, you didn't answer ortolan's first question, which is essentially the same as mine, which is why I'm asking it again.)

You essentially ignored my case against hohum at this point, and parroted a line hohum casually threw out while accusing me of hypocrisy (without defending himself, ironically). I think this line of argument is demonstrably false, as I've outlined.

Here I'll clarify each of the points I raised.
1.

Over

defensiveness - You note that defensiveness isn't a scumtell, but being overdefensive

is

a scumtell. I concede that this isn't one of my strongest points (in that it verges on playstyle criticism), but he not only lashes out at anyone who attacks him, he's also accused

every person who has ever voted for him of being scum

.
2. Misrepresentations - Firstly, it was his branding me a lurker, and implying I was lying about my modding commitments. That jab was a misrepresentation of my play so far; it felt like he saw my "sorry I'll be on tomorrow" post and did whatever he could to twist that into an attack on me; it's the kind of non-discriminatory knee-jerk case building that screams scum to me. Secondly, his characterization of the post restriction exchange as me "going on the offensive" was really the backbone of his case against me, even though I was posting only to clarify my position, and even stated that it was a very weak tell, if anything at all. This links back to 1.
3. Selective reading - Glad you think this was a good point, because it is.
In addition, I took the point originally brought up by Jack and developed it further in this post, including calling him out for OMGUS and further hypocrisy.
4. Active lurking - Again you accuse me of personal dislike, which is not the case. I'll answer this with another question: If xRx is lynched flips town, how will you feel about hohum's play today? I'm happy to concede that scum-xRx safely rules out hohum-scum-with-xRx, but looking at him in ISO and I think the active lurking label is apt. Also links back to 3 - if you think 3 is good, why not 4?
Finally, he hasn't posted since Saturday, and then only to defend himself (without actually answering any of the questions put to him), and there's less than 48 hours until deadline. He locked on his vote and hasn't come back.

But Percy's vote seemed a lot to do with his actual dislike of hohum and how he approached the game.

OK, those are two very different things; I'm not voting hohum because I "dislike" him, but I am voting him based on how he's approaching the game, because I think he's approaching this game

in a scummy fashion

. Why is that a bad thing?

I still have more reading to do, and I'll get a post in before deadline.

[Percy]

@Zach

: Do you want to lynch hohum because he's gone quiet, or do you think there's a case against him?

I'm feeling the need for more focus on ortolan tomorrow.

I'm annoyed that Sotty hasn't responded to a question that has been asked twice by me and once by ortolan, yet she's happy to dig up quotes to defend herself from zach and takes the time to defend hohum.

I have a neutral-leaing-town read on Zach. Lots of focus on flinter/Jack throughout the game, not much else, and I don't agree with his read on that slot, but what's there is townie-seeming.

Still think hohum is the best lynch.

[Percy]

Goddamn it, lost my entire post. FUCK YOU FIREFOX GODDAMN FUCK

I'm too tired and drunk to write it again. Here's the short version.

I think ortolan's replacing out was a dick move, but I'll be very suspicious of anyone calling his replacing out a scumtell.

However, I think his votes have been poorly reasoned for most of the game, and I see a lot of opportunism in his play. Willing to lynch.

Hope you get better soon hohum.

I recognise that there is tilt and tunnelling in my case against hohum, but I still think it's the best case I've seen today. Right now I can't make up my mind between hohum and ortolan and xRx.

Yep, xRx is still up there for me. He was scummy at the start of the day, got the heat taken off him after he threatened to replace out, and his contributions to today have been poor. If everyone is willing to split the difference and kill xRx, I'm still up for it.

Also,

Seriously, people who sign up for awesome games and replace out SUCK. If you're not enjoying yourself, at least try to learn something rather than ruining the game for the rest of us with your ragequitting. For the people who replace into games, you're awesome and I love you.

I will be online near deadline, and I'll make a more coherent post then and place my final vote (if vote-moving is required) with my reasons (if I change it) then.

[Percy]

I really don't see why hohum saying his vote is locked on and still having other suspects is a tell at all. He wants Reck lynched but he also suspects other people. The fact that people are pushing his wagon based on reasons like this is enough to convince me he's not a good lynch.

My position is that locking on a vote is anti-town, but his locking on with xRx is bizarre when you consider his lack of reaction to flinter replacing out. His selective reading is clear.

Also, he says I should have been accusing ortolan of selective reasoning, but I don't know why; that was the only defence he offered to this point.

Percy 428: "I'm too tired and drunk to make a post with content... but I'll be damned if I'm not too tired and drunk to make a neat graphic to go with my post"

I made the picture then lost my post, but why would you think that would cause the picture to be lost as well? lern2internetz

To add to ekiM's "why hohum is scum" post includes his reaction to my case, which I already dealt with in this post.

My three lynches at this time are hohum, ortolan and xRx. Glad for the deadline extension.

[Percy]

I'd like to get that impression from him rather than other players telling me that the case has no merit and defending him, if it's all the same to you, Vivey Vi

I'm going to re-read each of the lynch candidates in ISO, conclusions tomorrow or Friday.

[Percy]

Easter ate my free time. Will have something up before deadline.

[Percy]

Percy: flinter replacing out is nothing like Reckoner threatening to replace out. Did flinter 'go all emo'? As I understood it, hohum's point was that Reck was going into a sulk and giving up. I didn't see the same from flinter.

Again, someone defends hohum and answers the case against him in a favourable manner. Only after the lack of evidence to back up his read is presented to him by ekiM does he think to actually ask hohum.

I'm not saying flinter replacing out isn't scummy

Are you saying it is?

As for xRx's catchup post, I like most of the reads. For me, the won't lynch doesn't have Locke, but has DDD; the might lynch doesn't have hohum, but has Locke; the would lynch doesn't have DDD, but has hohum.

Wagon placement analysis is intruiging, but I get the feeling Vi dropped the analysis too early. Whilst it's true that more data will make the values more accurate, the scum now know how to look better (to Vi, at least) by changing their votestyle.

Seems most people are saying they are confused about how it works, but it should be pretty clear if you look at it long enough. I'm unconvinced as to its long-term efficacy, and as with all mathematical models most of the bathwater is thrown out with the baby, but votehopping a lot onto established wagons is scummy.

ortolan ISO:

The unvote of Reckoner looks suspicious as hell. He threatens to put his vote back on xRx later, votes kyle for "tactical replacement", and I can't for the life of me figure out what was going on in his head when he made this post. Then it was a "Vi is obvscum also a cheater why doesn't anyone listen to me" tantrum before replacing out.

The wagon-jumping gives the impression of scumhunting (he almost scores average on Vi's chart), but the reasons for voting always seem fairly minor or nonexistent, and there's never any explanations behind unvoting.

ortolan is a very, very healthy lynch. I am prepared to hammer also.

I'm still null on Locke after ISOing him. I find his false dichotomy of "Jack or hohum" in the post where he votes for Jack and his ongoing defence of hohum scummy, and I can see why scum would oppose a town lynch (unlike xRx, who gives him townpoints for it). However, nothing is a strong tell.

My ambivalence towards flinter throughout the game has been continued over into Jack. I think his posts have been slightly more townie than flinter's, but I'm still very undecided.

hohum still hasn't said anything. Vi, Sotty and Locke have all defended him, which I find particularly frustrating - I doubt they're all scum with him, but my scumread on hohum remains strong.

[Percy]

So it looks like deadline is in ~9.5 hours. I'll be back online in about 5 hours, and I'll drop the hammer then.

[Percy]

Hello everyone, I've had a busy Easter, but I'm catching up today. Expect me to drop my truth bombs in a few hours.

[Percy]

Reading through ortolan's play, I find it less likely that the flinter/Jack slot is scum. I'm not sold on it xRx or hohum.

Elaboration

-ortolan jumped on the xRx wagon late, so possibility of bussing is hard to discount; after I called him on his flinter vote, he said:

I didn't see this question first time round. I wasn't really conscious of the fact I was voting xReckonerx when I made that post, it was just I guess that I strongly reacted against what I saw as flinter's bullying/pushing a mislynch on kyle which I know scum is likely to do. I will say more recently that I explicitly feel reckoner is not as likely to be scum as I first thought...

After such a weak excuse and jumping onto flinter, xRx looks more scummy (not less), whilst flinter/Jack looks slightly more town.
-The vote on hohum looks a little contrived.
ort: "hohum I think you're legitimately scummy"
hohum: "oh yeah I dare you to vote me"
ort: "omgscum vote"
and I find this a complete nulltell on hohum.
-And then there's the weirdness from hohum asking me to accuse ortolan of selective reading. It makes a lot of sense as a bussing move, so again completely null.
-Later he votes kyle for weak reasons, and votes Jack when he gets called on it. Again, less likely flinter/Jack scum.

I also think that Vi's push against ortolan makes her more likely town.

I ISO'd Jahudo, and I was stunned to find I actually have a very, very strong town read on him. I really did try to see the scum in him, because he didn't like my hohum case and it would all make some sort of glorious Percy-was-right-all-along sense if he and hohum were scum. I even started writing something to that effect, but instead I re-read. I discovered that his reads feel natural and (mostly) well-reasoned, and the changes in his opinion feel genuine.

I also like his latest post a lot, and I'll hold back my read for ekiM until after he answers Jahudo's questions.

As for Locke, I've already mentioned his scummy attack on the hohum wagon, but now I realise it was when one of the big wagons was on scum, and the other (on Jack) was L-2. Mix in his lack of enthusiasm for the ortolan wagon and my read is fairly scummy.

FoS: Locke Lamora

.

So: Jack, Jahudo, Vi are town, probably DDD as well but a lack of posting/content today will erode that read.

xRx is still scummy for yesterday, but I'm going to wait for more from him before trying to solidify my read.

hohum is still my number one.

Vote: hohum

.

Two players I haven't looked at are Sotty7 and zach. They're next on my ISO list.

[Percy]

Firstly, I liked ekiM's post 562. I still have a town read on him. I'm going to re-ISO him with some more commentary soon.

I've said all I want to say about my case on hohum, and his latest vote on me further solidifies my read.

I didn't see this question first time round. I wasn't really conscious of the fact I was voting xReckonerx when I made that post, it was just I guess that I strongly reacted against what I saw as flinter's bullying/pushing a mislynch on kyle which I know scum is likely to do. I will say more recently that I explicitly feel reckoner is not as likely to be scum as I first thought...

After such a weak excuse and jumping onto flinter, xRx looks more scummy (not less), whilst flinter/Jack looks slightly more town.

Why does Jack look more town from this move?

He "forgot" his vote on xRx, and criticised flinter's attack on kyle. The vote on xRx seems very opportunistic, but whether it's simply opportunism or a bus is unclear. His jumping on flinter for "pushing a mislynch on kyle" makes me think it's unlikely flinter/Jack was scum with ortolan, though only slightly - I would think that a scumbuddy would be more likely to give a scumbuddy trying for a mislynch a bit of room to do so.

Locke's been replaced by Amished, who has come out all guns blazing at me in an attempt to distract the town from his predecessor's conduct. I will say a few things:

1. My vote on hohum had little to do with ortolan. Trying to tie my case in with ortolan is essentially the argument "hohum and ortolan were attacking each other, and I attacked hohum, and since ortolan was scum, I must be scum trying to protect my buddy". It takes a lot of oversimplification to get to this point, and the argument is without merit.
1a. For example, I think the interpretation that hohum and ortolan were bussing is equally valid (and in fact I've presented reasons as to why this may be the case in earlier posts), completely invalidating Amished's entire line of argument.

2. I was prodding ortolan at numerous points throughout the day for what I saw as sloppy reasoning. In particular, note this post of mine, where I call him out again on similar vote shenanigans to what he had done earlier. He had no votes at this time. It was for these reasons that I ended up voting ortolan.

3. I never declared a town read on ortolan, nor took steps to actively defend him, except from points raised by hohum that I thought were sloppy and scummy - unlike Locke.

4. I have admitted that I was tunnelled in on the hohum case at many points throughout the game, which I've been trying to rectify (but hohum isn't making it easy). I've tried to make my reasoning clear, and Amished's characterization of my reads being not genuine is something I can neither understand nor respond to.

5. It's exactly this kind of rhetoric:

Percy should be lynched as well. Pretty sure that will win the game. Who wants a lynch now?

...that makes me think this is an all-out attack in an effort to evade suspicion on Locke. Why he thinks there are only two scum in this game is bizarre, and even if he doesn't, it's certainly what he's implying.

Most of the above is pretty WIFOM (especially 2 and 3), but it's better in the WIFOM department than the case Amished has presented.

I haven't had a chance to do my other ISOs yet, will get to them soon.

[Percy]

EBWOP: I now better understand the quote in point 5. He isn't implying that he thinks there are only two scum, but that the scumteam is zach and myself. The point about the strong rhetoric stands.

[Percy]

I thought ortoscum+hoscum unlikely. I thought ortolan was scummy. I thought hohum was scummier.

Do you still consider ortoscum+hoscum unlikely?

I have some good vibes from zach. I've also liked Sotty's play recently; in particular, I like this post and the case against Locke therein. I also kinda agree here:

Jack votes after I again rally for an ort lynch and in my sarcastic way I pulled apart the viability of lynches of Locke, Jack, and myself to redirect people to the now vibrant ortolan wagon. Does an ortolan lynch happen without Vi's arguments? No. Does an ortolan lynch happen without my vote and agitation? Maybe, but in this reality of this game they were crucial and to pretend otherwise is a misrepresentation of this game's history.

That said, I'd like to hear DDD's take on Locke/Amished and hohum.

I'm swimming in townreads, and that's probably not a good thing. But I'm fine with the hohum and Locke wagons right now; I think they're both quite solid.

But I agree with you. Percy needs to be lynched

Today is a great day to lynch hohum.

[Percy]

Also, I love how I'm being attacked by Percy basically blindly from what I skimmed of his attack on me. Instead of waiting and seeing if I had any points to refute he just goes right into attack mode instead of knowing that he's innocent.

Wait, what? You're accusing me of blindly attacking you, even though you haven't read what I wrote?

The RVS vote just doesn't read right. There's not really a way to make the statement an exclamatory one, and it just seems like he's trying to overexaggerate to help give a reason to his vote by making it look scummy.

I had just finished a game with flinter, who was scum and hadn't read her role PM. Gamethread is

here

(I am part of the Gerty hydra).

For the questioning post, if that's not the fluffiest question I've ever seen I'll eat my pitchfork. There was absolutely no "lashing out" by anybody *but* xRx; so the question is absolutely pointless for being the 34th one in the game (18th that wasn't confirmations/rules). It's busy work that couldn't even help Percy help to determine how hohum felt about anything.

See, I remember putting a lot of thought into how to phrase that question. I saw the xRx wagon building steam, and hohum seemed very aggressive. I thought that labelling xRx's play the way hohum did may have been a scummy way to perpetuate the wagon, because I wasn't convinced that xRx was scum and hohum's phrasing appeared disingenuous. I phrased it pretty open-ended, though, in an attempt to get a better read on hohum rather than implying my gut read and possibly defending xRx (if he was scum to hohum town). The question was phrased to get a better read on the situation.

Going to re-read Jahudo.

[Percy]

For the question, wouldn't it be better just to ask for an opinion rather than "phras(ing) it pretty open-ended" that actually only left hohum one answer?

The question had more than one possible answer...?

Considering the wagon on hohum looks larger than it should be, Vi starting it fits right, xRx is.. well, xRx and I can see where he's coming from (hey, attacking somebody that was half-assed worked once, why not try it again?), and Jack doesn't seem like the most experienced person so would be likely to follow a Vi in this game.

Percy's vote is left in the open

there for that; with Jahudo sitting in the "not voting" category to see if there would be more support for any wagon and hop on that.

More reduction and spin, especially the bolded.

I pushed hard for a hohum lynch. I got a few things I considered to be weak tells, pushed harder, and got stronger tells. I was pretty sure it wasn't going to go to a wagon, but I wanted it to if it could.

I dispute the charge that I was a reluctant ortolan lyncher for any reason other than that I wanted hohum to be the lynch. Whilst Amished has taken some time gathering together quotes where I express a town opinion of ortolan, you'll find that my ISO has more criticism and probing than praise.

Describing me as "going after an easy target" when it comes to any of the three playerslots he mentioned (xRx, flinter, hohum) is flatly untrue. I didn't vote xRx until

after

the wagon had disappeared, I

never

voted flinter (and in fact spent most of the day saying how I couldn't make heads or tails of her), and to call hohum an "easy target" is ridiculous.

Amished has accused me of being overdefensive, but I don't think that's the case.

I think Locke is/was scum for:
1. Defending hohum
2. ...in a possible attempt to get the flinter lynch happening just when ortolan's wagon was building
3. His lack of enthusiasm for the ortolan slot throughout D1 (others have quoted it just as well as I could)
4. Manoeuvres such as this one I pointed out earlier:

I find his false dichotomy of "Jack or hohum" in the post where he votes for Jack and his ongoing defence of hohum scummy,

5. ...which, again, occured precisely when ortolan's wagon was building.

So, you see, I'm not attacking Amished because Amished is attacking me. I've established why I felt his predecessor was scummy, and I've seen him greatly exaggerate and spin his tale of Percy/ortolan OTP, which I've defended against.

I'm pretty sure that if I replaced into the Locke Lamora slot (who, by the way, was getting wagonned for

actively working against

the ortolan lynch) as scum that I would attack someone and try to draw the focus away from myself, so Amished's actions are

consistent

with Locke scum. If not for Locke's history, I may be more inclined to think he was misguided town with a pet theory, but I'm not willing to ignore the legitimate reasons for thinking Locke is scum.

As to the hohum "misrepresentation", I saw hohum saying that the town "had a right to know" whether Vi had a post restriction, and to me that sounded like he was demanding an explanation.

I usually put very little stock in meta; for example, I replaced into a game with hohum [link] after he had died, and so I have at least one reference for town-hohum. I think hohum is playing very differently from that game to this one, but it's all gut and my case is stronger than that. Similarly, I've played with xRx before, and whilst he can be erratic, the tells against him were much more than "that erratic xRx is being erratic again!", and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous. Sure, I gave kyle a free pass on the "playing with xRx-scum" issue and wasn't interested in the "replacing out = scum" arguments that were flying around, but not for other things (see, for example, this post). The former is because I think kyle is a worthless player and the inconsistency points to that rather than scumminess, and the latter is not an argument I've ever bought (though, ironically enough, it actually happened in this game with ortolan, so I'm a little more curious now...)

Also,

Post 65, page 3

Which is this:

Lot of vote-hopping early on here, Zach. Is this normal for you?

...?

I'd still like ekiM to answer this:

I thought ortoscum+hoscum unlikely. I thought ortolan was scummy. I thought hohum was scummier.

Do you still consider ortoscum+hoscum unlikely?

Also, I declared my town read on Jahudo and I'm still liking it. Amished's latest post is rubbish, also: N1 was 10 minutes long, and the better point to make is why he lead with the ekiM connection today rather than the Locke connection, given that

he was looking for connections

(rather than that he's anti-town for not taking the time to look for them at all).

[Percy]

Apologies for doublepost

@Mod: Please delete?

How do I live with this level of insanity?! ~The mod.

[Percy]

Town or scum you would think that anyone being run up at this point would be actively scum hunting when they replace in. This is you reaching to make a null tell mean something.

Point taken; however, I find it rather convenient that I'm being accused of exactly the same kind of interaction that Locke is being accused of now.

It's a fluff question.

Blergh, I need to sit down and devote a few hours to this game, but I don't have time right now. I'll try to get something happening over the weekend.

[Percy]

I'm going to spend today and tomorrow re-reading the game from scratch. I need to widen my perspective and get out of this foxhole.

Quick response to Amished:

1. Good to see that you've backed down on your flinter

and

hohum "easy target" argument, which was complete made-up bullshit. You seem to have concentrated on one small aspect of your argument and are declaring victory, but I don't even know what your point is any more. Nice work!

2. As for xRx, I voted him after the bandwagon disappeared, but you're also right that I helped put pressure on him. It wasn't particularly strenuous for me to do so, but the fact remains that I didn't vote him and was still looking around for other suspects. What was your point again?

3. You're criticising me for my post 602, for basically responding to your "case" before

you

were ready. You were accusing me of an ortolan connection that just isn't there, so I responded.

4. Finally, it's true that I don't put much stock in meta, especially meta brought up by other people; I find that it confuses people as much as it helps them, and can give people conviction when it's not warranted, and smart players can work around it, and so on and so on. However, I do not discount it as a scumhunting tool altogether.

If you (or anyone else) has a link to a hohum game where he was town and played like he's played in this game, I'd just

love

to read it.

Back in a day or so.

[Percy]

Thanks, got it now.

[Percy]

OK, so I finally got around to my re-read. Rather than a wall of quotes and detailed discussion, I'm going to try and be succinct. It's still long, so apologies all.

Vi

- my strongest town read. The ortolan wagon does not read as any sort of brilliant bussing move to earn ultra-town points, which I feel is the only way you can interpret Vi as scum. She nailed ortolan and started his wagon, and has been pro-town throughout the game.

DDD

- I find DDD very hard to read. He said this:

I was basically the one who turned the ort wagon from a pet cause of Vi into something viable while you two broke late onto the wagon in common bussing position.

I don't like it when people blow their own trumpets, but I kinda have to agree with him here. His involvement in the ortolan wagon makes me think he's not scum.

Jahudo

- I get a thoughtful and involved townie vibe from Jahudo. He has been suspicious of Locke for a while, and remained consistent with that read throughout D1. When D2 began, it did take him a while to work around to a Locke/Amished case, but I like what I've read.

ekiM

- I agree with him quite strongly about hohum, and I thought his case building from yesterday was pretty good. I particularly like this post and this post from today. He asks good questions.

Sotty7

- Some posts of hers (like this one) I really like. A lot. I don't like that she defended hohum, but otherwise I've found her null-to-town.

Zachrulez

- My biggest concern is zach's complete shift in attitude towards the flinter/Jack slot. Most of D1's content by zach was pushing the flinter wagon; however, he dismisses his entire case based off one post of ortolan's in this post, and uses that same post to vote Jahudo based on a chainsaw reading. The post he's quoting is post 123, and kyle was on one vote at the time, and the vote was by flinter.

I find this read and complete 180 pivot quite striking, and the evidence to support

both

his case abandonment

and

his "new direction" is quite thin. He does pull back from it, but it's to "I don't think my chainsaw-inspired read on Jack was that great, but whatever, let's lynch Jahudo because that was totally a chainsaw!"

Jack

- I think his

initial

reaction to the ortolan wagon is one of the worst. He tried to actively derail Vi's wagon in this post, though he is slightly redeemed by later joining the wagon in third position. I'd like to ask,

@Jack

: To what extent is your suspicion on Jahudo based on your suspicion of kyle99?

xRECKONERx

- I have liked some of his posts (like his catchup post), especially given his read on ortolan. However, there has been far too much following/wagonjumping and not enough content generation from him for me to shift him away from the nullish-scum read I had of him from before the linked post, so I still don't really know.

hohum

- Since he hasn't really participated all day, the points I made against him still stand. He got a lot of defence from people (Vi, Sotty7, Locke), and I'm really annoyed that he never actually responded to the case against him on his own.

Also, read the linked game, hohum's playstyle is anti-town, but I think the scumtells that have accrued over the course of the game aren't to be discounted with this in mind as easily as he seems to have been by many players.

Amished

- I think his case against me has been grossly over-exaggerated, but I tried to read Amished with a non-OMGUS mindset, so I'm just going to forget his case against me for the rest of this read.

I really like the cases against Locke as presented by ekiM and Sotty7, and I find his unvote of me and vote on Jahudo puzzling. It certainly seems like he's put a lot more effort into establishing his conviction that I'm scum, and now he's voting Jahudo for essentially not attacking him soon enough. He also responded to ekiM thusly:

The fact that Percy was campaigning for a counter-wagon to Ortolan at the time sure as hell doesn't make him more likely to be town just because *I* don't mention it or catch onto it. Are you really saying that I'm more likely to be scum because I didn't bring up something on somebody I'm trying to lynch?

There is a double standard here, and it seems to remove the only reason he's even voting right now.

---

Recent stuff:

I'd be fine lynching hohum OR Percy at this juncture.

Do you think we were bussing each other, or do you think we're mutually exclusive scum, or something else?

@Percy

: Are you always like that? Or rather, have you always been like that?

I'll be honest; I am great at scum, terrible at town. I've been lynched far more often as town than I'd like as town, and it's usually for one of two reasons:
1. I misunderstand something, fly off on a wild theory, and then get lynched when I twist myself in knots (see, for example, this game)
2. I tunnel on a player, and end up in a shitfight with them, and lose (see, for example, this game for tunneled-on-town and this game for tunneled-on-scum)
I'm working on it.

Percy are you looking at a amished/hohum team?

Both of those slots look good for scum, but if I could name a top four it would include Jack and Zach.

hohum is still my number one suspect. I would prefer a hohum lynch to an Amished lynch, but I'm very good with an Amished lynch too.

For the moment, I'd like to pursue my little side project with a

Vote: Zachrulez

for massive inconsistency and a possible "oh shit it's only you and me left Jack, that ortolan thing came out of

fucking nowhere

"-style retreat.

[Percy]

@Zach

:
1. It was not only your desire for a Jahudo lynch, but also your reaction to Jack that's important in my read.
2. I can believe that you bussed flinter like crazy on D1, and then jumped on the ortolan wagon later on. Now you don't want to keep bussing your only remaining scumpartner. That's the theory I'm exploring, anyway. Why is that inconceivable?
3. I only noticed this on my just-finished reread. I needed time and a reread to pick up on things like this, and get out of "HOHUM MUST DIEEEE" mode.

[Percy]

So you think this scenario is more likely than Hohum or Locke/Amished scum I take it?

What gave you that impression?

Also, I've already said that it took a re-read for me to pick up on it, but that doesn't invalidate the point. Why is this such a big deal for you?

[Percy]

Your case on me also hinges on Jack flipping scum...

Not necessarily. Whilst Jack-scum would provide very good evidence that I'm onto something here, I think your behaviour is still legitimately scummy.

What do you think about Jack now?

I much prefer an Amished lynch than a Jahudo lynch at this point. The best case against Jahudo is this one by DDD, and it still hinges mostly on kyle analysis and some minor inconsistencies in Jahudo's play. I think Jahudo reads town.

Right now, I think xRx needs to die, due to massive inconsistencies in reads, wagon jumping and "I'm playing badly and not reading because I don't care about this game"-like excuses.

Unvote, Vote: xRECKONERx

. Go wagon GOOOOO!

I still want a percy lynch.

GDIAF.

I don't think hohum's behaviour is going to change any time soon. Today he has done

absolutely fucking nothing

. He's never going to respond to the points against him by myself and ekiM, because everyone else

already did it for him

. It would have been really good to hear it in his own words, but it's not going to happen. With him playing how he's playing, I have no further comment on it aside from

super lurking and super coasting

.

I have no idea how to handle hohum's slot right now, but I can't state in strong enough terms just how much I loathe this state of affairs.

Current lynch preference:

hohum > xRx > Amished > Zach
(If I feel like a hohum wagon has any chance of succeeding, I'll vote him in a heartbeat.)

[Percy]

I'm waiting for Amished to explain the "double standard" point I raised against him; but I still view hohum's play as scummier overall.

xRx has been bugging me, and I think a good wagonning is in order. I don't think we should be establishing "Amished or Jahudo, one of these people will be lynched!" when there is still some time until deadline. If it comes down to it, I'm more than happy to vote Amished, because I think both he and his predecessor are scummy.

Accusations that I'm lurker-hunting/anti-town-hunting are untrue. I am not calling either hohum or xRx scum based on their anti-town play, but their scummy play.
(I am

very frustrated

with hohum's anti-town play (which is quite aside from his scummy play), and I like to

bold things for emphasis

.)

As for the kyle meta point: I stand by my meta-read of kyle, as well as my position that meta's usefulness is limited. I've looked at hohum's meta, and I don't think it excuses his behaviour. I didn't say "meta is always useless and anyone who uses it is scum, also I'm going to use it now lolz", so I don't see the double standard.

[Percy]

Why exactly are you wagoning Reckoner over your top preference?

You already quoted the answer to your question:

(If I feel like a hohum wagon has any chance of succeeding, I'll vote him in a heartbeat.)

How can you quote this and not know the answer?
Also, what is your point, exactly? My top suspicion is hohum, yet I'm voting xRx, so I'm scum with hohum? Is this some sort of "scumslip" argument?
Not thinking things through and knee-jerk voting based off a misreading of what you already quoted = scummy.

FoS: Zachrulez

Also,

Unvote, Vote: hohum
FoS: xRx

My scumread of xRx is growing rather than shrinking, but hohum remains my first preference.

I still want Percy to answer why he voted me when I'm not his top candidate, and why he's seemingly creeping around the major wagons.

1. I already said why. Zach quoted it again. Read this post again for clarification (but you're too lazy to do that, so whatever).
2. Nice smear. I guess this kind of read is exactly what I'd expect from someone who doesn't take the time to read my posts, but I have talked about the Amished and Jahudo wagons at length. I've also stated that I think forcing the "Amished v Jahudo" choice upon the town is not a good idea right now, when we still have time to explore other options, so your deliniation into "major" and "non-major" wagons is lazy, false and anti-town.

@Percy: I saw you wanted me to respond to something, where was it for expediencies sake?

Sure!

I really like the cases against Locke as presented by ekiM and Sotty7, and I find his unvote of me and vote on Jahudo puzzling. It certainly seems like he's put a lot more effort into establishing his conviction that I'm scum, and now he's voting Jahudo for essentially not attacking him soon enough. He also responded to ekiM thusly:

The fact that Percy was campaigning for a counter-wagon to Ortolan at the time sure as hell doesn't make him more likely to be town just because *I* don't mention it or catch onto it. Are you really saying that I'm more likely to be scum because I didn't bring up something on somebody I'm trying to lynch?

There is a double standard here, and it seems to remove the only reason he's even voting right now.

What do you think of the wagons that are going on right now (that people are actually on)?

Sure, I'll join whoever to save myself since its almost deadline.

I echo Vi's *twitch* at this. Opinions, Jahudo, giev them.

[Percy]

EBWOP: Before anyone else screams incoherently about my voting, I think that three people on a wagon is a lot better than two at this point, and ekiM's vote makes me think that maybe, just maybe, we can have a hohum lynch today. Oh happy days!

[Percy]

I'm pretty disappointed in my performance. Tunnelling on hohum was not the greatest move (though I maintain his play didn't do him any favours), and I found Sotty and Jahudo very difficult to read. I ended up pushing wagons on townies both days while the scum were being wagonned...

Well done, Sotty, that was excellent scum play. And thanks to VP for running a great game with a great theme and fantastic flavour