Mini 844 - P-p-plain! - Over

[Kmd4390]

/confirm.

Nice player list.

[Kmd4390]

Vote KeelieRavenWolf

I want to start a bandwagon on her. Who's with me?

[Kmd4390]

Plum can wait. Care to join me in bandwagoning Keelie?

[Kmd4390]

Pom, why no Keelie vote?

[Kmd4390]

Pom, you could shorten it.

Alm, what does Plum have to do with Pom not voting Keelie?

[Kmd4390]

Ok. Keelie, to vote, use the format we've all used. Bolded "Vote: PlayerName".

First of all,

Unvote

. Keelie's OMGUS response is exactly what I'd expect from Keelie as town. As scum, I'd expect more of a "Wait, how'd I slip up" kind of response.

Second of all, I got reactions from other players too.

Rosso is town. His post is obviously for reactions, but using a different player. I'd see this as a little bit suspicious if Keelie were scum, but even then, it would be weak considering my wagon request was the first post of the game, so a scumbuddy wouldn't be too worried. I simply can't find a strong scum motivation for his post. Therefore, Rosso is town.

CoCo is town. There were two posts at the time he posted. Both requested wagons. One included a vote. Another didn't. The logical thing to do is to vote for the one who didn't vote. CoCo did that. Town.

KScope is town. After some non-game threads I've seen, it makes sense that he'd follow Rosso the way he did. And the "slow game" comment is consistent with Drawn Together, where Scope was town.

Alm is town if Pom is scum (which I'll get to in a second). He confused Plum with Pom, which he wouldn't have done if he was scum with one of the two. If Pom is town, ignore this read completely. That is, unless Plum is scum.

Raiv could be scum. Lazy wagon hop on Keelie. No comment on Rosso's Plum wagon attempt. So could also be a connection to someone on that side of things (Plum or Alm?). I'd vote Raiv, but I have a stronger case. Two, actually.

Lew is my third suspect. Jumps on the wagon I started. Seems to want it to go all the way to a lynch. Then wants to set up tomorrow's lynch on the player who started it. Terrible logic. Hypocracy as well. Calls the wagon "pointless" in next post (nobody else had even posted yet!), but then says Keeluie hasn't defended herself. Wishy washy stance, especially considering he voted Keelie. Then he changes his mind when nobody else has even posted again! Unvotes and votes CoCo. Lew, what made you switch? I personally suspect that you were worried about how you'd be looked at for voting Keelie.

So, my case on Lew:
-Wagon jump with intent to lynch
-Setting up a chain lynch
-Says to suspect the player who started the wagon, which
----is bad logic
----is hypocritical
-Calls the wagon pointless while still being on it AND making a point against Keelie
-Switches to CoCo for no good reason.

Pom. Here's where things get interesting. She random votes. Someone who hasn't done a thing yet. No comment on my request for a Keelie wagon. No comment on Rosso's statement that Plum is obvscum. Nothing on CoCo's vote. Pom is looking to avoid attention. Newer player, but intelligent individual. She seems a bit nervous by avoiding the first few posts and with her post before that. "That's everyone, isn't it?". Comes off as a "let's start this, but I don't want to be the one to do it." Then after I ask why she didn't vote Keelie, she says the name is too long. I doubt that's actually why she didn't vote Keelie. I suggested shortening it, and she gave in and voted. But not for wagon's sake, but for having a long name! Which is why she wouldn't vote in the first place.

So, on Pom:
-Anxious to start, yet nervous to draw attention
-Random votes instead of commenting on previous posts
-Bad reason on not voting Keelie
-Contradiction on the Keelie-long-name thing.
-Gave in to my pressure a bit too easily.
-Gave the "long name" reason, probably to avoid calling it a wagon vote.

Vote Pomegranate

-----------------

I'd like to hear from xofelf and Konowa.

So, you're welcome guys. I've given you the scum team on Page 3. Pom, Lew, and Raiv. (That line sounds too much like Mastin for my comfort. Actually, so does that one. I'll stop now. Damn, Mastin would say that too!)

-----------------

Also, FTR CoCo, I believe in rules. I won't communicate illegally with Keelie about the game, and if she does so to me (unintentionally of course. She wouldn't do so intentionally), I'll request that I be replaced.

[Kmd4390]

Seriously, xofelf? I just voted a newbie and got massive reactions and laid the whole thing out and you come in to joke vote? What do you think of my last post?

Konowa, what exactly do you agree/disagree with regarding my cases?

[Kmd4390]

Konowa, first of all, too townie is a terrible argument. Second of all, Lew hasn't done anything protown enough that I could see that argument making any sense. The rest of your post is fine.

--------------------

Pom, to your meta points:
Newbie 818- Had nothing but pointless random votes at the time you voted. Nothing to really look at like the votes that myself, Rosso, and CoCo gave.

Mafia 100- Is ongoing and I refuse to discuss this any further.

165- Ongoing as well.

So. None of your meta points have anything to do with what you've done here. There was real stuff to comment on. Three posts that actually said something that you could have responded to. Instead, you make a completely random vote and don't say a word about the posts before yours.

You say you voted Alm to get a response from him. Well, he ignored your vote. First of all, what kind of response were you looking for from a random vote? Second, why not question him? Why let him off and join my wagon on Keelie? What did you learn from my push for you to vote Keelie?

The nervousness I saw was a feel I got from your posts. You seemed to be trying to post without really saying anything that would grab anyone's attention.

To you saying you never said you voted Keelie for having a long name: See your vote post. It's the reason you gave.

---------------------------

Alm,

On Keelie:
I'm not saying anything she did is optimal for either alignment, but more of what I'd expect. What she did is what I'd expect her to do as town.

On Rosso read:
Why are you asking "what if"? That's how I interpreted his actions. If I'm wrong, he can correct me.

on CoCo:
So being logical is a scumtell now? Riiight.

On Scope:
I'm saying that it makes sense for Scope to have followed Rosso as town. If something makes sense from a town perspective, I'm going to see it as a towntell.

On Lew:
Tell me how this sounds like a normal random vote:

but I honestly don't see how one could decide to vote somebody on day 1... I guess this is not even a spread votes strategy: this is the problem with day-start games... if at the end of this BW we lynch someone important, I hope tomorrow we will punish who started it...

Doesn't look very random to me.

1.Another misquote. 2.He clearly states that he doesn't like day-start games because it's possible to accidentally lynch a pro-town power role. 3.He then says (with a simile) that if that happens, the person who started the wagon should come under suspect. This makes perfect sense - 4.if someone starts a wagon on the cop, don't you suspect them? 5.Minimally, even if not, I fail to see the scumtell you are calling here. 6.I also fail to see how it is hypocritical. You need more explanation.

Wow. Just wow. Let me break down the craplogic here by numbering things in your quote.

1. How is it a misquote? I don't see it.
2. How is this only true for daystart and why is it even what you'd look at when looking for scum? I don't know about you, but I'm not going to freak out about suspecting players because "OMG THEY COULD BE A POWER ROLE!!". Anyone could be a power role. Know what else they could be? Scum. It works both ways.
3. Yeah, that's exactly my problem with Lew. Why suspect someone just because they make a vote, people follow their vote in agreement, and the player happens to flip town? I don't see how someone who makes a case on a town player is any scummier than those who vote the same player later. In fact, I'd be much more likely to suspect people who vote later.
4. Not at all. In most games, scum have absolutely no extra knowledge about who is a cop on Day 1.
5. Because it's a terrible reason to suspect someone and it sets up the next day's lynch for terrible reasons.
6. What is hypocritical is that he calls the wagon pointless and says to suspect me for starting it

while he is ALSO voting Keelie

.

I don't care that he got off the wagon. My concern is that he voted Keelie in the first place. Why do it if he disagrees with it?

Ok, why do you think he voted CoCo over Keelie then?

So because I gave my reads on PAGE THREE, and you aren't satisfied with their strength, I must be scum? Tell me this then. Who has given a better case than mine on Pom. Who has given a better case than mine on Lew? Hell, how many cases are better than the one I gave on Raiv? Your reason for suspecting me applies to every player in this game more than it applies to me. I'd suggest rethinking your position.

----------------------

Raiv, there was no trap. I just watched for everyone's reaction. You say I call everyone scum regardless of what they do. Look at my reads. Several are town reads. Nothing to say about why you voted Keelie? Or why you didn't comment on Rosso's statement about Plum?

----------------------

Lew, why post and not comment on my case on you? Do you plan on defending yourself?

---------------------

Pom is actually right, Alm. If you answer for people, you make things too easy for them. This is especially bad if you are town answering for scum, because we don't get their reaction to pressure. You make it easier for them, and they can coast to victory.

-------------------

Also forgot in the post where I said we needed to hear more xofelf and Konowa. Plum should say something too. And xofelf should post actual content.

[Kmd4390]

I agree that it's a mostly pointless case, but why are you answering for lewarcher? I'm sure he can explain himself fine.

You could be scum defending your scumbuddy for all I know

. Let people answer cases( and questions) directed at them by themselves.

Why?

The bolded, and also that I would've liked to see how lewarcher would've defended himself from Kmd's accusations. The different ways that people react are useful to notice and analyze.

For all you know, lewarcher could be scum himself. This argument makes no sense. As far as how his reaction goes, why don't you just gauge his reaction to both KMD's and my posts? Either way, there will be a reaction.

But if you are answering for him, you make his job too easy. If he's town, he'll have answers and there won't be a problem. If he's scum, then, well, you just gave answers so he doesn't have to.

[Kmd4390]

My vote requested a bandwagon. You could have:
A) Wagoned by voting Keelie
B) Called me out for requesting a wagon.

Rosso called Plum obvscum. You could have:
A) Agreed and voted Plum.
B) Called out Rosso.

^Both Rosso and myself made a vote/statement that was obviously not backed by anything and appeared more confident than we could have been. It's a good place to start.

CoCo made a decent point on Rosso. You could have:
A) Agreed with the point.
B) Disagreed with the point.

Also note that CoCo

did

choose option B regarding Rosso.

Wait, so you voted Alm for a response, but didn't expect to get one? That seems... off.

I gave examples earlier. The post just before Day started was one. The random vote, ignoring the three posts before yours, was another. The post where you say Keelie's name is too long to vote is another. The post where you give in to my pressure and vote Keelie is another.

But making your Keelie vote look random doesn't get a response from her either.

[Kmd4390]

plum is obviously scum.

Why isnt she dead yet?

Vote: AlmasterGM

.

Obvscum.

These are different. Rosso grabs attention by asking why Plum isn't dead. You simply use the term "obvscum" which is obviously meant to be a joke. Rosso's has more of a reaction seeking feel.

Why not respond to my other points?

[Kmd4390]

There's still a non-sequitor in your logic. Just because she did what you'd expect her to do as town doesn't make her town (which is what you claim). My argument is that, as scum, it'd be optimal for her to make the exact same play.

It doesn't make her guaranteed, untouchable, town. It

does

give me a town read on her so far though. If she can come into HER FIRST GAME, and know that I'm voting her to gauge her reaction, know what reaction I'm expecting from either alignment, and fake the correct one, then congratulations to her for a scum game well played. I personally don't think that's the case. If she's scum, I'm misreading the situation.

]
It's not a what-if - I'm arguing your assumption that posts by scum always have a scummy motivation. IMO, Russo is just as likely to be scum as he is town.

What? I didn't make that assumption. I assumed that his post was similar to mine as far as looking for reactions, which is a protown thing to do in the second post of the game. Don't make the mistake of thinking that I'm calling Rosso, or anyone else, 100% guaranteed town. It's just where my read was at the second post of the game, and still is until I'm shown otherwise.

That's not what I said at all. You said that CoCo was town because he made a logical play. I argued that scum can make logical plays as well, and that logic isn't a tell either way. You keep mischaracterizing my arguments as attempts to get reads one way or the other, when in reality all I'm doing is showing how your "town" reads are flawed.

How is it flawed? He, like Rosso, made a protown move. Yes, he

could

still be scum, but that's not what I'm seeing so far.

]
What if something makes sense both scum and town, as Scopes' play did?

Elaborate on why Scope would do that as scum.

On Lew:
Tell me how this sounds like a normal random vote:

Because 1) it's not even page 3 yet and 2) he prefaces it by saying there's no way to decide who to vote for, thus implying his vote is random/has little justification.

Little justification or not, he mentions a bandwagon and a plan for the next day. He shows no signs of joking. It's not random.

1. How is it a misquote? I don't see it.

Because he isn't doing or saying what you say he is.

Real specific. . No way to counter this except "Yes he is."

2. How is this only true for daystart and why is it even what you'd look at when looking for scum? I don't know about you, but I'm not going to freak out about suspecting players because "OMG THEY COULD BE A POWER ROLE!!". Anyone could be a power role. Know what else they could be? Scum. It works both ways.

I'm not sure if you only play mafia on mafiascum, but in many games, the game begins with night actions. This reduces the D1 randomness because you have information you can use to characterize power roles. Lew simply seems to be referring to this fact and saying how it doesn't apply here on MS.

You don't rely 100% on power roles though unless it's a crap setup. Also, you don't even touch on my point here. Any player is just as likely to be scum as they are to be a power role. Roles were distributed randomly and any player could have gotten any role. I'm not going to lay off of an unclaimed player just because there is a chance they are a power role. If I thought they were a power role, I wouldn't attack them in the first place.

3. Yeah, that's exactly my problem with Lew. Why suspect someone just because they make a vote, people follow their vote in agreement, and the player happens to flip town? I don't see how someone who makes a case on a town player is any scummier than those who vote the same player later. In fact, I'd be much more likely to suspect people who vote later.

Depends on how hard they tunnel the wagon. If people just pile on, then I am in agreement with you. However, if the person is really pushing for it, then I think suspicion is in order.

Fair enough. But there's a difference between someone pushing bad logic and someone who genuinely believes a case. Usually, if it goes all the way to a lynch, the case is strong enough that the player either believed the case and is town or is scum who made a good argument. Being first on a lynching wagon isn't a scumtell.

I apologize for breaking this quote up, but it's the easiest way to respond to it:

I think your reads are bad. No read is better than a bad read

Strongly disagree. I think giving reads does more for the game, whether people agree with them or not. If the read is truly bad, people can point to why and it allows the player who gave the read a chance to either show more about why they feel the way they do (as I have done) or rethink the position and change their mind.

so I don't care that you have posted more text than the other players.

Neither do I. My point was that I've made it clear where I stand. Who has done a better job of that so far?

If you want to cop out and say it's only page three, then maybe you shouldn't make such definite reads in the first place.

I agree. Which is why I haven't made a definite read on a single player yet. I probably won't have a definite read on a player all game unless I am a power role which I won't get into.

According to you, logical strength of arguments is the mechanism we use to find scum. At the point where, in my opinion, you have the most logically flawed arguments in the game, why shouldn't you be my number one suspect?

Well. That's a debate that could go on for pages in MD. I'm personally on the other side of that argument. I think gut reads are stronger than logic. I'm not going to argue that here though. I'll just keep playing how I have been.

Flawed arguments (which I still don't see how mine are flawed by the way) is not always a scumtell. Town can just as easily be wrong about a player.

Unfortunately, I don't think lew is scum, so I don't think this is an issue.

Unless you are 100% sure on this, the point stands. The only way you are 100% sure, considering it's Day 1 and we haven't had a night yet, is if you are scum. Therefore, let me be blunt for a second. Shut up about my case on Lew and let him defend himself.

Why not respond to my other points?

Gotta go now. Will be back on later.

Pom is actually right, Alm. If you answer for people, you make things too easy for them. This is especially bad if you are town answering for scum, because we don't get their reaction to pressure. You make it easier for them, and they can coast to victory.

Unfortunately, I don't think lew is scum, so I don't think this is an issue.

Personally I don't find Lew to be very scummy, but that's beside the point. you should've let him answer for himself.

So you're back and can respond now?

[Kmd4390]

Oh, there's a 4th page now. And Plum is on it.

Great, I always seem to miss the RVS but still have basically only that to reference for the scumhunt. Lovely.

So Alm, Pom, and myself haven't given you any real content? Ouch. (Ok, I see that you mentioned that stuff. That makes me feel better.)

I'm in complete agreement with those three paragraphs on Lew about the Keelie vote and CoCo vote.

What is wrong with listing my scum reads? I think you are mistaking it for connections between the three players, which isn't what I'm doing. Pom, Lew, and Raiv are my top three individual scum reads.

--------------------------

Raiv, why are wagons good? (I'm not disagreeing. I just want to know your opinion.) I'll have more to say after you answer this.

[Kmd4390]

Raiv, I'm not trying to avoid Plum. I was simply wondering why Alm responded to my question about Pom with a statement about Plum.

Plum hadn't posted yet. I forgot to include her in the list of lurkers.

Ok, I agree with you about the wagons. Now, what do you take from specific wagons that we've seen in this game?

[Kmd4390]

It's open knowledge that she has a friend who has played the game before. You have no clue what her experiences with mafia are. Your gauge of her reaction isn't some extremely advanced theory utilized and known only by you - it's generic town behavior vs generic scum behavior. If you want to underestimate new people, go right ahead. I personally don't think it would be that hard for her to pull a dupe.

Yeah, she knows someone who has played. Me. I'd know if she had experience in the game. She knows a VERY basic version. Nothing that would help her fake a reaction like that.

Yes you did. You said "I can't find any scum motivation for CoCo's posts, so he's town." This assumes that every scum post has some deeper implication and that they won't just post things for no reason other than to appear town. I'm glad you don't think Rosso is 100% town, but I don't even see him as 95% town. I think he's 75% town - an even percentile.

No, I said I think he's town. I didn't say I know he is. And you're right that I don't see scummy motives in his posts, so I don't suspect him. Yes, I do think he is likely town. No, I'm not saying that is a definite read that will never change. 95% would even be a bit extreme IMO. I'm not 95% on anyone just yet.

I'm still confused as to how "logical" moves translate to "pro-town" moves. You keep using these terms interchangeably when they are entirely different.

This is a semantics argument then. Pointless.

Why wouldn't he? There have been no negative implications, and you think he's town because of it. Seems like a decent scum play to me.

You are arguing what would be "good" play while I'm arguing what is more "likely" play. We don't disagree on logic. Just the conclusions.

I've got a response, but I'll just save it and let lew reply, since that's what you and everyone else seems to want.

Good choice.

I suppose what I meant to imply in my comment was not as clear as I thought. What I meant was "No read is better than a bad read ... when scumhunting." So, if I'm looking at two players - one who gives no read and the other who gives what I consider to be a bad read - I'm going to go after the bad read.

Yeah, you were clear the first time. I disagree with this opinion. I'd be more likely to vote someone who isn't giving reads and is coasting through the game than I would be for someone whose reads I disagree with or consider "bad" or "wrong".

]Neither do I. My point was that I've made it clear where I stand. Who has done a better job of that so far?

I don't see why this matters. I agree that it is clear where you stand. I don't like where you stand. So I'm going to disagree with you.

That's fine, but why does disagreeing with my stances on players make me scum?

Flawed arguments (which I still don't see how mine are flawed by the way) is not always a scumtell. Town can just as easily be wrong about a player.

This is exactly what I've been trying to say. If this is what you think, then how can you say someone is pro-town because they made a "logical" play?

If someone makes a play that is logical for town to make, they are doing what town would do, which can be defined as a towntell (if it makes me think they are town) or protown (if it helps the town). Neither is more reason to think a player is scum.

However, different town players will have different opinions. Different town/scum players will push different opinions. Having different opinions, most of the time, is a complete null tell. It's only useful when you try to find connections between players. We don't have any confirmed players, so this is pretty useless right now. So basically, for the time being (Day 1), disagreements on stances are completely null.

]Unless you are 100% sure on this, the point stands. The only way you are 100% sure, considering it's Day 1 and we haven't had a night yet, is if you are scum. Therefore, let me be blunt for a second. Shut up about my case on Lew and let him defend himself.

Wrong. But OK.

Yeah, it's best if we both (yes, including myself) shut up about this.

[Kmd4390]

Lew, if you were simply gauging reactions, tell me what you learned.

If you think the vote made you look bad, then yes, you'd switch.

Ok, did I spell it wrong or something? My bad. I'm sure you know what I meant though.

The bad logic is the logic to suspect whoever starts the wagon.

[Kmd4390]

Scope, why Alm?

-----------------

Lew, the person who starts a wagon decides on their own, "Hey, this is a player who should be lynched". A player who joins a wagon later has a much higher chance of voting because "people want this player lynched". I'm more suspicious of the second of the two scenarios.

I've explained several times. CoCo made the move that I'd expect town to make. If he is scummy later, I'll be all over it. For now, I think he is town. You did some scummy things (listed in my reaction analysis) and I jumped on them. I fail to see anything wrong with this.

--------------

Rosso, my bad. I respond where I see fit.

[Kmd4390]

You stress that it was the RVS, but none of the posts before yours were random votes. Mine was a reactionary vote. Rosso made a reactionary statement. CoCo voted with an actual reason. Commenting on any of these things is much more productive than a random vote.

Also, you need to clarify. You said your vote was a random vote for someone with no votes. You've also said you were looking for reactions from Alm (but were satisfied with no reaction???). Which is it?

If not commenting was enough of a reaction, what did you learn from it?

No, it's not your fault that she didn't respond. But you really didn't give her anything to respond to. It looks too random to apply any real pressure.

I agree that we need more Keelie posts though. Xofelf as well. I'd add Konowa to that list if it weren't for the V/LA. Raiv also seems under the radar. He is posting, but doesn't seem to say much.

[Kmd4390]

Doesn't really sound like you were looking for reactions then. Why bring that up?

Also, Kmd, you seem extremely obsessed with getting me lynched. I would ask why, but I don't see the point. Just wanted to point that out.

Well, of course. You are my top suspect, so I want you lynched. That's how I play.

[Kmd4390]

So I'm scum because I apparently set a trap to call everyone scum? Tell me where I called the following people scum:
CoCo
Rosso Carne
KaleiÃ

[Kmd4390]

Pomegranate is the biggest threat in the game? And Lew? And you? No offense to any of you guys, but if I were scum, I'd be more worried about someone like Plum, who knows how I play and can probably read me better than anyone else here. To say that my suspects are "threats" is terrible reasoning.

[Kmd4390]

I'm pretty sure that Alm is town, so therefor CoCo must be scum.

Elaborate. Also, what happened to the Kmd/Plum/Scope team?

I agree Lew is prob town too

Why?

It was supposed to be funny.

*headscratch*

ok then..

[Kmd4390]

There

is

no meta on Keelie. I'm basing things off of general newbies and how she is IRL.

I didn't say Rosso is town for having no motivation. I said he's town because of the way he's going for reactions so early.

I am NOT AT ALL saying that scum always play logically and town always play poorly. I'm not even sure where you get that from.

If we, as you say, do nothing on Day 1, it screws the whole game. Day 1 is where you get all of your reads, and usually, the majority of the game's discussion. I'd rather be vocal and wrong than sit on my thumb all day and gain nothing.

Heh, you very rarely have to worry about me not responding. Question stands though. Why is a disagreement in stances a reason for me to be scum?

[Kmd4390]

Pom, yes. You are still my top suspect for reasons I've clearly outlined. Yes, I'd like to see you lynched considering I think you are probably scum.

I think I've gone into enough detail about answering for people as well.

[Kmd4390]

Hmm. I agree with Pom about Raiv and all the questions that his posts leave. I also agree with Raiv that it's better to get your opinions out. Raiv's point is just theory though, so isn't connected to his alignment. And Pom could still be distancing or Raiv could be town, so I won't clear her for making good points against Raiv. Just want to get it out there that I agree with those two posts though.

[Kmd4390]

Keelie, your original reasoning was this:

I vote KMD.
Because he's so obsessed with getting me lynched.

Do you still believe this or do you have another reason for voting me?

[Kmd4390]

I will ask him: if you are a vanilla, which I assume you want every1 to believe, for now, do you consider your attitude pro-town? What if you force a power role to claim?

Don't rolefish. I'm not going to claim now. Yes, I'm doing what I think will help the town, so I consider it protown. My opinions are out, and if I'm lynched, everything I've said is validated by my town flip. I'd suggest that everyone look at it, knowing that it's what I've honestly believed, and evaluate it's accuracy. If a power role claims, so what? I'm not going to be scared to attack scummy players because they

might

be a power role.

It seems extremely unlikely to me that both he and alm are mafia. They were both targetted by bw's (alm is right now), and they both react without exaggerated OMGUS's. Moreover, I am still convinced Kmd is scum (I explained why above)... if he is mafia, raiv and alm probably are not.

Explain how anything I've done has been OMGUS.

actually, CoCo, I think Kaleidoscope was trying to encourage people to vote for Kmd in order to see who was really eager to have Kmd lynched... it was a trap, or at least I hope it was, cuz if it was not, or if he is claiming double vote, it is really a dumb move.

anyway it doesn't seem it's working...

FoS: always Kmd

1) If you thought it was a trap, why not let it run it's course?
2) It wasn't. You don't know Scope.

[Kmd4390]

So the wagon on me is literally a joke vote (xofelf), an OMGUS vote that I'm not even sure is serious (Keelie), a disagreement with my reads (Alm), and someone who likes wagons (Raiv), right?

[Kmd4390]

Pom:
-Defending yourself doesn't make you town. Defending yourself well might.
-Why are you trying to find connections to me rather than individually scummy players? I find this especially interesting considering you aren't voting me.
-How have I tunneled on you when I've given reads on almost every single player in the game, calling two of them scum?

I also have to ask considering she is your sister and I'd hope you'd know her better than I would. How is Plum acting different? Does it go beyond just lurking?

[Kmd4390]

Ok, I don't have time to go into detail responding and stuff because I just got home and want to sleep, but I'm at L-1.

Claim: Cop

Btw, xofelf, since when

don't

I want to be in control?

[Kmd4390]

xofelf, I don't play any roles differently. There is one exception and that didn't work out so well (beloved princess).

[Kmd4390]

The Pom kill pissed me off. I thought I did a good job of distancing. Well, good game town. You guys earned it.

[Kmd4390]

Pom, distancing keeps us both active and if one of us dies, the other looks town. Our vig saw through it though, apparently...

You did a great job defending yourself though.