Mini 1062 - The Lies of Locke Lamora (game over!)

[ThAdmiral]

And in this corner, we have ThAdmiral doing exactly what Coach did in his last post, except this time ThAdmiral is just trying to look good for it, whereas Coach obviously put actual thought into his reads.

More mudslinging. How surprising.
I like how you take anything I do and "creatively interpret" it so it becomes a scum action.

Also I know and have known that both you and jenni are scum, why do you think I've been doing all this mud slinging?

Obviously you don't "know"; apart from the fact that I know I am town, your flip on jenni three posts later proves this. Saying you "know" implies you have some sort of proof but since you don't why lie?

ThAdmiral's still scummy scum though, can we kill him?

More mudslinging...

[Furcolow]

I am not sure if I am ready to write off Jenniwren's protective roleclaim as being genuine. These could be her and DDD's fakeclaims, and Benmage could have been our medic/doctor/jailkeeper role. Without seeing his role, how can we be sure she isn't lying?

[Parama]

Yes, I am mudslinging. ThAdmiral, you're scum. I know you are scum. I have no reason not to believe you're scum.

[don_johnson]

furc: you are an alchemist, no? how could benmage have rb abilities? don't you think your abilities would be similar in some way? granted jenni claiming last gives her the oppurtunity to "build to suit", but it does make some sense.

vote: parama

we should move this forward. i don't think this is wrong.

[Parama]

You think wrong.
Why me over ThAdmiral, btw?

[Parama]

Oh wait, you're scum with ThAdmiral aren't you? Totally makes sense.

[Parama]

P.S. I could provide several games that prove that if I'm being lynched, I'm definitely town, but that'd be a crappy meta defense and I don't wanna go there.

[Parama]

Oh yeah. Just wondering, why is quickhammering one of my top scumspects scummy? I see no way that it's scummy. Providing a wall-o-text on someone you're hammering is damn scummy because it looks like trying to justify your hammer on a townie as much as possible. My hammer was like "Oh I see a scumspect at L-1, a L-0 on scum is a good thing, so let's hammer and hope he flips scum."
If a2rudeboy had flipped scum, you'd all be singing my praises right now. I don't see why his alignment makes much a difference in the towniness of my hammer. Besides, a2rudeboy is always a good lynch

[Parama]

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to B.S. a wall-o-text case on ThAdmiral Be back in 30 minutes to an hour, probably.

[don_johnson]

i don't like your recent posting. i don't like the way you set-up your claim to make you town. your hammer was uber scummy, and i don't think furc is scum(or at least part of a scum "team"). i think you are most likely buddies with thad, but you seem much more eager. i think jenni is town, so she could vote thad and let coach double hammer who he thinks is scum. if there's three scum its you/thad/coach, so i think this is a win-win. i don't like thad's wishy washiness on you, but often lylo confusion is a town-tell, so off chance scum is you/coach. either way, this game is now stalling. everyone was waiting on me. here i am.

[Parama]

You think I'm scum with ThAdmiral?
You are hilarious. We're crossvoting now in assumed LyLo. Obviously the best play for scum. Instead of ending it today with a town lynch, why not push lynches on each other and hope one gets town cred for the bus so that we can push a town lynch tomorrow? Obviously the best strategy.

[Parama]

BTW. If you think it's LyLo, "wanting to move forward" is not a valid reason to vote someone. We need to be RIGHT, not to merely progress forward with whatever lynch is easiest. It's not D1 anymore.

[don_johnson]

i have clearly laid out my suspicions. characterizing the reason for my vote as "wanting to move the game forward" is misrep. appealing to the idea that scum don't vote each other in lylo situations is ridiculous. when they are caught, they don't have much choice if they want to win. camping your votes on each other is a great way to earn town cred

if

one of you are lynched. it doesn't prevent you from moving to other bandwagons if necessary. you are steeped in fallacy. present your case on thad any time you are ready.

[Parama]

ISO 3 is a moderate length post in which ThAdmiral says NOTHING. He questions if my policy vote was serious, he sheeps people's accusations of palmer's meta thing, then asks about palmer's meta, followed by saying that discussion shouldn't be forced in response to me saying that no discussion was happening. And then he ends by questioning my town reads (town don't care about other players' town reads, or at least they shouldn't). There's... nothing there. All the questions are useless, and there's no analysis coming from ThAdmiral.

Side note: ISO 5 he says he'll respond to my wall but never does. But that's excusable.

The trend of asking lots of questions but never giving any analysis continues through a lot of his next posts - ISOs 6, 8, 9, and 10. There's prodding for information, yes, but a lot of it is info that doesn't benefit either side - elaboration on a claim and asking others' scumreads - but not giving any reads himself. ThAdmiral has not taken a stance on a single player at this point in the game - the most he's done is say palmer is likely town based on his claim, which is weak at best.

ISO 11 does actually get some things accomplished, but he doesn't make his first non-RVS vote until ISO 13. And that post is where he first mentions a2rudeboy (ctrl+f his ISO for proof) - and he's already ready to vote him! Seems like scum who knew the palmer lynch was inevitable and so called him town to get town points while then trying to push a mislynch on another easy target.

ISO 15 - Uh... where to begin. The entire post is trying to discredit Furcolow while also making a weak attack on him. THEN he tries to bring up another player's game theory and uses it as an argument to suspect him. It comes off as weak at best and having to reference the reason as SOMEONE ELSE'S makes it seem like you don't fully believe it yourself.

Wait.
BACK THE F*** UP.
DIGRESSION TIME.

Also I am pretty sure the action on me came from town due to the flavor involved.

2 town roleblockers? Possible, but unlikely.

How did you know that it was a roleblock on me? (Well, jailkeep, but it's basically the same thing). I never said it was a roleblock. It could've been plenty of other things. Why did you assume it was a roleblock? Oh, because you're scum with the one who actioned on me, right?

3.

On N2, I tried to bring Charter in for questioning, but was roleblocked. Because of the unreliability of the question/answer situation, I was going to ask him who he thought was scum in hopes his answers would at least give me a more substantial read on him than my first question had given me on Parama.

Sorry jenni, I want to believe your claim makes you town, but...
I was brought in for the jailkeep at the very start of night. Were you told that you were roleblocked immediately upon night start? Otherwise, I don't see how the ability could even be blocked .-.

Ugh, this makes a ThAdmiral/jenni scumteam look even more likely even in light of jenni's recent claim. ThAdmiral still dies first, of course.

ISO 18 - "I still don't if I'm being honest." what is that supposed to mean, I can't even tell. Why did you respond to a post directed towards Coach without even letting Coach address it himself? And lol that silly "slip" that is not a slip because it can't be a slip. Haha. Just trying to spread your scummy nonsense everywhere, aren't you?
Oh and in the next post you take the neutral ground and turn it into WIFOM, while still keeping your earlier read on me. Double standards much?

ISO 20, he admits to not having any suspects. Red flags. Everywhere. He gives some brief reasoning for suspecting the top lynch of the day. He briefly mentions several others and doesn't elaborate. Backtracks in ISO 21, saying he "meant" to say "suspicious" and not just "interesting". ISO 22 - admits that his cases are weak - THEN FIND ONES THAT YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN.

ISO 23 - I really see a lot of IIoA here. Let's see what the post looks like without all the IIoA stuff.

a2rudeboy

rudeboy is my number one for lack of contribution + jump on the palmer wagon yesterday, coupled with asking parama about his role and imo bad reading of coach travis post today.

To add to that he pretty much only went on about the jack-meta gambit as his main argument against Palmer.
Question: where are you at today? We haven't heard much from you. Who are your suspicions etc.

Parama

Question: one odd thing I found as I was rereading is that you were voting skyquiem for a fair portion of day 1 and seemed to have suspicions of her, but when you put up your scum list later you said: "The scumteam is: jenni, Furc, a2rudeboy" (post 280). Why no skyquiem?

Jenniwren

Question: in post 141 you say "I voted Palmer for two reasons. 1) I think the whole meta thing was anti-town, and 2) I wanted to see if my shadow would also vote for him. (He did.)". I assume you are talking about furculow, as he was the only person who voted after you, but can you explain the whole shadow thing?

We're back to Weak Questions and No Analysis Hour, folks!
I do find it odd that he references that "slip" again even after WIFOMing that away a few posts before.

I'm going to shorten these next few down to the real issues with them because I can and because it's fun.
ISO 24: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons.
ISO 25: Time to push a mislynch in LyLo!
ISO 26: Instead of trying to push a weak case, why don't you tell us why you aren't providing any analysis?
ISO 28: *fluff*
ISO 30: Why is the fact that I haven't changed my case a bad thing? Scum on D1 are scum on D3, y'know. Weren't you voting me earlier?
ISO 31: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons, again. Weren't you voting me earlier?
ISO 32: How does that change things? If you think I'm scum, then a nameclaim really can't be enough to make you change your mind, right?
ISO 34: So you believe my claim, 100%. Noted for later. I do find it funny that your method of scumhunting is now based solely on nameclaims. Still no analysis at all, of course.
ISOs 35-39: HEY GUYS LOOK AT ME I'M POSTING. IGNORE THE FACT THAT I'M ACTIVE LURKING - HERE'S SOME POSTS!!!! ZOMG!!!!

ISO 40: Let's get this train a rollin'. Fun post to point out scumminess in.

Furcolow: I actually agree with this one. The rest...
DJ: fencesit ho. Come on now, you can do better than that.
jenni: I'mma lynch you if you don't claim, b****. This is the most accurate paraphrase I can think of. Because ThAdmiral says he's willing to sing her praises as soon as she claims.
DDD: Eh... ntohing to say about this, it's just giving a town read. Agree with this too.
CT: I'mma lynch you because of your claim, b****. This one's especially bad, because I haven't seen anything wrong with the claim myself.
Me: Party time! Referring to hammer as scummy, not saying why. Saying mud-slinging is scummy, not saying why. And I was voting jenni when you proclaimed me town in your ISO 34. Why didn't you instavote jenni there? Because you forgot about LyLo dichotomy due to being scum yourself. The very last part is the only thing remotely valid, but you kinda backed yourself into a corner after

Most likely claim: parama. There's no reason why all the gentleman bastards wouldn't be in this game and furthermore no reason they wouldn't be town.

and the fact that you also claim to be a Gentleman Bastard. Need I say more on this subject?

ISO 41: First part isn't mudslinging, it's valid logic. You saw Coach put together a list of reads, and figured you'd do the same to try and get some towncred off of it. I've seen the play before - don't just dismiss it as baseless. Second: You forgot the dichotomy rule already? Let's point out your exact words:

I wasn't sure which one was scum until he switched his vote to me - now I know it is him (once again if he was town scum would have jumped on and wagoned me to death).

This is exactly the same reason I used to say that I know both you and jenni are scum (though in light of recent events I'm thinking we only have 2 scum, or maybe just 3 scum who are all wimps and don't want to attempt a quickhammer). This is exactly what I was referencing when I made this comment. You forgot your own logic that quickly? I'm amazed. Third: If I stopped saying you were scum, do you think I'd be able to get people to believe me?

I find it simply pathetic that I had to whip up a wall just to convince you all of this guy's

inherent

scumminess. He's acting scummy because he's scum, and there's some blatant contradictions that any town player would never make.

[Parama]

55 minutes. Not bad, but I can do it faster next time. Was slightly distracted a few times.

[Coach Travis]

Yeah, those are some good points about ThAdmiral, and while I still have my suspicions of Parama(and still think he's a likely lynch in the future), for now I'm more sure of ThAdmiral being scum, he's just looked awful lately. Not ready to make my vote yet, not because I'm not willing to commit, but because I want to see if anyone else agrees he's the best option, so I can add my power onto it.

[Parama]

and while I still have my suspicions of Parama(and still think he's a likely lynch in the future)

Wow, I have never seen someone be so blatant about lining up lynches. You're also on the "Parama + ThAdmiral are scum together" wagon? Where do you people come up with this stuff? It's frickin' hilarious, I'm dying laughing over here.

[jenniwren]

I submitted my action during twilight, after you hammered Rude. When day began, I had no result from the questioning, and Charter was dead. Therefore, I believe I was roleblocked; otherwise, I would have had some result, and more importantly, Charter would have been alive. I'm guessing Charter probably received the question and all would have proceeded as normal until the scum sent in their night actions, in which case it didn't matter that I had questioned him.

[Parama]

Hmm, I guess that would make sense. It would also confirm that scum have a roleblocker.
Thinking about it, I could see ThAdmiral making a wholly different mistake while not being scum with you - the mafia may have roleblocked me on the same night I was jailkept, and ThAdmiral assumed the action I was talking about was the mafia roleblock and not your jailkeep, causing his slip. Would really make sense, especially given that 1. ThAdmiral is scum, and 2. The scum have a roleblocker regardless of jenni's alignment (if jenni is town, she was roleblocked so scum must have a blocker, and if jenni is scum, she IS the scum roleblocker).

So yeah continue lynching ThAdmiral please. This game needs more mafia blood.

[ThAdmiral]

ISO 3 is a moderate length post in which ThAdmiral says NOTHING. He questions if my policy vote was serious, he sheeps people's accusations of palmer's meta thing, then asks about palmer's meta, followed by saying that discussion shouldn't be forced in response to me saying that no discussion was happening. And then he ends by questioning my town reads (town don't care about other players' town reads, or at least they shouldn't). There's... nothing there. All the questions are useless, and there's no analysis coming from ThAdmiral.

I admit I was starting behind the 8 ball as I had been v/la for the start of day 1, but I completely do not accept the fact that I said nothing in this post. People were saying some weird stuff and I wanted clarification. Just because I wasn't throwing out accusations and votes (something I know you are very fond of) doesn't mean I wasn't saying anything.

The trend of asking lots of questions but never giving any analysis continues through a lot of his next posts - ISOs 6, 8, 9, and 10. There's prodding for information, yes, but a lot of it is info that doesn't benefit either side - elaboration on a claim and asking others' scumreads - but not giving any reads himself.

ThAdmiral has not taken a stance on a single player at this point in the game

- the most he's done is say palmer is likely town based on his claim, which is weak at best.

Bolding mine. This is such a misrep. In ISO 5 I say: "I buy palmers claim and believe he is town". How is that not taking a stance?
I was also asking questions about more weird stuff that people were saying, namely in this case furculow's bizarre assertion that he hadn't been "informed" of palmertrou and therefore he was lying. I suppose you just wanted me to let that slide?

he doesn't make his first non-RVS vote until ISO 13. And that post is where he first mentions a2rudeboy (ctrl+f his ISO for proof) - and he's already ready to vote him! Seems like scum who knew the palmer lynch was inevitable and so called him town to get town points while then trying to push a mislynch on another easy target.

If you actually read ISO 13 I explain my vote very clearly: "I would have said no to a rudeboy lurker vote, but his recent and somewhat convenient reappearance just before deadline coupled with an opportunistic wagon vote means I am happy to vote for him".
I also love who you take my

correct read

on palmer and then try to make me look scummy for it. Bravo.

ISO 15 - Uh... where to begin. The entire post is trying to discredit Furcolow while also making a weak attack on him. THEN he tries to bring up another player's game theory and uses it as an argument to suspect him. It comes off as weak at best and having to reference the reason as SOMEONE ELSE'S makes it seem like you don't fully believe it yourself.

I don't see what is weak about bringing up someone else's game theory. If I said it was mine I would have been taking credit for something I didn't have anything to do with (and for your information I

don't

believe the theory is a good one). For those of you that don't know Albert B. Rampage had/has a fairly popular theory that states that if you want to lynch someone just keep going after them relentlessly in every post you write even if you have no proof. It can be surprisingly effective, but it means that if you are wrong you can end up derailing the entire town.

Also I am pretty sure the action on me came from town due to the flavor involved.

2 town roleblockers? Possible, but unlikely.

How did you know that it was a roleblock on me? (Well, jailkeep, but it's basically the same thing). I never said it was a roleblock. It could've been plenty of other things. Why did you assume it was a roleblock? Oh, because you're scum with the one who actioned on me, right?

I thought it was pretty clear you were talking about a roleblock, and indeed you were. It was also fairly obvious to benmage at the time - I guess we both must have been the scum roleblocker in your eyes? It certainly couldn't have been the person

who claimed to have jailkept you

, i.e. Jenni...

ISO 18 - "I still don't if I'm being honest." what is that supposed to mean, I can't even tell. Why did you respond to a post directed towards Coach without even letting Coach address it himself? And lol that silly "slip" that is not a slip because it can't be a slip. Haha. Just trying to spread your scummy nonsense everywhere, aren't you?
Oh and in the next post you take the neutral ground and turn it into WIFOM, while still keeping your earlier read on me. Double standards much?

The post was regarding me so I had every right to respond to it. "I still don't if I'm being honest" meant I still didn't understand what he was trying to say. What about that can't you understand?
Regarding the slip, things like that have caught scum before. I wasn't going to pretend I was 100% sure that it was a slip though. How is uncertainty a scum-trait?

ISO 20,

he admits to not having any suspects

. Red flags. Everywhere. He gives some brief reasoning for suspecting the top lynch of the day. He briefly mentions several others and doesn't elaborate. Backtracks in ISO 21, saying he "meant" to say "suspicious" and not just "interesting".

Bolding mine. Another blatant misrep. I clearly stated that a2rudeboy was my number 1 suspect, but after that I didn't really have strong suspicions on anyone else. I didn't backtrack in ISO 21 either: I used the phrase "piqued my interest" to indicate that they were "suspicious" in my eyes. I wasn't interested in their socio-political philosophies, I was interested in them in the scope of the game!

ISO 22 - admits that his cases are weak - THEN FIND ONES THAT YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN.

I believed my cases were weak. I was not about to lie and pretend they were something they were not, or pretend I believed in them more than I actually did. Once again I was uncertain, how is that scummy?

ISO 23 - I really see a lot of IIoA here. Let's see what the post looks like without all the IIoA stuff...
We're back to Weak Questions and No Analysis Hour, folks!
I do find it odd that he references that "slip" again even after WIFOMing that away a few posts before.

Just because I don't post walls of text like you doesn't mean I was only posting IIoA. I tried, like I always do, to be concise and I brought up all the relevant points against all the people in that post.
Also I didn't "WIFOM" away the slip. I always believed it was a potential scumslip. At the time I said I would give you the benefit of the doubt; clearly I shouldn't have.

I'm going to shorten these next few down to the real issues with them because I can and because it's fun.
ISO 24: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons.
ISO 25: Time to push a mislynch in LyLo!
ISO 26: Instead of trying to push a weak case, why don't you tell us why you aren't providing any analysis?
ISO 28: *fluff*
ISO 30: Why is the fact that I haven't changed my case a bad thing? Scum on D1 are scum on D3, y'know. Weren't you voting me earlier?
ISO 31: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons, again. Weren't you voting me earlier?
ISO 32: How does that change things? If you think I'm scum, then a nameclaim really can't be enough to make you change your mind, right?
ISO 34: So you believe my claim, 100%. Noted for later. I do find it funny that your method of scumhunting is now based solely on nameclaims. Still no analysis at all, of course.
ISOs 35-39: HEY GUYS LOOK AT ME I'M POSTING. IGNORE THE FACT THAT I'M ACTIVE LURKING - HERE'S SOME POSTS!!!! ZOMG!!!!

Just your usual smear-campaign behavior. I've gotten used to it now and am not even going to bother responding to the above.

ISO 40: Let's get this train a rollin'. Fun post to point out scumminess in.

Furcolow: I actually agree with this one. The rest...
DJ: fencesit ho. Come on now, you can do better than that.
jenni: I'mma lynch you if you don't claim, b****. This is the most accurate paraphrase I can think of. Because ThAdmiral says he's willing to sing her praises as soon as she claims.
DDD: Eh... ntohing to say about this, it's just giving a town read. Agree with this too.
CT: I'mma lynch you because of your claim, b****. This one's especially bad, because I haven't seen anything wrong with the claim myself.
Me: Party time! Referring to hammer as scummy, not saying why. Saying mud-slinging is scummy, not saying why. And I was voting jenni when you proclaimed me town in your ISO 34. Why didn't you instavote jenni there? Because you forgot about LyLo dichotomy due to being scum yourself. The very last part is the only thing remotely valid, but you kinda backed yourself into a corner after

Most likely claim: parama. There's no reason why all the gentleman bastards wouldn't be in this game and furthermore no reason they wouldn't be town.

and the fact that you also claim to be a Gentleman Bastard. Need I say more on this subject?

More smear-campaigning. I will respond to a few things here, though.
Firstly I've already explained previously why your hammer was scummy. Mudslinging is inherently scummy as it is not backed up by anything. I had thought you were probably town because of your claim, I admit that was a mistake. I realized that scum must have been given good fake-claims in this game.

ISO 41: First part isn't mudslinging, it's valid logic. You saw Coach put together a list of reads, and figured you'd do the same to try and get some towncred off of it. I've seen the play before - don't just dismiss it as baseless.

I was typing up my list of reads in response to furculow saying: "I would like people to give some reads". It had nothing to do with coachtravis.

Second: You forgot the dichotomy rule already? Let's point out your exact words:

I wasn't sure which one was scum until he switched his vote to me - now I know it is him (once again if he was town scum would have jumped on and wagoned me to death).

This is exactly the same reason I used to say that I know both you and jenni are scum (though in light of recent events I'm thinking we only have 2 scum, or maybe just 3 scum who are all wimps and don't want to attempt a quickhammer). This is exactly what I was referencing when I made this comment. You forgot your own logic that quickly? I'm amazed.

Ok, fair point.

Third: If I stopped saying you were scum, do you think I'd be able to get people to believe me?

We'll never know because I doubt you are going to stop saying it any time soon.

In summary

: Parama's case is built on a platform of lies, misrepresentation, smear-campaigning, mudslinging and the questioning of behavior that is not "inherently scummy" at all.

The counter case against parama doesn't need a wall of text or a pbpa. I can state it pretty simply:
1. The hammer on a2rudeboy:
Scummy as it didn't allow rudeboy to claim. Also scummy because it allowed the scum to silence Charter, a very experienced and generally regarded good player, before he could say anything about the game.
Also note that he had hardly mentioned rudeboy at all day 2. And then when he sees he's -1 he suddenly says: "can't get one scum lynched, might get another lynched", i.e. as opportunistic as it gets.
2. Has been mudslinging against people all game:
Furculow, jenni, skyquiem/dj, a2rudeboy, and me. Mostly just claims that these people are part of the "scumteam" he's made up. Unsurprisingly his "scumteam" has been proven to be false time and time again.
3. The voting jenni and me thing, which has already been mentioned.

And now add...
4. His terrible case against me.

[Parama]

The trend of asking lots of questions but never giving any analysis continues through a lot of his next posts - ISOs 6, 8, 9, and 10. There's prodding for information, yes, but a lot of it is info that doesn't benefit either side - elaboration on a claim and asking others' scumreads - but not giving any reads himself.

ThAdmiral has not taken a stance on a single player at this point in the game

- the most he's done is say palmer is likely town based on his claim, which is weak at best.

Bolding mine. This is such a misrep. In ISO 5 I say: "I buy palmers claim and believe he is town". How is that not taking a stance?

I NOTED THAT. Not a misrep. Guess you didn't read my argument fully.

he doesn't make his first non-RVS vote until ISO 13. And that post is where he first mentions a2rudeboy (ctrl+f his ISO for proof) - and he's already ready to vote him! Seems like scum who knew the palmer lynch was inevitable and so called him town to get town points while then trying to push a mislynch on another easy target.

If you actually read ISO 13 I explain my vote very clearly: "I would have said no to a rudeboy lurker vote, but his recent and somewhat convenient reappearance just before deadline coupled with an opportunistic wagon vote means I am happy to vote for him".
I also love who you take my

correct read

on palmer and then try to make me look scummy for it. Bravo.

It's not THAT you called him town (because I did to) but that you called him town simply because of the claim, ignoring all the arguments pressed against him, and instead opt to vote someone for an "opportunistic" vote. Arguably your vote was just as opportunistic, though under different circumstances.

Also I am pretty sure the action on me came from town due to the flavor involved.

2 town roleblockers? Possible, but unlikely.

How did you know that it was a roleblock on me? (Well, jailkeep, but it's basically the same thing). I never said it was a roleblock. It could've been plenty of other things. Why did you assume it was a roleblock? Oh, because you're scum with the one who actioned on me, right?

I thought it was pretty clear you were talking about a roleblock, and indeed you were. It was also fairly obvious to benmage at the time - I guess we both must have been the scum roleblocker in your eyes? It certainly couldn't have been the person

who claimed to have jailkept you

, i.e. Jenni...

Oh so now we're deflecting to jenni. I see what you're doing there, scum.

ISO 18 - "I still don't if I'm being honest." what is that supposed to mean, I can't even tell. Why did you respond to a post directed towards Coach without even letting Coach address it himself? And lol that silly "slip" that is not a slip because it can't be a slip. Haha. Just trying to spread your scummy nonsense everywhere, aren't you?
Oh and in the next post you take the neutral ground and turn it into WIFOM, while still keeping your earlier read on me. Double standards much?

The post was regarding me so I had every right to respond to it. "I still don't if I'm being honest" meant I still didn't understand what he was trying to say. What about that can't you understand?
Regarding the slip, things like that have caught scum before. I wasn't going to pretend I was 100% sure that it was a slip though. How is uncertainty a scum-trait?[/quote]
The fact that you acknowledge it as WIFOM and then tried to use it as a point against me is what I like least about it.
Also I was reading that one sentence a different way, somehow. Ignore my stupidity

ISO 20,

he admits to not having any suspects

. Red flags. Everywhere. He gives some brief reasoning for suspecting the top lynch of the day. He briefly mentions several others and doesn't elaborate. Backtracks in ISO 21, saying he "meant" to say "suspicious" and not just "interesting".

Bolding mine. Another blatant misrep. I clearly stated that a2rudeboy was my number 1 suspect, but after that I didn't really have strong suspicions on anyone else. I didn't backtrack in ISO 21 either: I used the phrase "piqued my interest" to indicate that they were "suspicious" in my eyes. I wasn't interested in their socio-political philosophies, I was interested in them in the scope of the game!

Okay, I did kinda word this badly. You have a suspect, but not real suspect

s

. And your strongest case was still weak.

I'm going to shorten these next few down to the real issues with them because I can and because it's fun.
ISO 24: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons.
ISO 25: Time to push a mislynch in LyLo!
ISO 26: Instead of trying to push a weak case, why don't you tell us why you aren't providing any analysis?
ISO 28: *fluff*
ISO 30: Why is the fact that I haven't changed my case a bad thing? Scum on D1 are scum on D3, y'know. Weren't you voting me earlier?
ISO 31: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons, again. Weren't you voting me earlier?
ISO 32: How does that change things? If you think I'm scum, then a nameclaim really can't be enough to make you change your mind, right?
ISO 34: So you believe my claim, 100%. Noted for later. I do find it funny that your method of scumhunting is now based solely on nameclaims. Still no analysis at all, of course.
ISOs 35-39: HEY GUYS LOOK AT ME I'M POSTING. IGNORE THE FACT THAT I'M ACTIVE LURKING - HERE'S SOME POSTS!!!! ZOMG!!!!

Just your usual smear-campaign behavior. I've gotten used to it now and am not even going to bother responding to the above.

That's funny, because this is an especially information-rich section of my case. It's incredibly concise and getting straight to the facts. You're really just going to blow that off?

ISO 40: Let's get this train a rollin'. Fun post to point out scumminess in.

Furcolow: I actually agree with this one. The rest...
DJ: fencesit ho. Come on now, you can do better than that.
jenni: I'mma lynch you if you don't claim, b****. This is the most accurate paraphrase I can think of. Because ThAdmiral says he's willing to sing her praises as soon as she claims.
DDD: Eh... ntohing to say about this, it's just giving a town read. Agree with this too.
CT: I'mma lynch you because of your claim, b****. This one's especially bad, because I haven't seen anything wrong with the claim myself.
Me: Party time! Referring to hammer as scummy, not saying why. Saying mud-slinging is scummy, not saying why. And I was voting jenni when you proclaimed me town in your ISO 34. Why didn't you instavote jenni there? Because you forgot about LyLo dichotomy due to being scum yourself. The very last part is the only thing remotely valid, but you kinda backed yourself into a corner after

Most likely claim: parama. There's no reason why all the gentleman bastards wouldn't be in this game and furthermore no reason they wouldn't be town.

and the fact that you also claim to be a Gentleman Bastard. Need I say more on this subject?

More smear-campaigning. I will respond to a few things here, though.
Firstly I've already explained previously why your hammer was scummy. Mudslinging is inherently scummy as it is not backed up by anything. I had thought you were probably town because of your claim, I admit that was a mistake. I realized that scum must have been given good fake-claims in this game.

Okay, I've back up my suspicions with a case. I've had a case, but was too lazy to present it; I continued to insist that you were scum though. And lo and behold I had the evidence to back it up. So yes, I was mudslinging, but you're lying if you're saying it wasn't backed up by anything.
Nice backtrack on the claims there, really subtle. 10/10 would read again.
Good job dismissing another concise block of accusations, though. You know that you can't get away with "Your case is crap, but I'm not going to say why", right?

The counter case against parama doesn't need a wall of text or a pbpa. I can state it pretty simply:
1. The hammer on a2rudeboy:
Scummy as it didn't allow rudeboy to claim. Also scummy because it allowed the scum to silence Charter, a very experienced and generally regarded good player, before he could say anything about the game.
Also note that he had hardly mentioned rudeboy at all day 2. And then when he sees he's -1 he suddenly says: "can't get one scum lynched, might get another lynched", i.e. as opportunistic as it gets.

I had a2rudeboy on my suspects list for a while.
Not lynching a PR claim just because they claim PR doesn't help since apparently everyone is a PR and mafia are going to claim PRs too.
Also charter is my hero I would never kill him :< /WIFOM

2. Has been mudslinging against people all game:
Furculow, jenni, skyquiem/dj, a2rudeboy, and me. Mostly just claims that these people are part of the "scumteam" he's made up. Unsurprisingly his "scumteam" has been proven to be false time and time again.

Furcolow is yelling and screaming nonsense, but I don't think I've ever seriously pushed a case on him (maybe voted him for part of D1? I forget.) Skyquiem seemed like the only valid alternative to a palmer lynch, and palmer looked quite town to me, so I pushed that lynch. I already gave reason on jenni, and I have given reason on you as well. Did you know that town can be wrong, too? Because 1 of my scum reads has flipped town, therefore all my scum reads are wrong? Where did you make that assumption? The only think I've seen proven wrong is my read on a2rudeboy. None of my other suspicions have flipped, and with the way you guys keep voting I doubt they ever will be and scum will coast to an easy victory. And I'll blame ya'll when you see ThAdmiral's name in red in endgame.

3. The voting jenni and me thing, which has already been mentioned.

And it works in reverse, so this isn't valid.

And now add...
4. His terrible case against me.

My case is FAR from terrible. It's probably the most solid case thus far. And I even BSed half of it, like I said I would.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Point A) I have no idea why Parama waited this long to actually make a case. It seems almost like a desperation move to me because if you're going to roll with the just yelling loudly thing then that's the plan. I don't know why you accuse someone of being scum, vote them, and then several days/weeks later decide to pull together a full case; if you're going to do that shouldn't you lead with it to try and convince people of your arguments?

Point B) Parama is right about Coach Travis and his hilarious waffling and strange position and really this should convince everyone he's scum AND YOU SHOULD ALL VOTE FOR HIM. Parama and ThAdmiral makes as much sense as Furcolow and Skyquiem/DJ being scum together, that is to say: no sense. Thus Coach Travis' attempt to chain their lynches to a degree makes it seem obvious that he's trying to give himself a backdoor win if he decides he has to bus a teammate. Add that to the fact that he's basically the second man in any logical two man scum team and the only person involved in any possible three person scum teams. Finally, why haven't scum jumped all over my vote still sitting on CT? Because he's their scum partner and the rest of the town seems intent on letting this happen. Stop dicking around and help me lynch this scum already.

[Coach Travis]

I never said they were a team and I'm not trying to chain lynch them. I was just saying that right now ThAmdiral is the player I'm most certain of, but Parama is someone I'm still highly suspicious of. I perhaps worded things poorly:I never actually thought about potential scum teams, what I was saying was right now I want to focus on lynching the person I'm most suspicious of, but I won't for one second rule out that Parama is scum. If we lynch ThAdmiral and he turns up scum, then I'll think about who may or may not be connected to him, and that's when I'll actually decide if Parama is as bad a fit as you say he is.

And seriously, thinking I'm scum because I haven't been hammered? That's not even worth getting into, there's so many potential reasons I haven't been lynched, including one I don't think is true but haven't ruled out that you've been playing us all along and are scum, but you're partners want one townie to join in before I'm finished. And besides, I'd say if I were actually scum I would have hammered Parama, because either I'd be bussing my partner to try and save myself, or I'd be lynching a townie to potentially end the game. Why as scum would it make sense for me to hold back? So you see, both that scenario and yours of scum not lynching me are equally surprising, so using such an argument is pointless.

[ThAdmiral]

Oh so now we're deflecting to jenni. I see what you're doing there, scum.

I'm not deflecting to Jenni, she

said that she jailkept you

. Don't you think that is slightly more likely why you were blocked that night than me blocking you and then dismissing the fact that I thought you had been blocked by a second town roleblocker?

The fact that you acknowledge it as WIFOM and then tried to use it as a point against me is what I like least about it.

I don't get your use of the word WIFOM here. My stance on the slip was that it was possibly a slip but not blaringly obvious so I wasn't going to crucify you for it.

Okay, I did kinda word this badly. You have a suspect, but not real suspect

s

. And your strongest case was still weak.

It turned out to be wrong, granted, but I still think it was an ok case.

That's funny, because this is an especially information-rich section of my case. It's incredibly concise and getting straight to the facts. You're really just going to blow that off?

Alright lets look at each one of your "concise" and "information-rich" points:

ISO 24: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons.

I agreed with coach. I would have said the exact same thing if I had gotten on first. And I elaborate on my suspicions of you in my next post to which you say:

ISO 25: Time to push a mislynch in LyLo!

My only reply is that it's not a mislynch if it gets scum.

ISO 26: Instead of trying to push a weak case, why don't you tell us why you aren't providing any analysis?

I don't think I was providing a weak case, and furthermore I had provided analysis of your scummy hammer.

ISO 28: *fluff*

I was pointing out that what furculow said was ridiculous, something you also pointed out (because it was ridiculous).

ISO 30: Why is the fact that I haven't changed my case a bad thing? Scum on D1 are scum on D3, y'know. Weren't you voting me earlier?

A lot has happened since D1 I would have thought you would have some new and better reasons to be voting Jenni, but you didn't.

ISO 31: Baaah let's sheep off of other's reasons, again. Weren't you voting me earlier?

She posted a far better case than you did. It reaffirmed my conviction to lynch you.

ISO 32: How does that change things? If you think I'm scum, then a nameclaim really can't be enough to make you change your mind, right?

As I said I was temporarily swayed by the fact you claim to be a gentleman bastard. Given that all the other gentleman bastards that had come up seemed to be town, and I knew I was town gentleman bastard, and given that the gentlemen bastards are the main good guys in the book I didn't think one would be scum. I have since realized scum must have gotten good fake claims.

ISO 34: So you believe my claim, 100%. Noted for later. I do find it funny that your method of scumhunting is now based solely on nameclaims. Still no analysis at all, of course.

I didn't say I believed your claim 100%, but yes I did think it was the most likely at that time. The whole claiming thing did throw me a bit, but you're right in that I shouldn't have focused mainly on that.

ISOs 35-39: HEY GUYS LOOK AT ME I'M POSTING. IGNORE THE FACT THAT I'M ACTIVE LURKING - HERE'S SOME POSTS!!!! ZOMG!!!!

See this is more of your mud-slinging which I am frankly quite sick of. I have only ever been posting my thoughts on the game as I see it. If you want to construe that as "active lurking" or posting so I don't seem scummy, then fine.

Okay, I've back up my suspicions with a case. I've had a case, but was too lazy to present it; I continued to insist that you were scum though. And lo and behold I had the evidence to back it up. So yes, I was mudslinging, but you're lying if you're saying it wasn't backed up by anything.

How was I supposed to know that you were going to back it up with a case, when you hadn't backed it up with a case?

Good job dismissing another concise block of accusations, though. You know that you can't get away with "Your case is crap, but I'm not going to say why", right?

I feel like I responded to all relevant/decent comments in that block of accusations.

I had a2rudeboy on my suspects list for a while.
Not lynching a PR claim just because they claim PR doesn't help since apparently everyone is a PR and mafia are going to claim PRs too.
Also charter is my hero I would never kill him :< /WIFOM

He may have had information/some insight. We'll never know now.
As far as the charter thing that may be the case, but you could have been overruled by your scum partners.

Furcolow is yelling and screaming nonsense, but I don't think I've ever seriously pushed a case on him (maybe voted him for part of D1? I forget.) Skyquiem seemed like the only valid alternative to a palmer lynch, and palmer looked quite town to me, so I pushed that lynch. I already gave reason on jenni, and I have given reason on you as well. Did you know that town can be wrong, too? Because 1 of my scum reads has flipped town, therefore all my scum reads are wrong? Where did you make that assumption? The only think I've seen proven wrong is my read on a2rudeboy. None of my other suspicions have flipped, and with the way you guys keep voting I doubt they ever will be and scum will coast to an easy victory. And I'll blame ya'll when you see ThAdmiral's name in red in endgame.

The problem is you may have put forward cases every now and then but the majority of the time you just say "this person is so obviously scum" or "this is the definite scumteam" so anything else that you have to say is lost in the sea of tripe.

My case is FAR from terrible. It's probably the most solid case thus far. And I even BSed half of it, like I said I would.

I don't see how admitting that half of your case is BS is supposed to convince anyone...

[ThAdmiral]

I'm sorry everyone. I

really

hate walls of text, but I feel compelled to meet parama head-to-head.