Open 566: Murder on the Oriental Express (Game Over)

[Green Crayons]

UNVOTE: CKD
VOTE: farside

I am completely unable to see how farside-town could believe the bullshit that is overflowing from her case against me. Her GC vote is based on lies, ignoring the context of my actions, and believing completely untenable points about how a town would play.

I will not be changing my vote.

[farside22]

Let's use fact instead of fiction.

At the end of day 4 this is what GC stated about CKD.

Sigh.


After today, especially late game day, CKD looks pretty town. I guess his play today could be a gambit -- "let me throw myself upon the mercy of the town with plenty of LYNCH ME's" -- but I really don't think so. Couple that with

how

he went about not voting Beli (hard defense) and scrambles (actually appeared to inquire into the merits of a scrambles vote, even after scrambles was locked into the lynch via the most-votes-absent-majority rule), I think CKD is town.

I also think CDB looks lean town. Scum wouldn't bank on "forgetting" a pretty vital rule to excuse play. His reasons for unvoting CKD to vote Amy don't strike me as suspicious -- I myself have said that I have X-number of lynch candidates, and I don't particularly care what order they get lynched in. scrambles refusal to vote CDB is weird, and not something I'm just forgetting. But that alone isn't going to really do it for me.

Then GC breaks it down to either me or amy.

That leaves me with farside and Amy.

Nobody appears willing to join Amy and I on farside. Fine. UNVOTE: farside, VOTE: Amy. She really has become the lurker queen, and has failed to really participate at all this game day. I wouldn't want her at LYLO because of that, as it would be a serious knock against her towniness.

Now he started the day voting me but does say one of me or cbd here.

It's CDB or farside. They are the only two potential bussers from the scrambles wagon.

He sort of defends CKD here.

Well I hit submit and not preview.

Those posts show why I don't think CKD was consciously avoiding voting a scummate.

Rethinking my Post 2013, I agree with acryon that it's reasonable to assume that scum will bus at least one of their scum partners.

I've stated why farside's scrambles vote looks like a bus.

If farside is actually town, POE means that the only potential scum on the scrambles wagon was CDB. I think CDB is more likely to be scum that CKD for the reasons quoted above.

Now he has options for 3 players where before it was me or cbd.

Actually, if farside isn't scum, I'd probably have to hope that I get NKed because frankly I don't know which of CDB or CKD I would lynch first.

But hey sure riddle, whatever you say and suddenly CKD is a scum read that is to be lynched when he see's his weak point going no where.

Yeah, Riddle, that's probably the best argument for why he's scum.

My vote, sure as shit ain't moving.

[farside22]

I'd like to here from cbd today. He's been pretty Mia today.
Of course I notice GC doesn't call him on this.
I wonder why?

Oh yes that completely reads like the shit you game me for 2 game days.

Oh wait no it doesn't.

Point farside.

Oh, and of course this is just a bullshit lie to justify her bad vote on me. I never suspected anyone for failing to post (or going V/LA). It has always been that farside was using an inordinate amount of "catchup posts" instead of just diving right into the game:

I'm not saying her V/LA is fabricated. I'm saying that going absent and then coming back with a serious of catch up posts -- and this is her habitual play this game, not a one-time event -- is aligned with scum play.

I'm phone posting, so can't link, but porochaz did the exact thing as scum in Oldie Mafia 2 (normal large).

Oh, I can link this now.

Oldie Mafia 2. The scum that was constantly doing catch up posts was porochaz. He had a legitimate excuse for his V/LA (funeral and other bad IRL experiences), but he kept doing posts like these: Post 444, Post 596, Post 676.

Also, I just got finished with a game where this happened again. Mini 1609. The scum that was constantly doing catch up posts was massive. Once again, a legitimate reason (no weeked access), but he kept doing posts like these: Post 2434, 2497, and Post 3336.

Once again, it's not so much that someone has V/LA, and then decides to make catch up posts. It's the heavy emphasis of using catch up posts, as it allows a person to look like they are providing the town with a lot of activity, but it isn't really all that substantive and useful for the town.

Of course, being V/LA was the predicate for farside relying heavily on her catch up posts, but it's the catch up posts and not her V/LA that is the suspicious part of her play for purposes of that line of suspicion. And as I pointed out when Riddle wanted me to do the work for farside, farside could have jumped in and made a (what would have been a pretty convincing) meta defense: that she has been doing similar catch up posts in all of her games.

I was on V/LA for 2 game days! Not all fucking game.
I was not the only fucking player doing catch and behide which makes this the most worthless point you've made.

[Riddleton]

I see CKD isn't getting much traction. I suppose I'll compromise.

Sigh. Farside is correct now that I see it. The interest in the CKD wagon seems artificial.

VOTE: GC

[Green Crayons]

Pretty passé to suspect those who jump onto your wagon, but Riddle's switch seems particularly empty. High suspect if he makes it to LYLO.

[Green Crayons]

lol @ voting me under the belief that I would bus a buddy who had minimal suspicion on him with a stellar case as soon as I replaced in

TLDR:

VOTE: scrambles, because:

(1) I didn't like Blonde's hyper-defensive play.

(2) I don't like the slot's interaction with Beli. Blonde looked like he was distancing from Beli-scum. scrambles looked like he was bussing Beli-scum.

-----

Mr. Blonde

(1)

Blonde gets really defensive, really quick to any criticism of his play. In Post 43, Blonde gets really snippy with Snuggly's vote on Blonde – calling Snuggly's reason for a vote (a nebulous "something" and Blonde's "shall we dance" comment to Amy) as "mightily subjective," and then goes out of his way to remind the thread that Snuggly "apparently has never played before." Attacking his attacker, on Page 2? Wow.

(2)

I think Blonde's disproportionate defensiveness is also more clear with respect to farside's vote. His whole handling of farside's (not very good, not good enough to base a lynch off of, but perfectly adequate for a Page 1 vote) vote on his slot is weird. At first he ignores it until Post 33, then he calls it a joke in Post 43, and from there it just grows and becomes this Big Thing.

(a)

I really dislike the hyper-logical tone Blonde uses to defend himself. (For example, "You are using intangible evidence and supposed experience as a way to push me for a generic tell that essentially I can't defend against." in Post 45.) It reads like someone who is purposefully trying to remove their emotional response to being voted, which is artificial and calculated.

(b)

So Blonde and farside have a long back and forth about the merits of her Page 1 vote. It would be incorrect to say that Blonde

only

posts about farside, but it would be quite correct to say that Blonde posts

only

about those people who have voted him. (farside in Post 45, Post 49, Post 58, Snuggly in Post 50 and Post 53.)

(c)

Alright, so Point (b) wouldn't be that big of a deal except Blonde suddenly is off his farside vote/suspicions in Post 83 and Post 84 after a brief step away from the thread. Here's what bothers me about Blonde's move away from his farside argument/vote:

- Blonde's last post to farside in Post 58 is a bunch of questions directed at farside, all challenging the basis of her vote on him. Farside

does not answer them

between Post 58 and when Blonde returns in Post 83/84. Nonetheless, Blonde is happy to move away from his farside vote.
- Blonde invokes Acryon and Skelda to justify his move away from his farside vote in Post 83. I don't like this. Why point to other players and say "yeah, what they said!" if not attempting to preemptively justify your action under the basis of "you can't suspect me for this unless if you also suspect these other players!"
- Also, what Acryon (Post 66) and Skelda (Post 67) said was that they didn't agree with farside's Blonde-vote, but that alone didn't make farside scummy. Blonde appropriates that position, but then severely undermines it in the very same post: he can only "sort of see where a Townie would think something" like what farside is saying; he faults farside for failing to follow up on some questions with Toby; and farside is, at best, "maybe" "derpttown." (Post 83, Post 84.) Reads like a player hedging his bets, willing to step away from a target but laying enough groundwork that a return will not appear unnatural.
- SO THE END RESULT IS THIS: Blonde moves away from his farside vote, which he has been super defensive about/engaged with, even though farside never gave him answers to questions he was asking, preemptively justified by invoking the reasoning of other players, all while simultaneously laying seeds for why his continued suspicions of farside wouldn't be unwarranted.

(d)

Okay, so all that didn't sit well with me on my read through, but the kicker was the fact that Beli piled on with his farside vote (Post 61) in the time frame between Blonde being super into his farside vote (Post 58) and Blonde dropping his farside vote like it was a hot coal (Post 83/Post 84).

SPECULATION: Blonde didn't want to be on the same wagon so quickly with scum, thus the bad justifications for running away from the farside vote, but leaving himself room to return.

QUERY: Why would Beli be happy to throw a vote down on a player already being voted for by a scumbuddy? (shrug) Nobody would expect it? It wasn't necessarily a bad vote, as far as early D1 vote justifications go? Bel's play this game was weird. I don't know.

(e)

BONUS: Blonde (Post 83) first credits Skelda's note (Post 67) that he was "giving scumpoints to Beli and Chaos since farside would be such an easy wagon to join for scum."

Setting aside the ADDITIONAL conflicting opinions Blonde has thrown out there w/r/t farside, this lays the groundwork for Blonde to be critical of

both

Chaos and Beli. But Blonde only gets critical of Chaos, going so far to put him in Blonde's null/scum read in Post 137.

Well, what about Beli? Blonde's got nothing to say about him, except for asking Amy to talk about her non-Beli suspicions (Post 83) and despite Blonde's go-to advisor Skelda voting for Beli in Post 128 (close enough to Blonde's scum-list read in Post 137 to give Blonde plenty of time to reflect upon where his supposedly Beli suspicions to have gone). In hindsight, this looks like Blonde is purposefully turning a blind eye to Beli-scum.

scrambles

(1)

Day One: Doesn't do a lot (other than complimenting his slot in Post 233 :eyeroll:) until his vote on Beli in Post 339 and Post 340.

(a)

The basis for scrambles' Beli vote is solely: "I currently dont like belisarius at all for that "derp, I have no scumreads" comment." This is a surface read. It's not even a read. It's copying and pasting what other players said immediately prior to scrambles vote: acryon in Post 328 and farside in Post 337.

(b)

The timing of the Bel vote is particularly cringe-worthy.

- Naked Jogger voted Beli in Post 314. That brought Beli up to 2 votes (Amy and Naked), putting the Beli-wagon just one vote behind the Chaos-wagon (3 votes) and the Skelda-wagon (3 votes).
- From NakedJogger's Beli-vote to scrambles Beli-vote, nobody else actually voted Beli. But it's clear that that's where the wind was blowing:
- Skelda, Post 316: "Of the people with votes, I am most likely to go back to Beli. I really do not think that Chaos is scum. I guess I could see acryon, not really sure. But I am not in the mood to die Day 1 again."
- acryon, Post 328: "I don't like votes without explanation (314 from NakedJogger), but 313 from Belisaurus really sucks IMO. Bel's entire ISO at this point is tunneling Farside and trolling. Follow that up with a "darn I wish I had more to go off of!" and he really doesn't look good to me."
- acryon, Post 332: "I would say I am between Bel and Skelda at this point."
- farside, Post 337: "Bel is another player that concerns me. I don't see a lot coming from him for reads. Those are still my top two scum reads."
- Dry-fit, Post 338: "Belisaurius is a wildcard for me. I still don't know what to think of him."

SPECULATION: scrambles saw that there were votes already on Beli-scum, and saw that there were plenty of players who were also willing (and almost ready) to vote Beli. Rather than being late to the party, scrambles got ahead of the Beli-wagon and preemptively bussed his partner.

QUERY: why bus a partner over, putting Beli-wagon at 3 votes, to tie it with the other two leading wagons (Chaos and Skelda)? Because scum like to bus their partners for some stupid reason. Because scrambles wouldn't have to explain away a bad vote on confirmed town Skelda, or likely town Chaos. Makes it easier to play.

(c)

I think scrambles' "unsafe lynches are the best lynches" gobbledygook nonsense in Post 353 is scum posturing: scrambles is saying ALL AT ONCE that (1) chaos is reasonably suspicious, and is therefore a "safe" lynch, and thus voting him denies all culpability to a chaos-voter, which would be where scum would place their vote, (2) Beli is not reasonably suspicious (because a Beli-vote is "unsafe") and therefore if Beli were to flip town, scrambles would rightly get suspicion on him, (3) because Beli is an unsafe lynch, and not a safe lynch, scum wouldn't be keen on voting Beli, and therefore scrambles must be town.

(d)

scrambles is willing to back of Beli (Post 359), but never actually does so (much less follow through this willingness to reevaluate his Beli-vote) because that would look REALLY BAD if he jumped off the Beli-wagon and a Beli lynch actually went through.

(2)

Day Two: first reading through D2, I started to doubt my suspicions on the Blonde/scrambles slot, but then I got to Toby's insight and rethought my position:

I've had a scum buddy, having obviously going to be lynched the next day

, have their plan be that day to call me town and argue it to their death.

The bolded is what I think very much happened. Scum saw that Beli was a probable D2 lynch, and so acted accordingly. In this light, scrambles' D2 Beli-focus is weird:

(a)

scrambles first D2 posts asks

chaos

, and only chaos, what chaos thinks about Beli. (Post 570, Post 574, Post 634.) Why the zeroing in on chaos? Why not try to get more of the thread on board? It looks like scrambles is making a half-hearted attempt to get people back on the Beli-wagon.

(b)

scrambles reasoning for a Beli-vote have downgraded: no longer is it that Beli isn't actually giving good reasons, it's only that "there's something there," a "feeling," and some type of "vibe." (Post 574.) Holy smokes that's a horrible effort to justify a suspicion: "Hey guys, I totally am on board with this suspicion, but I'll let others fill out my nebulous accusations." Looks like scum recognizing that Beli-lynch might be inevitable for D2, but doesn't want to actually contribute to it at the beginning of the day just in case if suspicions go elsewhere.

(c)

Then we get scrambles Beli-vote in Post 634. Now he's fourth on the Beli-wagon. Why the Beli-vote from scrambles? Because of Beli's wifom (Post 636.) Once again, not original Beli-suspicions:

- Toby, in Post 440: "everyone huddle together and let's wifom what this means." (in a Beli/Toby back-and-forth)
- CKD, in Post 450: "too flippant (yeah yeah WIFOM)..also his is a counter wagon to someone I think is scum." (discussing why he thinks Beli is town)

(d)

scrambles then ignores Beli for the remainder of the day, up until Beli is L-1. Only then does scrambles jab at Beli in Post 861. scrambles literally did not talk to Beli at all, did not try to pursue or explore his suspicions, until the Beli lynch was sealed.

[Riddleton]

You suspect everyone.

Yeah, that's what i think you did.

[Green Crayons]

I suspect everyone?

That makes no sense.

[Green Crayons]

I have crossed Titus off my list. I think CDB's absence from the thread actually speaks in favor of him. I have been weighing your play in my head for a while now, just not vocalizing it.

[Green Crayons]

Yeah, that's what i think you did.

Not sure if on par, or worse, than CKD's "magical words" suspicions.

[curiouskarmadog]

lol..

unvote.

not that I want to be in the defending GC business but.

farside/riddleton, why would it be a good GCscum play, to take his vote off of me at -1 to put it on farside that one seems to want to vote?

i personally dont know what to think of GC...I do think his vote of me was strange, but given the particular game climate, I get it. I dont get however, why he questioned riddleton about my wagon, when he was on it. If he didnt feel good about it, why not unvote? I didnt like the "farside is scummy because of the lack of posting" inclination. I still dont like (and I know I am the only one who thinks this) "I know for a fact I am town" bit.

on the other hand, timing of his votes on previous non CKD wagons, didnt look scum motivated. I also dont see certain posts/actions as coming from scum.

truly on the fence here.


going to reread.

still need more from CDB and titus.....

[Riddleton]

You're right, sorry. Scum never bus their budies!

I've made cases on scumbuddies before. What's your point?

[Green Crayons]

Scum laying out a solid case against a buddy, when that buddy has no prior suspicions, when that buddy is the last living buddy, on Day 3, is borderline anti-win condition. It gets peopled riled up against the buddy even if the scum were to ultimately abandon his buddy vote.

Is it possible that I am scum who bussed his buddy? Yes, list most things, it is possible. Is it more plausible that I am scum who bussed his buddy than a player who replaced into the game, who had a good grasp of the players and slots, and did pretty well on deducing at least one slot who was scum? No.

This is actually the same flawed reasoning for your position that CKD is scum who refused to vote either of his buddies. It's possible. Why is it more plausible than the alternative? Because reasons.

[Riddleton]

It's "more possible", and I think that's the deciding factor for me in this stage of the game.

[Riddleton]

It's not anti-win condition at all. There are cases where this is a plausible scum move, such as an inexperienced buddy you wish to bus (ie. scrambles) and make a huge case on so you can get towncred and live onwards.

[Riddleton]

If you knew the gamestate pointed to your buddy being pinned later on in the day, you figure you may as well be the one to break the news

[Green Crayons]

Once again, inability to explain why bus is more plausible than town case, even though both are possible.

[Green Crayons]

If you knew the gamestate pointed to your buddy being pinned later on in the day, you figure you may as well be the one to break the news

Are you saying this was the gamestate?

[Riddleton]

If you knew the gamestate pointed to your buddy being pinned later on in the day, you figure you may as well be the one to break the news

Are you saying this was the gamestate?

Possibly. Scum are more aware of what's happening in the game than the town are.

If, hypothetically, you had knowledge that scrambles easily broke under pressure as he did in D3, you knew he would be pinned and caught at some point. Ticking time bomb.

[Riddleton]

I think you are scum for my case. The bussing does fit in as scum motivation:

Green Crayons

Sorry if this becomes wall-y. Two main issues with GC:

1) The scrambles vote in #1060 is strange. I think that he made the case & post in the right time where scrambles wasn't under much suspicion, so that the wagon won't take off much. And he's right -- it didn't. The main thing that fuelled the wagon was scramble's defensc and lies about his experience & his meta of 'not talking to scumreads', and finally his comment about how he groups scum with doctor. I'm also speculating that GC, despite his wall post being 100% correct, specifically made the post incredibly long and drawn out as if to discourage people from reading the whole thing. That's my paranoia speaking, though.

a) He aggressively pushes Scrambles for most of the way there -- saying that his defence of 'WiFOM' isn't accurate, among other things -- until he just decides to abruptly stop once Scrambles pushes out these weak defence posts that don't actually mean anything. The way I see it, GC's suspicion of Scrambles rises and rises, so I don't understand what's so special about scrambles' posts that makes GC just step down from all suspicion and unvote in this post. The transition is awkward and feels forced. Most of Scrambles' responses were talks of his own meta as scum, and lies about experience and playstyle of 'not responding to scumreads' that were all quickly unearthed. What part of these responses did you 'Like' in that post enough to unvote him?

b) His further interaction is more awkward, still. We see GC ask me why I don't like his responses, despite me saying so in the exact same post. I assume he then realises in #1445 his unvote starts to look bad w/r/t how bad Scrambles' defence was. From here, GC's push of Scrambles starts again. Just out of nowhere, at Scrambles questioning whether my comment on him is valid on this post. Long story short, these spasmodic pushes on Scrambles result in a revote on him, followed by an unvote, and finally we see GC finally stick to Scrambles here, with his last justification on the vote being that he trusts my judgement.

Conclusion is that I think GC's push and posts on Scrambles were awkward. We see unusual interaction with this slot, as GC quickly changes his mind time-after-time again depending on whether the gamestate is pushing for scrambles lynch, or a mislynch on someone like CDB. In a nutshell, the original justification of the unvote on Scrambles is what I don't like the most, as it seems very strange that an experienced player would believe that an emotional, ab hominem type-defence is town. I just don't buy that after all your pushing, you think Scrambles is just 'Frustrated town' in this post, seemingly to undermine all your effort in bussing your buddy until now.

---

2) Day 4's play is very different. Late day 3, we see justification of how he trusts my judgement. Perhaps because that he's the only scum left, and sheeping me on pushes on CKD for instance won't draw any attention to himself. I theorise that he will use my push at Scrambles as an excuse to set himself up to follow onto a CKD wagon. We get another post from him on here that despite him disagreeing with my case earlier, he's happy with it now and 'gives it more credit'. All of a sudden, GC is more malleable because of how I was correct with Scrambles. That doesn't make much sense to me, and reads as scum trying to jump onto a wagon without too much responsibility for it afterwards.

a) In this post, we see he's looking at CKD and then Amy (I was, too, for CKD), and then comments about how the no majority isn't no lynch in this game. That's fine, because it's an impression I, and pretty much anyone was under as it's the norm here. What bugs me is it seems this is an excuse later on in the next post to say it's CKD and then Farside and then amy. From this point, I think we see a notable change in stance over CKD, and he's preparing himself up for an easy wagon on farside or amy later on. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but I don't like how this change of stance comes at a similar time to when I start to feel less confident about CKD, also.

b) I don't like the farside case that stems out of this, as I've discussed earlier. I don't think V/LA is scummy, and I don't think it's unusual that a reasonable portion of her ISO is catch-up posts. You say in #1777 you're not willing to do a meta argument for Farside, but yet in #1781 you do just that, as I more openly explain my suspicions on your slot. Why is that?.

Royal Ape

1) #141 really just says absolutely nothing. Does nothing but point out the obvious by saying "I prefer real reasoning, and not arbitrary reasoning". Gives the impression of 'activity' but accomplishes nothing; so I don't like seemingly obvious/vague posts like this.

2) #144 and #145 are really on-the-fence regarding Skelda. This is the first time we see RoyalApe fence-sitting, and he does this a lot. He claims here that "Skelda's towntell on NJ wasn't valid, ergo scummy", but later says in the next post "But the rest of his ISO is good. He's null!". Following up on this, I find it strange how he talks about saying "I've no reads/no idea" is null-scum behaviour, but he does this himself in #158.

3) Speaking of the above, RoyalApe's play is very cautious, similar to that I'd expect of newbie scum. An example of this is how scarce RoyalApe is with his voting; he fence-sits a lot and says people "might be scummy", but actually only votes for Skelda (not counting RVS votes) in 32 posts from #73 to #748. Acryon's criticism of his play in this post is valid, and RoyalApe dismisses it as 'Oh, cool that's a neat term I'm not familiar with', not responding to any accusations.

4) #189 is basically "Whoooooppps, I'm still on my RVS vote, but I don't want to admit that". I don't like how, if he was scum, casually unvotes his buddy saying "I think he's town". I should point out it's common scum behaviour to vote their buddies in RVS. It doesn't get much suspicion from other townies, as the 'interactions' between them can be faked. In this post, we also see RA categorise people as either 'townie ISOs' or 'Null ISOs for lack of content'. Why did he forget to mention his buddy, Beli in this list? Beli's content was questionable and a big heap of WiFOM. Why is that not 'Null' or 'Scummy' by his definitions?

5) Attacks NJ's reasoning for voting for RA in #202 as 'Silly' and 'We're not in RVS anymore'. Gives a justification that 'XYZ reason is great, but your reason is crap, I don't accept your vote', which doesn't sit well with me at all. RoyalApe later backs down from this stance, after NJ questioned him, by saying "I didn't think it was exactly scummy, per se....", starting again with the defensive play.

6) Starts a useless line of interrogation with Amy in #204, midly suggesting that 'Counting votes yourself is scummy'. When Skelda questions this, RoyalApe responds in #214, with another very defensive post, saying that 'It's not useless until we find out', which reads as sort of desperate to me. My theory is that RoyalApe is trying to pursue Amy of Beli onto a mislynch like Skelda (which he does later). At least with CKD, it's that he thinks Beli was town, and not dragging all votes away from the slot.

7) Basically fence-sits the way through with Beli, questioning others reads with him in posts like #317, but not actually having a solid opinion on him. Never once in his ISO does he state he thinks Beli to be town or scum. Tries to divert focus away from Beli in this post saying we should be focusing on 'EVERYONE!' and not just two suspects, which reads as desperate scum trying to get attention away from his buddy.

[Green Crayons]

lol

I have super powers as scum under your theory about this "possible" gamestate of scrambles somehow getting suspicion on him at a point later in the day that I replaced in, and about scrambles playstyle (even though I think there was this huge discussion in this game about him not having many games on mafiascum?).


Okay, Riddle.

[curiouskarmadog]

it feels like GC left the CDB wagon at a pretty pivotal point.

Vote Count 3.11

Titus: (2) acryon, scrambles
acryon: (1) Farside22
ChannelDelibird: (3) Curiouskarmadog , Kalimar, Amy Farrah Fowler

(L-2)

scrambles: (4) Titus, Riddleton, ChannelDelibird, Green Crayons

Not Voting:

With 10 alive, it takes 6 to lynch.

Deadline: (expired on 2014-10-18 20:47:00)

Mod Notes:
None

[/area]

[curiouskarmadog]

If you knew the gamestate pointed to your buddy being pinned later on in the day, you figure you may as well be the one to break the news

Are you saying this was the gamestate?

Possibly. Scum are more aware of what's happening in the game than the town are.

If, hypothetically, you had knowledge that scrambles easily broke under pressure as he did in D3, you knew he would be pinned and caught at some point. Ticking time bomb.

why is GC guilty of this and not farside?

[Riddleton]

lol

I have super powers as scum under your theory about this "possible" gamestate of scrambles somehow getting suspicion on him at a point later in the day that I replaced in, and about scrambles playstyle (even though I think there was this huge discussion in this game about him not having many games on mafiascum?).


Okay, Riddle.

I'm not saying you foresaw the future, I'm saying you could have spotted that he broke under pressure elsewhere.

For example a typical conversatino in a QT:
GC: "Hey! Scrambles! Hey Beli"
Beli: "Philoxene, ut GreenCrayons!"
Scrambles: "Hey, I'm still a little new at this.. sorry if I make newbie mistakes"

[Riddleton]

ie. You knew he was new, you knew he hadn't done many games, you knew he got a little flustered when talking about experience. Hence you knew he would be caught. That's the ticking time bomb thing you caught onto.