Excalibur: Day Two

[Brickdoctor]

Because I 'haven't contributed anything'. No one has contributed anything, aside from accusations that got innocent people killed. If that's our standard, I'll pass on 'contributing' at this point.

Okay, let's all be like Francis. Let's 'not contribute' and not accuse anyone, not lynch anyone, and have no reactions to accusations or other behavior to analyze. Let's sit back and hope that the Vig gets lucky and/or that the Scum lie down and die. Let's also repeatedly criticize the discussion - if there actually is one after all the other stuff we're not going to do - and make no attempts to fix the problem.

[Waterbrick Down]

Well wading through all of these conversations we have two cases it would seem before us. A case against Commander Watlers (Tamamono)and one against Lieutenant Daly (Darkdragon). As Chief Engineer Wilder (Peanuts) initially stated, Daly has been playing the middle road, speaking from past experience this is one of the foremost grasping accusations made by scum as the accused can't win no matter how they answer, believe me I've done it before. However if we are to assume Wilder is a scum trying to bring down a townie, we have to wonder why he would do so when the debate between Jones and Walters is going on. Also it may be worth noting that it looks like we may have a third killer on the loose who attempted to bring an end to the already deceased doctor Burbank during the day which seems more like a SK styled killing, unless of course there are two scum teams and one of them has a day kill. I'm going to read through a little more of the arguments a little more closely before further comments, though it would seem the scuffle between Lieutenant Jones and Commander Walters has calmed down a little bit.

Since it's been brought up a few times, I'll clarify my comment.

1. I'm stating that the only discussions/cases were about Tamamono and Darkdragon at the time, not that they were are only options as far as a lynch.

2. My accusation against Peanuts was based on my past experience playing as a scummy scum in a past performance, in that an accusation against someone for playing in the middle of the road is one that I've used in the past and I was recognizing it here. However I brought up that he had made his accusation during the Tamamono scuffle which would have been a dumb play for a scum.

3. The comment about Burbank was made before I realized the whole scenario was made by a practical joker (OoC: I missed the joke in the discussion topic) and hence tried to reconcile the event with the presence of a SK.

Hopefully this makes things a little clearer.

[Flare]

Hmm. I'm not sure what to think about you. Yesterday, I thought you might have been in league with Awesomestar and KotZ, but that didn't turn out well. Your behavior has struck me as somewhat scummy, as there's very little substance to your comments. Yesterday, you showed up to say several things which weren't particularly useful, and then voted with the bandwagon. And now you show up and establish that you're suspicious of Walter for voting, when he hasn't even voted! Are you talking about Lieutenant Michael McAndrews (Brickdoctor)? The point is though that you established your suspicion on him for an unfounded reason, and it looks to me like you could show up again when a Lynch has started so that you could say something like: "I was suspicious of him earlier and now I agree with what everyone else is saying. Vote: Tammo/(ProbsTownorBussedScum)" I'm not sure if this post is scummy or just highly confused.

I am confused, by all the different finger-pointing that pops up and settles down all (while its night-time where I live). To be honest, I don't have anything helpful to contribute, and thats the problem. If you'd rather me just shut up and say nothing, then I will.

As for voting for me before I had a chance to respond... I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Ask me any questions and I will answer (provided that I'm actually awake, if you haven't noticed I live in Israel which is Greenwich +5)

[Waterbrick Down]

I believe you have yet to clarify your point about Commander Walters.

(Hi everyone, sorry for not coming in earlier. I could've sworn that I had left a comment yesterday afternoon, but my browser screwed up at the moment that I posted the comment, and I thought that it would've been posted, but I guess it didn't )

Anyways, I'm not finding anyone today extremely scummy. The only person I am feeling anything scummy about him is Commander Coryn Walter, I can't put my finger on it exactly, but something about the way he has been acting has been making me feel uncomfortable... I find his quickness to vote without much serious proof also scummy

I'm not voting for anyone yet, though. I'm not determined that anyone is scum, yet.

Walters had yet to vote at this point, additionally I'm not a big fan of the "I can't put my finger on it exactly" which means you may be town and didn't spend the time going through the pages of posts Walters had made in order to find something concrete agianst him, but still want to appear active, or you are a scum who also didn't want to take the time to look through Walter's posts but still wants to appear town like by voicing a suspicion agianst the person who seemed to be on the chopping block at the time. Either way I find the comment unhelpful, this is day 2 here we've had plenty of discussion and we should be able to move a little away from the "gut feelings" mentality.

[fhomess]

So I know the conversation has moved on but I'm going to go back to the discussion between Commander Walters and Lieutenant Jones. Personally, I don't think the approach Jones was taking suggested that Walters was scum. That said, I think there are some things that came about during the conversation that people don't really seem to have picked up on. I think if Jones had noticed these things, perhaps he would not have dropped the case, but it's also possible that he was just feeling stress about being challenged on it.

Here's what I saw in that exchange that leads me to think that Commander Walters may in fact be scum:

1. Commander Walters contacted Jones to request he be watched/protected. He said having a watcher on him would help confirm some people. Naturally, such an action could be helpful to either side, and the scum knowing that Commander Walters could be a target of night actions would be very helpful for them if they have roles that can see what's going on as well. I disagree with the notion that such a request on day 1 is reasonable for a loyalist to make with the expectation it really will clear several people. Commander Walters is smarter than that. It's worth noting that Commander Walters has not denied anything of the private correspondence, so we can take it as accurate.

2. Much of Commander Walters declarations of innocence are embellished with Appeals to Emotion of the most blatant kind.

3. Commander Walters declares two of his statements to have been said in jest. The statements in question were the one about wanting protection and the one about wanting to lead the town. That's possible, but it's also possible that he would throw those in there with smilies to make them look that way to deceive while still wanting to plant the idea in a lead townie's head. This is a common scum tactic of trying to influence subtly without looking suspicious. I don't care how you phrase it, it's scummy to suggest it, and it's scummier still to suggest you meant it only in jest. If you said it, you meant it. It's not unreasonable for a townie to ask for protection if they have a reasonable need for it, such as a forced role claim in thread. Honestly, I'd have believed in his innocence more if he had confessed to these things as desires rather than trying to brush them off as jokes.

4. When asked if he had contacted anyone else, he said no. When Jones created his play that showed he had indeed spoken to someone, he said he may have accidentally forgotten that he spoke to others about this same thing. It's an about face of something that he had said previously.

- Post #29 & Post #36

Ultimately, I don't think the case is a slam dunk, but I believe it to be stronger than the case against anyone else, and that's based primarily on the final two points. Those points are his reactions during the earlier accusations that I don't find trustworthy, so for now...

Vote: Commander Walters (Tamamono)

As an aside, I was reflecting that it's funny I tend to write "Tammo", even though it's "Tama"

[Palathadric]

Since it's been brought up a few times, I'll clarify my comment.

1. I'm stating that the only discussions/cases were about Tamamono and Darkdragon at the time, not that they were are only options as far as a lynch.

2. My accusation against Peanuts was based on my past experience playing as a scummy scum in a past performance, in that an accusation against someone for playing in the middle of the road is one that I've used in the past and I was recognizing it here. However I brought up that he had made his accusation during the Tamamono scuffle which would have been a dumb play for a scum.

3. The comment about Burbank was made before I realized the whole scenario was made by a practical joker (OoC: I missed the joke in the discussion topic) and hence tried to reconcile the event with the presence of a SK.

Hopefully this makes things a little clearer.

This still does not clear you at all of making a very odd and scummy post. Still, I think you're experienced enough to not do something so blatantly scummy if you were scum, so I'm just not sure, but that post seemed incredibly worthless and like you were trying to help while not helping at all.

-snip-

This is a very interesting series of points you're making. You may almost have persuaded me to vote for Mr. Walters, but let's see what he has to say when he comes up. This is one of the better cases I've seen today, so it's worth thinking over.

[Flare]

I believe you have yet to clarify your point about Commander Walters.

Sure thing!

I find Commander Walters to be suspicious in various aspects and I will try to list them here...

#1. He has claimed twice to just be joking. First about protection and second about leading the town... things that a similar character did in the popular TV show "Jedi Temple Mafia", and then he ended up being a bad guy. Asking to do scummy things is scummy, and then pretending that its just a joke is even more scummy... He's just trying to deflect the blame. (post #29).

#2. He was also acting like there was such a bandwagon against him, when in fact there hasn't been. Although there might be soon

#3. Also in the beginning of the day he was really harping the fact that he should've be killed the night before by the scum... perhaps he's trying to discreetly instill a false feeling, of that he's the enemy of the scum, therefore definitely not a scum?

#4. Cmdr Walters seems to be a fan of using "Appeals to Emotion" while claiming his innocence, which seems pretty scummy.

#5. He did start bragging about starting the bandwagon against Robbins, and if credit needs to go to anyone then definitely not to Walters. This reminds me of something I've seen in a recent mafia game, which I'll cover next.

These points lead to my last note: His behavior has also been unnervingly similar to a similar character did in the popular TV show "The Jedi Temple Mafia", especially #1, #2, & #5. This character was at first town, but then got converted to scum on Day Two. He managed to get control of the town because of his clever talk and early grab to power when he was still town... and control them to his evil will. I dearly hope the same will not happen this time.

I find that the case against Commander Walters is stronger than any other, so I'll be voting for him now and if he comes with a reasonable defense, then he may be un-voted by me. I am not 100% sure that Walters is one of dem Purists, but as was said in "The Jedi Temple Mafia", the only way is to vote him out, right?

Vote: Commander Walters (Tamamono)

[Bob]

Vote Tally:

Arnold Daly (darkdragon): 2 (Brickdoctor, CallMePie)

Richard Francis (Shadows): 1 (darkdragon)

Suzanne Vanderbilt (Flare):1 (Dannylonglegs)

Cameron Walters (Tamamono):1 (Flare)

Don't forget, you need 11 votes to convict. There's less than 15 hours left in the day or so.

[Flare]

Don't forget, you need 11 votes to convict. There's less than 15 hours left in the day or so.

You missed one vote, fhomess also voted for Commander Walter.

[Tamamono]

Here's what I saw in that exchange that leads me to think that Commander Walters may in fact be scum:

1. Commander Walters contacted Jones to request he be watched/protected. He said having a watcher on him would help confirm some people. Naturally, such an action could be helpful to either side, and the scum knowing that Commander Walters could be a target of night actions would be very helpful for them if they have roles that can see what's going on as well. I disagree with the notion that such a request on day 1 is reasonable for a loyalist to make with the expectation it really will clear several people. Commander Walters is smarter than that. It's worth noting that Commander Walters has not denied anything of the private correspondence, so we can take it as accurate.

I did not contact him solely for that - he and I had been in contact beforehand, and I made a comment that I'd be a good target for a watcher. What's not 'loyal' about this? Isn't it in the town's best interests to get people confirmed?

2. Much of Commander Walters declarations of innocence are embellished with Appeals to Emotion of the most blatant kind.

On the contrary, I think I've used very good logic in defending myself, and the emotional responses were responses to Jones himself.

3. Commander Walters declares two of his statements to have been said in jest. The statements in question were the one about wanting protection and the one about wanting to lead the town. That's possible, but it's also possible that he would throw those in there with smilies to make them look that way to deceive while still wanting to plant the idea in a lead townie's head. This is a common scum tactic of trying to influence subtly without looking suspicious. I don't care how you phrase it, it's scummy to suggest it, and it's scummier still to suggest you meant it only in jest. If you said it, you meant it. It's not unreasonable for a townie to ask for protection if they have a reasonable need for it, such as a forced role claim in thread. Honestly, I'd have believed in his innocence more if he had confessed to these things as desires rather than trying to brush them off as jokes.

Donna, that's so far-fetched an idea it makes my stomach hurt. Literally. "Influence subtly"? Really? Yes, I'm scum and I'm going to win this game through subliminal messaging!

Donna, I understand that I may not have been useful enough yesterday for protection, and I understood it then, too. It would have been nice, but it was a joke. The same goes with trying to lead. Jones had actually been making half-joking (or was he serious? ) comments about checking me out, and I responded with another joke. I do not want to lead, and frankly, I don't have the time for it.

Man, what is it with people and empty pushes these days?

4. When asked if he had contacted anyone else, he said no. When Jones created his play that showed he had indeed spoken to someone, he said he may have accidentally forgotten that he spoke to others about this same thing. It's an about face of something that he had said previously.

- Post #29 & Post #36

That is complete and utter megablocks. I said I had never professed my fears to anyone else - but I've been in contact with lots of people. You're either misunderstanding something very important, or you're intentionally twisting my words around.

I find Commander Walters to be suspicious in various aspects and I will try to list them here...

#1. He has claimed twice to just be joking. First about protection and second about leading the town... things that a similar character did in the popular TV show "Jedi Temple Mafia", and then he ended up being a bad guy. Asking to do scummy things is scummy, and then pretending that its just a joke is even more scummy... He's just trying to deflect the blame. (post #29).

Are you people for real? Can't a guy make a joke without everyone running around like headless chickens?

#2. He was also acting like there was such a bandwagon against him, when in fact there hasn't been. Although there might be soon

No, I wasn't acting like there was a bandwagon against me. I was responding to the death tunnel Jones had had on me. Had he continued that, I would have surely been lynched.

And I thought Donna's points were hollow...

#3. Also in the beginning of the day he was really harping the fact that he should've be killed the night before by the scum... perhaps he's trying to discreetly instill a false feeling, of that he's the enemy of the scum, therefore definitely not a scum?

Okay, yeah, that does it, this chick is not town. No townie in their right mind would make up such a ridiculous reason for voting somebody. She didn't have enough reasons to jump on my bandwagon, so she made a few up. This is just like her post earlier - she's trying to look helpful.

Vote: Lieutenant Suzanne Vanderbilt (Flare)

Please note that this is not an omgus, I was planning to do this earlier but didn't have the chance, and Vanderbilt's most recent post makes me even more inclined to do so.

I honestly don't think I need to explain this vote - Vanderbilt's been extremely unhelpful so far, but has acted like she is helpful, like when she apologized for showing up at a perfectly respectable time, or when she added extra megablocks reasons to vote for me. I personally don't feel comfortable voting for Francis or Daly, as they're both null leaning town in my book, so I figured instead that I'd vote for Vanderbilt - the person I really think is scum.

#4. Cmdr Walters seems to be a fan of using "Appeals to Emotion" while claiming his innocence, which seems pretty scummy.

See above.

#5. He did start bragging about starting the bandwagon against Robbins, and if credit needs to go to anyone then definitely not to Walters. This reminds me of something I've seen in a recent mafia game, which I'll cover next.

I did not brag about it, and I've already addressed this point. I was going to say something else, and lost my train of thought.

[Shadows]

Okay, let's all be like Francis. Let's 'not contribute' and not accuse anyone, not lynch anyone, and have no reactions to accusations or other behavior to analyze. Let's sit back and hope that the Vig gets lucky and/or that the Scum lie down and die. Let's also repeatedly criticize the discussion - if there actually is one after all the other stuff we're not going to do - and make no attempts to fix the problem.

You know, when people don't know anything, they should shut their mouths and not hurt us more by getting the wrong people killed. The only people who know anything solid at this point are the scum and any investigator we may have, assuming we haven't already foolishly killed them in our mindless guessing.

Let's review. Talk too much, get accused. Accuse someone, get accused. Don't talk because you don't have anything helpful to say, get accused. I'm fairly certain that tomorrow, if we don't get lucky today, it'll be vote for someone who turns out innocent, get accused. Brilliant, let's go with your plan.

Amusingly, the person you support killing today is the one who accused me, for the same reason you just listed above, inactivity. It was idiotic from them and it's idiotic from you, in my opinion, but hey, let's not be inactive, lest we be accused for that, so instead I'll follow your lead and see where it takes us this time.

Vote: Arnold Daly (darkdragon)

Happy?

I, for one, hope it's right, but if it is, it's pure luck. We could use some good luck right about now.

If, in the next few hours, another vote comes along that could actually pass, I'll change accordingly. It isn't like we're doing this with any logic or knowledge.

[Peanuts]

Well, there doesn't seem to be a really convincing case, but we have to reach a conviction, that's why I stick with the one against Lieutenant Daly. The reasons? Well, mainly because of her IIoA and how she keeps changing between suspects. She has shortly accused several players and now goes against Francis, who, while not talking much, is also not quite a major suspect of me. I'm far from sure, though, and might change my vote in order to reach a conviction. If I'm suspicious of the lynchee, that is, of course.

The case against Walters is far better presented by Donna Willis, but yet not a strong one. It makes me suspicious of Walters, though.

About Lt. Vanderbilt, while I can clearly see where the suspicion against her comes from, I'd rather give her time to redeem herself than vote for her just now.

I'll vote: Arnold Daly (darkdragon)

[Fugazi]

Umph... There is no real case against any of the lynch candidates today, and I don't feel confident enough to vote. However there are still a few hours left and perhaps under the pressure something will come up.

[fhomess]

Donna, that's so far-fetched an idea it makes my stomach hurt. Literally. "Influence subtly"? Really? Yes, I'm scum and I'm going to win this game through subliminal messaging!

Your ability to twist words is duly noted. Subtle and subliminal are not the same thing, and I'm sure anyone here would agree that one goal of the scum is to subtly influence loyalist thinking to further their agenda.

That is complete and utter megablocks. I said I had never professed my fears to anyone else - but I've been in contact with lots of people. You're either misunderstanding something very important, or you're intentionally twisting my words around.

Perhaps I misinterpreted it, but this statement:

Okay, yeah, I might have accidentally talked to someone who was talking to the watcher (or even to the watcher himself), so that makes sense. I had overlooked that.

just strikes me as too much of a convenient oversight from someone of your rank.

No, I wasn't acting like there was a bandwagon against me. I was responding to the death tunnel Jones had had on me. Had he continued that, I would have surely been lynched.

This is another reason I don't trust you. Why were you so paranoid? No one besides Jones had really pushed it, yet you acted like everyone was behind him. There were no choruses of "Yes, I'm ready to vote him now!" No angry mob with pitchforks. Just a lone crier sounding alarm. If you look at my case, it's not based on Jones' points so much as your reaction to them. I understand you're an emotional person, but a Commander should have a more level head than that.

And I thought Donna's points were hollow...

You're certainly welcome to feel this way and others may feel the same. If it doesn't go anywhere and you prove to be a loyalist, I'll be happy to have been mistaken.

[Dannylonglegs]

Sorry for the long post.

*snip*

Hopefully this makes things a little clearer.

Alright, thanks for responding to my suspicions. This doesn't clear you entirely in my mind, but I won't be voting for you today. I'm keeping my eyes on you though.

I am confused, by all the different finger-pointing that pops up and settles down all (while its night-time where I live). To be honest, I don't have anything helpful to contribute, and thats the problem. If you'd rather me just shut up and say nothing, then I will.

Well, according to Francis, nothing any of us has said has been useful at all anyways, so we're all in the same boat there. What strikes me as scummy about your comments though is that you do speak up every now and then, but you say nothing and your confusion is evident. If you're a townie, read the posts, and try not to say someone's voted who hasn't! You don't look like you're hopelessly confused, you look like you're trying to find reasons to get Walters Lynched, and trying to seem helpful! I forget who it was who said this during that holo-series Jedi Temple Mafia, Templies don't have to try to seem helpful, they actually need to be helpful, or else they'll let the sith win, or let themselves get wrongfully Lynched! (It was probably Coryn , but the adage still stands)

As for voting for me before I had a chance to respond... I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Any faith at this point is misguided, because we have no bearing for who may or may not be scum, because, unfortunately, we haven't caught one yet! So excuse me for not having enough faith to wait for your reply to vote. We can unvote, so anything to make you respond is a good thing in my opinion.

*Snip*

Interesting, this argument is allot better than the one that Jones made earlier. However, I still think Flare is the best candidate for Lynching today.

Sure thing!

*snip

Vote: Commander Walters (Tamamono)

See, I told you she'd do it.

Yesterday, you showed up to say several things which weren't particularly useful, and then voted with the bandwagon. And now you show up and establish that you're suspicious of Walter for voting, when he hasn't even voted! Are you talking about Lieutenant Michael McAndrews (Brickdoctor)? The point is though that you established your suspicion on him for an unfounded reason, and it looks to me like you could show up again when a Lynch has started so that you could say something like: "I was suspicious of him earlier and now I agree with what everyone else is saying. Vote: Tammo/(ProbsTownorBussedScum)" I'm not sure if this post is scummy or just highly confused.

You established your "suspicion" of him earlier for a nonexistent reason, and now you're back with a bad rehash of the case just made by Donna. You were looking for reasons to vote for him, and you found them! congrats! I could go through your argument point by point and explain where the ideas in it are exactly those of Donna and where your metagaming and bad reasoning take their place, but Walters just did, and while Donna's case against him is much better than Jones' I still think you are a better Lynch candidate than Walters. Your behavior strikes me as incredibly scummy and nothing you have said yet makes me think otherwise, and allot of what you've done so far actually reaffirms my suspicions. I do want to mention this quote however.

I find that the case against Commander Walters is stronger than any other, so I'll be voting for him now and if he comes with a reasonable defense, then he may be un-voted by me. I am not 100% sure that Walters is one of dem Purists, but as was said in "The Jedi Temple Mafia", the only way is to vote him out, right?

Yes, the only way to see if he's one of "dem purists" is to vote for him... or anyone else who looks like they may have a bandwagon forming against them that might be better to jump on than Walters' It looks like your establishing your escape route in case another bandwagon comes along. Right now I wouldn't be surprised if you were both scum trying to use the other as a "scum wouldn't vote off scum" argument. That's a bit of a long shot though. Right now, I'm only suspicious enough to vote off you.

[Brickdoctor]

You know, when people don't know anything, they should shut their mouths and not hurt us more by getting the wrong people killed. The only people who know anything solid at this point are the scum and any investigator we may have, assuming we haven't already foolishly killed them in our mindless guessing.

Let's review. Talk too much, get accused. Accuse someone, get accused. Don't talk because you don't have anything helpful to say, get accused. I'm fairly certain that tomorrow, if we don't get lucky today, it'll be vote for someone who turns out innocent, get accused. Brilliant, let's go with your plan.

Accusations are good for us. Accusations generate reactions. Reactions can be analyzed to help us find Scum. The only reason for someone to want to avoid being accused is if he has something to hide...

[Flare]

Ensign Pewter, I had already started writing up my little list about Commander Walters before that Donna posted hers. I find that you have always been against me, even before I said much at all. Why choose me rather than other inactive members? A lot of members haven't posted much helpful at all, if they've even commented at all.

And Commander Walters, you railing against me just because of my accusations against you also reminds me of the Jedi Temple Mafia. I find your response to my (and Donna's) reasons why we think you're scum to be quite harsh and twisting. I'm sorry but now I'm even more determined that you are scum.

Interesting, this argument is allot better than the one that Jones made earlier. However, I still think Flare is the best candidate for Lynching today.

You make it seem that the candidates for lynching, are the ones that are arguing against Walters? Hmmm... I smell something wrong here.

[Dannylonglegs]

Ensign Pewter, I had already started writing up my little list about Commander Walters before that Donna posted hers. I find that you have always been against me, even before I said much at all. Why choose me rather than other inactive members? A lot of members haven't posted much helpful at all, if they've even commented at all.

I chose you because all of your comments so far have given me a scummy vibe, today, and yesterday. I've already explained my suspicions of you. It's not that you're inactive, it's that the posts you have made make it seem like you're trying to seem useful without really saying anything! Also, you seemed to be suspicious of Walters without even having a real reason (before you made your argument.) I apologize for saying you took your points from Donna if you didn't. I suppose there are only so many things Walters has done that can make one suspicious of him, so there's reason for repeat.

You make it seem that the candidates for lynching, are the ones that are arguing against Walters? Hmmm... I smell something wrong here.

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but it is incorrect. I'm pretty sure Donna's Loyal from her actions and her argument (and the fact that she just woke up, but that's just gut), and I think Flipz is loyal too, from his actions and gut. You are the only one who's voted for him that I suspect, and I made my argument against you and Jack before Donna even made her argument against Walters. I don't know who Jack's suspicious of, but he hasn't said anything about Walters as far as I know. And, I'm not sure about Walters, because I can't tell if his actions are truly those of a purist, or if I'm just blinded by the actions of Coryn in the popular Holo-series, Jedi Temple Mafia. My point is that this has nothing to do with Walters.

[Dakar A]

Since it seemed to be in the wrong format earlier, I'll

Vote: Lieutenant Suzanne Vanderbilt (Flare)

[swils]

Okay, down to it. I was personally requested to head up the security detail on this ship, so it's no secret that I haven't been around as long as some of you, and haven't seen much action aboard the vessel. That said, I've got no problem standing up to a more seasoned officer if I've got a problem with their personal conduct.

Lieutenant Francis, while I respect your seniority, and stand by the notion of not voting in haste, I simply cannot wrap my head around the idea of discouraging any and all discussion that isn't supported by cold hard facts. If we're going to approach things that way, why don't we just skip the first few days entirely take a few days off and lounge on the holo-beach deck, then reconvene after a few nights? Then we'd have some real facts to work with, right? I'm not going to lecture you on why I find interactions between crew members, accusations, reactions, the whole lot, quite useful to our cause. I'm quite sure that you are at least aware of the reasons, even if you don't necessarily agree with them.

The problem here is that anyone with useful information will put themselves in danger if they step forward, and the rest of us are going to have to guess and sit around until they do, that means we need to organize something, and at this stage I don't see how to do it.

We're left to twiddle our thumbs and wait to be killed, while anyone who can actually do something to help us has to weigh their life against their information. That's an awfully boring way to play the game handle messy situations like these.

[Shadows]

Accusations are good for us. Accusations generate reactions. Reactions can be analyzed to help us find Scum. The only reason for someone to want to avoid being accused is if he has something to hide...

The scum are rarely stupid enough to react in a way that is obvious enough to be useful. As for not wanting to be accused, when you're innocent it's frustrating and it gives the scum a chance to take advantage of town confusion to get their job done. It isn't quite as clear cut as you seem to think.

Either way, we obviously have to do something, I just hate this blind portion of the game of life.

Lieutenant Francis, while I respect your seniority, and stand by the notion of not voting in haste, I simply cannot wrap my head around the idea of discouraging any and all discussion that isn't supported by cold hard facts.

That's good, because neither can I. I haven't asked that we not discuss matters, I've asked that we not act in haste lest we wish for a repeat of our first day of failure. I think we can agree there.

If we're going to approach things that way, why don't we just skip the first few days entirely take a few days off and lounge on the holo-beach deck, then reconvene after a few nights?

It's funny you should say that because I had this idea, but it doesn't relate to our current situation so I'll save it for now.

I'm not going to lecture you on why I find interactions between crew members, accusations, reactions, the whole lot, quite useful to our cause. I'm quite sure that you are at least aware of the reasons, even if you don't necessarily agree with them.

It's a nice thing to hope for, but not always very effective. It's rare for scum to be as careless as they would have to be to provide anything useful. You, for example, probably aren't scum, based on my own experiences, but who knows? It just isn't as simple as people think it is and I'd like to see caution.

That's an awfully boring way to play the game handle messy situations like these.

Well, we certainly don't want to bore you to death, not with a hasty town, a reckless vigilante and a team of scum who could do it instead.

[Brickdoctor]

The scum are rarely stupid enough to react in a way that is obvious enough to be useful.

It's better than the little - if any - information you can get from doing nothing.

As for not wanting to be accused, when you're innocent it's frustrating and it gives the scum a chance to take advantage of town confusion to get their job done. It isn't quite as clear cut as you seem to think.

It can be frustrating, I agree, but if you defend yourself well, it shouldn't be confusing. If you think you can't defend yourself well or if you behaved in such a way that you think it would be impossible to defend yourself, then, yes, you wouldn't want to be accused...but that's obvious no matter what part of the situation you're in.

Because I 'haven't contributed anything'. No one has contributed anything, aside from accusations that got innocent people killed. If that's our standard, I'll pass on 'contributing' at this point.

Either way, we obviously have to do something, I just hate this blind portion of the game of life.

So...we obviously have to do something, but you're not going to contribute. You might not like this portion of the situation, but that doesn't mean you should sit back and wait for other people to do the contributing during this time.

[Masked Builder]

While I do not believe either are doubtlessly guilty, I will Vote: Lieutenant Suzanne Vanderbilt (Flare), as the case against her seems stronger to me.

[Fred Daniel Yam]

Indeed, as much as Richard is annoyed at us for being too annoying and whatnot. I will vote: Vote: Lieutenant Suzanne Vanderbilt (Flare),

[Shadows]

So...we obviously have to do something, but you're not going to contribute. You might not like this portion of the situation, but that doesn't mean you should sit back and wait for other people to do the contributing during this time.

I'm happy to contribute all I can, the problem is that right now, that's nothing. I don't even find the daily ramblings particularly suspicious, it just looks like a bunch of noobs to me so far.