Heartlake Heartbreak - Day Three: Don't Ask Me Why

[Scubacarrot]

I don't think it's a pity about Jane. One less lurker who wasn't answering our suspicions makes it easier for us to focus on finding the Scum. Luckily, there were two block targets, both suspects. We can ask politely that the day vig kills one while we lynch the other. Is that a plan?

It worked yesterday!

Yes, I know. That's why I wanted to say that I am here, that I try to follow, but that it is hard for me. I am not leaning back and saying this and that from time to time being scum. I am town and I tried to follow the conversation very close. I know that I am by far not the only one who is not talking in his own language (look at you). But it was/is way more difficult to me than it was before. So I thought I'd say this before I get on somebody's scumdar. If I'd knew that it would laid out as playing a card, I'd remain quiet (regarding my confusion) and concentrated on other thoughts (which I basically did not have - being confused). That would have kept us from discussing if I am scum or not. I hope that I can convince everybody that I am town.

Look. If you are really confused, which I am not convinced of. Here is what you do: Say two people are having a conversation and you don't fully understand, here is what you don't do. You don't say in thread basically: "Well, I don't know what's going on. Yup....That's my participation. See Ya!" What you do is ask someone, preferably one of the people in that aforementioned conversation, in private about the parts you don't get and then get your well thought up thoughts in thread anyway. I said yesterday that confusion is a tool (for scum). And it is, but what it is not, is an excuse. So English is not your native language. That's fine, nor is it mine. So it will maybe take us a bit longer to get some stuff, we might have to read over stuff twice. But don't use that as an excuse for poor participation. Perhaps instead of apologizing and explaining you are confused, you could do that response?

[PsyKater]

Point 1

Someone made this helpful analysis of yesterday's lie detector events.

I think it gives us some interesting insight.

I posted my contribution to the lie detector thing when I noticed that there was something going on and that it would not be helpful if I would wait to post my "clearance post". At the moment that I posted I was not sure that this lie detector was fake. If you go and read my post once again, you will check this. After I made my post, I read what was posted in the meantime.

I am very sorry, but my boss(es) are literally standing behind my desk chair, my phone rings all the time. This is called busy season here. I will try to go into your post and the other ones about me before voting starts though.

[Hinckley]

Alright then... perhaps we do have the incredible luck of having a day killer that's a vig? I guess it's a possibility? I was doubtful that God would give the town an unblockable kill... but perhaps that happened, or the vig just held off a second night in a row? Whatever the case, good thing we got one scum, and good thing that we're only down 3 townies for it. At this ratio, we should have a fairly easy time, and still have a nice number of us escape with our lives.

What makes you think it's unblockable? If there is a day vig, the Scum should have a day block or protector. Do you know that they don't? You seem pretty sure. Why is your mind so set on the fact that they don't have a way to block or protect during the day? Scum?

If there is no day protector or blocker on either side, then I would guess our day killer is an up-to-now helpful serial killer. Seeing no evidence that there is no other day actions doesn't mean there aren't.

Great that we caught the first scum now. Even greater that there is no kill of another townie. Other than poor Jane.

That makes me think of two possibilities: Either the daykiller is the scum killer. Or it was another successful block or protection. I am curious to hear who was being blocked tonight. Maybe we can hear a play from someone? Maybe the hedgehog is good in theater? Just suggesting ;)

Or a conversion. I'm working on a play...or maybe some notes from Lady Dolores. Depending on what we can find. But what about the possibility of conversion? And how about you answer to the posts from me and Daisy yesterday? There's a lot to answer to there.

I'd like to put the idea of a conversion happening last night out there. I think it would be a good night for the scum to convert. Let's assume they can't convert and kill on the same night. Yesterday we successfully lynched who we assumed to be their killer based on who was blocked. Today, with no night kill again, everyone would be eager to lynch whoever was blocked again, since it turned out so well last time. So what if they then chose this night to convert instead? Making us all focus on whoever was blocked instead of worrying about who could have been a good target for conversion?

There's of course many other possibilities for there being no kill once again, but I just wanted to put that thought out there, so we can look carefully today and see if someone is changing their behaviour...

Good point. Who are the likely candidates for conversion. I still think Fred and I would be high on that list. Anybody else?

I think it is a valid point, I did not think about. I remember a book where a conversion took 2 nights. Is this usual or does a conversion usually take 1 night?

I am currently working on my vote analysis and posting behavior analysis. Now that one scum is lynched, it could be helpful already.

I can't wait to see your analysis.

Shame about Jane. I was pretty sure she was scum based off of her response yesterday, but then, so were Oscar and the daykiller apparently. I was unfortunately too late to vote, although I do have the post saved (the day ended right before I could speak up).

I will admit that I was blocked last night, although I am not your killer. All you can do is take my word for it, although the smart thing to do would be to lynch or day kill me today, even though I would prefer to be confirmed town through investigative means. But who has time for that?

You were also "pretty sure" when Trisha turned up as Scum. Neither point still looks "pretty sure" to me. I'm still concerned that you seemed so sure of her guilt because of those reasons. They seemed more like a lazy player to me, but I did want her out of the way so we wouldn't have to guess at her behavior. So, you were blocked, yes.

Wow. A pre-emptive argument. It's a smart move, and the townie one. It's fair that you got jailkept, as suspicion was lobbed at you by the for-now town cleared Oscar (led a lynch on a scumbum, works for me). Of course, there is a possibility of a conversion, but we can't vote on the basis of what we don't know.

He was not targeted by the jailkeeper. The other suspicious person was.

[PsyKater]

I'm gonna Vote: Katie (Psykater)

[...]

Katie has been not been very helpful at all, I feel. Her posts today:

PsyKater, on 07 December 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

Could you both stop arguing now? I do not see how this could help the town somehow?!

While this is perhaps not false, she both fails to help the town herself in any way shape or form, and she does not try to resolve the issue that were at hand.

True here. The thing I wanted to achieve with this statement is that both of you would stop filling pages within minutes which made things harder to follow. And as I mentioned before I could not see how this arguing was helping the town. It seemed that I was alone with that, as some people said how helpful all of this was. So be it then. I did not get anything. (Oh, there, the confusion card is still there. Lynch her! -> Sorry, but it is still no card and I am answering your questions now :P)

I will continue to answer the questions bit by bit. I want to go into another point that was risen as well: I read several times that I used to be god knows how smart in somebody's police dream and now I appear so dumb.

Look. If you are really confused, which I am not convinced of.

Well, I do not know how you come to the conclusion that Andrea was smart or anything as she got killed early. Perhaps (all of) you see her through rose-colored glasses because of the short time she was living. But perhaps you are kind of right as well. I am not stupid, I think. I had good grades in school and I can analyse pretty good.

But I was lost the past days. Really.

Ah, I forgot to make the point

The problem is more that I do think too much. Everytime I wanted to post something I was afraid that it could laid out as scummy.

Even now, when I have to defend myself, I think twice and trice ?! about the things I say. Andrea had the same problems at first but there was less-experienced scum around and she was less afraid. Even less with more time having played.

[Shadows]

I don't think it's a pity about Jane. One less lurker who wasn't answering our suspicions makes it easier for us to focus on finding the Scum.

I'm not sure we got anything good enough out of it, I'll have to hear some analysis to prove that point. To me, losing even dead weight needs to come with some obvious positive return when you're in a situation where every body counts.

Luckily, there were two block targets, both suspects. We can ask politely that the day vig kills one while we lynch the other. Is that a plan?

That, on the other hand, is good news if the day kills are the vig, which is still uncertain to me, but entirely possible. So yes, that does sound like a decent plan at this point. Will you be sharing those findings soon so that anyone with information that might help can step forward before voting begins?

While the day killer still could be the Scum kill, they're choosing the worst targets. Unless there's a day protector, I can't understand why the Scum would go after Zara and Jane, two absent sheep. Then again, maybe they don't know there isn't a day protector. However, I fully believe the Scum would choose better targets. If not, thanks Scum! You're helping us narrow the field.

Do we have some proof that there isn't a day protector? It would seem incredibly unbalanced to imagine that any side could have a killer without the other having a way to defend against it, wouldn't it? Even the usual poisoning deaths come as a result of a night action and can be stopped, it seems very odd to assume these can't.

I think the easier explanation is that the Scum killer (Walter) was blocked on Night One and perhaps we've blocked the killer again on Night Two. Or there was a conversion. Why would we have two Actions that could block (actually three) if the Scum couldn't do anything at night??

Easier isn't always right, but I hope it is in this case. Unless it's a conversion, the most overused action in this game of life.

I'm suspicious of anyone trying to confuse us by continuing to suggest the Scum are killing during the day. It's not likely.

And I'm always suspicious of anyone who wants us to believe something we can't be certain of to the extent that they call keeping an open mind "trying to confuse," so we're even there. All I want to do is consider all of the possibilities. So far, our two day deaths have been townies. When we score a scum that way, I'll feel a little more secure that it's a vig, and even then the possibility of a serial killer exists. Speaking of overused actions.

[PsyKater]

Sorry Daisy, but I found this one and I want to answer it first.

Um?

There is zero reason to not lynch Walter today. He was blocked while there was no scum kill, and even if it was a protection/conversion, we can't let someone who was blocked on a no-kill night go running around.

As for the daykill being the scumkill, that's almost impossible. They had no reason to kill Zara yesterday - they would have been more likely to kill Oscar/Fred yesterday than quiet old Zara. Plus, it would be strategically unfair for the scum to kill during the day, their kills wouldn't be affected by blocks/protections/tracks/watches/etc. (unless day actions are a thing now ), making it possible for them to choose whoever they wanted to kill each day.

AND, even if the scum, through some incredible plot twist, are the day killers, then that still means that Walter has a kill action and used it last night. If he was the vig, Oscar wouldn't be letting us lynch him now, so if your theory is right, Walter is the serial killer and works at night, so there's no reason not to lynch him today.

What's wrong, scummo? Afraid to vote for your partner?

Well, despite the fact, I did not vote for Walter after all :P , I was more afraid of voting another townie out.

You say that there is no reason to vote someone off when he is blocked and there is no kill. That was not that clear to me. I can think of many situation where Walter could have been town. I think it was even more probably that he was town. At least I was not the only one to think so. I guess I would have voted for Walter though if I'd managed to open my mouth in time, as I know how important it is to lynch someone and get to a conclusion. Plus I had nothing against someone else.

[Cecilie]

Good point. Who are the likely candidates for conversion. I still think Fred and I would be high on that list. Anybody else?

I'm going to fuel Daisy's ego and say that she's a likely candidate too, she seems to have gathered some information in the first couple of days. There could be other less obvious candidates as well.

[Hinckley]

[/font][/color]

True here. The thing I wanted to achieve with this statement is that both of you would stop filling pages within minutes which made things harder to follow. And as I mentioned before I could not see how this arguing was helping the town. It seemed that I was alone with that, as some people said how helpful all of this was. So be it then. I did not get anything. (Oh, there, the confusion card is still there. Lynch her! -> Sorry, but it is still no card and I am answering your questions now :P)

Most people were also annoyed by that. Where did anyone say it was helpful? It appears you are not fully reading what people have said as opposed to deeply analyzing it. You're doing the same thing and now trying to make fun of yourself for it. "Everyone said how helpful it was". You are confused, because that's not what it said. But then, why aren't you asking what people found so helpful about it. Wouldn't you find those people suspicious? "A distracting argument with no game substance sure is helpful!" Wouldn't you say "Why are you suggesting it's helpful? It's distracting and potentially confusing?" and then be suspicious of the person calling it helpful?

The problem is more that I do think too much. Everytime I wanted to post something I was afraid that it could laid out as scummy.

Even now, when I have to defend myself, I think twice and trice ?! about the things I say. Andrea had the same problems at first but there was less-experienced scum around and she was less afraid. Even less with more time having played.

Now maybe I've got tunnel vision on you, but being afraid to appear Scummy is Scummy. If you have nothing to hide then you can easily defend anything that someone says is Scummy. Even if you end up being lynched, anything you say will be proven true if you flip Town. Town shouldn't be afraid of that. Why do you have to work to appear not Scummy?

I'm waiting for confirmation about some Night Action results, and then I will certainly write a play or series of Dolores letters or whatever, but right now the plot of either is coming up to be that Katie is Scum.

[Dannylonglegs]

Well, What a great surprise to wake up to! Hurray! We caught a scum! This confirms the jail-keeper in my mind.

Again, interesting that there was no scum kill. also interesting that we have 2/3 blocks. A regular blocker as well as the jail-keeper? Does that mean we have a regular protector in addition to the jail-keeper and the blocker? Not that I'm not pleased to hear that if that's the case, but it does sound a little bit suspicious that there would be that many blockers. Just my two cents. Don't eat them Oscar, I've been saving them for a rainy day!

At any rate, Lynching/Day-Killing the two blockees would probably work, although, there is always the chance that the blockee blocked by the jail-keeper was actually the scum target for the night-kill who ended up protected. I guess we'll find out more when the second identity goes public. I do, however, feel that Jimmy's open-ness with the whole affair, and his openness with his stolen lunch paints a rather pro-town picture, but I'm far from trusting of anyone right now. That could just as easily be a ploy to convince us of his Townieness. Still though, such openness is bound to draw unwanted attention, so I still get the slightest Townie vibe from him. His defensive behavior yesterday does somewhat counteract that.

I'm surprised so many believe that the day-killer is scum because we haven't seen any night kill. While I won't entirely write it off, it's kind of clear that the day-killer's action have been pro-town, whether he's the vig or an SK (I'm more inclined to believe the latter, because it would be somewhat unfair to the scum if our own killer did not have the same restrictions (ie: running into one of our blockers) as the scum-killer.) It's rather clear that he/she's focused on silent lurkers, which is A. good for the Town by getting rid of the "fat" so to speak, and also the potential lurking scum, and B. good for an SK by getting rid of targets that the Town would get rid of otherwise to bring everything closer to an end at which point the SK will win. Also, it's not so far fetched to believe that the scum was blocked twice. It seems like we're kind of loaded in the blockage department.

And then there's the possibility that someone got converted. If I haven't said it before, I'll say it again some-more, I don't like conversions. If I were scum and I had to pick who to convert, it'd be Oscar in a second. Sorry mate, but not only are you cute and stompable, but you're "confirmed" Town by leading a lynch, and apparently an investigation too, not to mention all the people you've been talking to behind closed doors. I suggest to the investigator to check him again tonight. He's extremely useful on our side, but a huge liability on theirs.

[PsyKater]

Now some posts from Oscar:

You can't have ever believed the police would come after you because of something he said. He's roleplaying.

Yes, you got me wrong. I was roleplaying as well. I was very suspicious of Fred. I am still somehow. But "incriminating" him seems to be "wrong" on some metagaming way. So you told me that you could read from him that he was town. And that I better not mess up with him. I found this very odd, but after you seem to be one of the most helpful beings for the town and you seem to be verificated (as you said, as long as I can trust you, the fuzzy bear and not thinking of a godfather), I posted that part. "Hey Oscar, I understand that I better not mess up with Fred (in game), who is policeman (roleplaying). Whatever. (Brilliant mind now thinks: Great, now they claim that I must be scum as I fear to mess up with the police shut up, brain)

But other people have seemed confused

But I am the only one that must be scum. Because of metagaming and so on.

although you seem like you're acting

WhatTheFuzzle? Only you can tell why I should be acting there. I had no clue and I still have no clue about many things that were going on the past two days.

I will spell it out in detail right now:

Thanks. Finally.

1. Daisy watched (with her lunch) me (Oscar)
   
2. Daisy saw that Fozzie Bear targeted me (Oscar)
   
3. Fozzie Bear claims to have a plethora of one-shots (known as a Jack-of-all-Trades) with which he investigated me with and got the result of "Town".
   
4. Separately, Fred and Amy both used their "flavor cop" lunches on Daisy and were told he had a pair of glasses with no lenses. This seems to indicate his used Watcher lunch.
   
5. A jailkeeper has claimed to me to have targeted Walter, who was therefore blocked and protected last night.
   

Okay. This was the first time I read something about the Fozzie Bear. Wait, I have to look up "plethora". Wow. That should exist? A plethora of one-shots? Interesting. Okay, I understand now. Thanks for your help.

I have still difficulties with this jailkeeper thing. This role seems to be somehow odd to me. So the jailkeeper wanted to protect a fellow townie and blocked a scum by that? Or was his intention to block a scum? Or does a jailkeeper shoot more randomly and we have to figure out his results after all?

[Hinckley]

Shadell, why are you responding only to me? Aren't there other interesting things being said anywhere?

I'm not sure we got anything good enough out of it, I'll have to hear some analysis to prove that point. To me, losing even dead weight needs to come with some obvious positive return when you're in a situation where every body counts.

We don't have to wonder about someone who was acting suspicious and not coming around to answer the questions postulated to her. If you can't see how that's helpful, you're probably Scum.

That, on the other hand, is good news if the day kills are the vig, which is still uncertain to me, but entirely possible. So yes, that does sound like a decent plan at this point. Will you be sharing those findings soon so that anyone with information that might help can step forward before voting begins?

No. I'll hang onto until hour 71.

Do we have some proof that there isn't a day protector? It would seem incredibly unbalanced to imagine that any side could have a killer without the other having a way to defend against it, wouldn't it? Even the usual poisoning deaths come as a result of a night action and can be stopped, it seems very odd to assume these can't.

You haven't read what I've written because you've just re-stated what I said.

Easier isn't always right, but I hope it is in this case. Unless it's a conversion, the most overused action in this game of life.

Of course easier isn't always right but the evidence is stacked up against the theory that Walter wasn't the killer. No kill Night One. Walter blocked. We now know Walter was Scum. I'm sure we'll continue to discuss the possibility of something else happening if we see evidence to the contrary. Thanks for the reminder that easier isn't always right. You might've confused your Scum buddy Katie though so make sure to explain it to her in your Scum PMs.

And I'm always suspicious of anyone who wants us to believe something we can't be certain of to the extent that they call keeping an open mind "trying to confuse," so we're even there. All I want to do is consider all of the possibilities. So far, our two day deaths have been townies. When we score a scum that way, I'll feel a little more secure that it's a vig, and even then the possibility of a serial killer exists. Speaking of overused actions.

Why do we need to be even or odd? You seem to be stuck in a mindset of me vs. you. Why? I'm Town. If that's your mindset, you're Scum.

[PsyKater]

Yay, Daisy:

Confusion. Check.

Summarizing. Check.

Asks for confirmation on stuff already clear in thread. Check (Hey, Walter has this one too.)

Pulls conclusions that may very well have another reason. Check.

Acts helpful. Check. (Her first of two posts today).

Promises she'll help more later. Check. (A common theme among people it seems, Billie is notorious for this as well, may not mean anything.)

I know this list. I go through this list while reading other people's posts. And I can't say anything else than: you are absolutely right. I sucked.

[Hinckley]

And then there's the possibility that someone got converted. If I haven't said it before, I'll say it again some-more, I don't like conversions. If I were scum and I had to pick who to convert, it'd be Oscar in a second. Sorry mate, but not only are you cute and stompable, but you're "confirmed" Town by leading a lynch, and apparently an investigation too, not to mention all the people you've been talking to behind closed doors. I suggest to the investigator to check him again tonight. He's extremely useful on our side, but a huge liability on theirs.

You're right. That is true and I'm well aware of it. No hard feelings.

[PsyKater]

I have two other points that you can add to this list and put a check after it, soon:

Draws suspicions to other players rather then defending himself. (hey, guess what? It will come later on)

...

forgot about the other one.

[Scubacarrot]

I'm going to fuel Daisy's ego and say that she's a likely candidate too, she seems to have gathered some information in the first couple of days. There could be other less obvious candidates as well.

I don't think I am that likely of a candidate, really. As long as I am creating pointless arguments that looking back were not really that helpful, not saying blank space in that time was better, but there you go, the scum would not want to get rid of me. I also made it pretty clear I have no role. You'd think the person they would be converting would have a role or at least a chance of a role. I think the idea that there was a conversion last night is a possibility we can not ignore. There was no scum kill, I am convinced the day killer is an x-shot vigilante or serial killer now, so we got to figure out why that was. Did we get lucky and blocked the right person twice in a row? It would be pretty awesome, but we can't know. The thing I suggested earlier about the scum either having completely lost their killer or it taking a day for the kill to pass over? Probably not, honestly. Now, I know who the jailkeeper targetted, and he could be someone who the scum would target for a kill. Another possibility is that the scum did the following: I thought it up, so the scum could too: What if the scum decided not to kill, because yesterday we convicted the blocked person, that theory would work twice, wouldn't it? At least, that was my first instinct, do it again! The town lynching one of their own is much more valuable than the scum killing their target at night. Well, it depends on the target, but assume it was a similair person.

For god's sake Katie, make one post so we don't have to go through ten posts to reply to you, please.

[PsyKater]

I forgot about three or four times now, that I want to clarify my lunch: I was missing on the list for some reason as I mentioned before. I chose Steak and I got a steal action as well. I used it on Shadell on the first day/night. I got nothing. Reason why I chose Shadell? Don't know. Reason why I used it so early? I was afraid to lose it otherwise. Thinking about it now, it would have been much smarter to pass it on to a more experienced player or to use it when I have more clues about the other players.

Oh wait. Wasn't there a theory that stealing is a scum action? Right, you got me then. Or let's think about it again. Choosing a steak or a cake or whatever was pregame. Duh.

[Hinckley]

Yay, Daisy:

I know this list. I go through this list while reading other people's posts. And I can't say anything else than: you are absolutely right. I sucked.

What have you found from your analysis?

So, things are not what I thought from the Night Action results I was waiting for. I do not see evidence there is a bus driver, after all. I used my flavor cop lunch on Katie and found no items in her room. We still don't know if the lunches show any clues toward Night Actions or if they just show lunches, but I can, at least, confirm that Katie does not have a lunch any more. She told us yesterday that she didn't have one. I don't have one either but my role PM was very specific as to why I didn't have one. Makes me wonder why Katie didn't have one. It's possible she gave hers away on Day One, but also possible that she has a similar reason for forgetting her lunch. If she's Scum, that's worrying. So, we have one person from the apple group who didn't get lunch and one person from the steak group who didn't get lunch (unless she gave it to someone already). If our flavor cop lunches can see Actions other than lunch, which we've seen no evidence of, then it would mean Katie doesn't have any other Action. This doesn't really mean anything as to affiliation.

Not what I thought I was hearing at first, and not much to go on. Sorry about that. I'll keep trying.

[PsyKater]

For god's sake Katie, make one post so we don't have to go through ten posts to reply to you, please.

I cannot please anybody, can I?

I spent the now the whole afternoon on checking posts and answering, only interrupted when work was calling (oh, wait, that was quite often). Well, if you want to screw me, call my boss and tell him. Then I have more time to play Mafia

[Tamamono]

The problem is more that I do think too much. Everytime I wanted to post something I was afraid that it could laid out as scummy.

Even now, when I have to defend myself, I think twice and trice ?! about the things I say. Andrea had the same problems at first but there was less-experienced scum around and she was less afraid. Even less with more time having played.

Why are you so concerned with looking town? A townie's biggest concern is finding scum - not looking town and surviving. If you can't towntell, then you're lynched, but it's for the best for the town.

Well, despite the fact, I did not vote for Walter after all :P , I was more afraid of voting another townie out.

I know you're new, but when the amount of players left is so large that scum can't possibly win with a mislynch, you use the mislynch without caution. Sure, lynching a townie is bad, but the kind of town you're going to lynching would be detrimental to our efforts to scumhunt if left alive. It's all about seeing the big picture - you sacrifice the minority to pave the way for the townie majority.

You say that there is no reason to vote someone off when he is blocked and there is no kill. That was not that clear to me. I can think of many situation where Walter could have been town. I think it was even more probably that he was town. At least I was not the only one to think so. I guess I would have voted for Walter though if I'd managed to open my mouth in time, as I know how important it is to lynch someone and get to a conclusion. Plus I had nothing against someone else.

Ok, that makes a little more sense now. I understand why you didn't want to vote Walter, and that's fine since you're new to the stables, but in the future, that's when you lynch somebody.

If there is no day protector or blocker on either side, then I would guess our day killer is an up-to-now helpful serial killer. Seeing no evidence that there is no other day actions doesn't mean there aren't.

Yeah, I think I have to agree with this. I've been thinking a lot about the daykiller, and I'm thinking he/she is the SK, tbh. SK's are always really underpowered, so gods always like to give them extra little powers to level the field. For example, in this one made-for-TV Godfather-ripoff, there was a poisoner who couldn't be killed at night, and also had a weak tracker action or something like that. An untouchable daykill would function as something like this, tbh.

Good point. Who are the likely candidates for conversion. I still think Fred and I would be high on that list. Anybody else?

I think that's it, honestly. I'd agree with Cece normally, but even Daisy is still under suspicion, so they wouldn't want to convert her.

[Shadows]

Shadell, why are you responding only to me? Aren't there other interesting things being said anywhere?

Some reason I shouldn't respond to you when you're the one discussing something that I had already said should be a primary concern for the day, the daytime kills? Especially when you're not open to a real possibility and admitted to thinking you were influencing the "vig" who has killed two townies so far, something you seem to want to justify as good. It's a little scummy, but it's more jesus-y, both of which megabluck us over in the long run, as anyone with history here knows.

We don't have to wonder about someone who was acting suspicious and not coming around to answer the questions postulated to her. If you can't see how that's helpful, you're probably Scum.

She ended up town, it wasn't helpful. If we kill everyone who doesn't come around to answer questions, we're going to run out of townies and lose without the scum even having to do anything. I'd like to avoid that, but that's just me and doesn't seem to fit your mindset, so it must be wrong.

Why do we need to be even or odd? You seem to be stuck in a mindset of me vs. you. Why? I'm Town. If that's your mindset, you're Scum.

It could be because of the number of these nonsense statements you make.

You might've confused your Scum buddy Katie though so make sure to explain it to her in your Scum PMs.

If you can't see how that's helpful, you're probably Scum.

Oh, and right in the question itself...

I'm Town. If that's your mindset, you're Scum.

See what I mean?

[PsyKater]

So, before I have to go home .... eh I mean go to the stables or something, I'll raise a point that came to me. O yes, how lame. Let's try to get other players into the focus. Shut up.

Tammy, looking over the statements from yesterday makes me think about you. You seemed to be 100% sure that Walter was scum. Perhaps because you knew? And there is this claim that the people should not spread their votes although there was plenty enough time to vote. Did you want to make voting analysis more difficult?

Shadell, I tried to steal your lunch, but I found none. Now that I write about it, I remember an odd statement of yours:

Reminder: This isn't the usual situation, you don't need to be quite as afraid to come forward with things you learn, we're actually at an advantage here. Since so many of us have lunches, as vague as their results may be, you can feel safe presenting what you learn without the fear of making yourself a target of the scum. Take advantage of that if you know something helpful, or even something confusing, it might take more than one of us looking at their results to piece together something useful.

That said, I saved my lunch until such time as I see an appropriate use, so today for me will be a matter of listening, learning, and hopefully analysing something from what is said.

This was your first statement "yesterday". Why were you lying?

[Shadows]

And there is this claim that the people should not spread their votes although there was plenty enough time to vote. Did you want to make voting analysis more difficult?

Wouldn't scum subtly encourage spreading the vote to make it completely impossible to analyse a vote that failed and save one of their own? You're not really making sense there.

[Dannylonglegs]

I don't think I am that likely of a candidate, really. As long as I am creating pointless arguments that looking back were not really that helpful, not saying blank space in that time was better, but there you go, the scum would not want to get rid of me. I also made it pretty clear I have no role. You'd think the person they would be converting would have a role or at least a chance of a role. I think the idea that there was a conversion last night is a possibility we can not ignore. There was no scum kill, I am convinced the day killer is an x-shot vigilante or serial killer now, so we got to figure out why that was. Did we get lucky and blocked the right person twice in a row? It would be pretty awesome, but we can't know. The thing I suggested earlier about the scum either having completely lost their killer or it taking a day for the kill to pass over? Probably not, honestly. Now, I know who the jailkeeper targetted, and he could be someone who the scum would target for a kill. Another possibility is that the scum did the following: I thought it up, so the scum could too: What if the scum decided not to kill, because yesterday we convicted the blocked person, that theory would work twice, wouldn't it? At least, that was my first instinct, do it again! The town lynching one of their own is much more valuable than the scum killing their target at night. Well, it depends on the target, but assume it was a similair person.

I kind of doubt that the scum would do such a thing. It is a possibility though. While I doubt the scum would over-think to that extent and rely on such heavy-handed manipulation as that, there is a distinct benefit to be had if the gambit works. That said, it's safer to lynch/kill all the blockees to get a better picture of what went on. In my mind, it's more likely that the scum tried killing again (or converting )

I forgot about three or four times now, that I want to clarify my lunch: I was missing on the list for some reason as I mentioned before. I chose Steak and I got a steal action as well. I used it on Shadell on the first day/night. I got nothing. Reason why I chose Shadell? Don't know. Reason why I used it so early? I was afraid to lose it otherwise. Thinking about it now, it would have been much smarter to pass it on to a more experienced player or to use it when I have more clues about the other players.

Oh wait. Wasn't there a theory that stealing is a scum action? Right, you got me then. Or let's think about it again. Choosing a steak or a cake or whatever was pregame. Duh.

Wait, wow, you said something useful-ish! Shadell, had you already used your lunch at this point or did you not start with one?

[PsyKater]

I will try to answer the other questions later. Until then, I hope that I have done some analyzing. To be helpful at the end.

Wouldn't scum subtly encourage spreading the vote to make it completely impossible to analyse a vote that failed and save one of their own? You're not really making sense there.

It made sense to me when I wrote it. Let me think about it again.

[Scubacarrot]

I kind of doubt that the scum would do such a thing. It is a possibility though. While I doubt the scum would over-think to that extent and rely on such heavy-handed manipulation as that, there is a distinct benefit to be had if the gambit works. That said, it's safer to lynch/kill all the blockees to get a better picture of what went on. In my mind, it's more likely that the scum tried killing again (or converting )

Aye, I just brought it up because there was already talk about killing one of the blocked people. While, as said before, that's a good idea, it worked yesterday. We can't dismiss other options, and we might be missing something. I would love to hear some watch, and flavor cop results. They might help?