Unrest in the Forest - Day 3: Caress of Steel

[Hinckley]

Ask someone else, I'm not willing to work with you.

That's pretty rude. Any reason why not?

[Piratedave84]

Jesus! The site kept giving me server errors and still posted everything

That's pretty rude. Any reason why not?

A common denominator for a few stumps is you; might not mean anything but I'm wary of you.

[Walter Kovacs]

Voting Update:

Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken) - 6 (Zepher, Hinckley, Tamamono, Bob, jamesn, Goliath)

Bobby Beech (Lord Duvors) - 3 (Scaevola, TinyPiesRUs, badboytje88)

Peter Cedar (badboytje88) - 1 (TheLazyChicken)

There are 24 Hours remaining in Day 3. It takes 10 votes to lynch.

[Lego Spy]

Catarina was universally scumread. Larry is playing less scummily IMO and maybe town don't want to flashwagon a newbie after yesterday? Or maybe Larry is scum.

Care to explain how he's less scummy? If anything, I think he's more scummy than Catarina was.

Also, not bandwagoning against someone who seems scummy just because they're a noob doesn't seem like a good reason not to bandwagon. Noobs can still be scum.

Vote: Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken)

For his actions earlier today and his scummy behavior.

I'm keeping my eye on you though, Berty.

[Dragonfire]

I don't think we have a set of codes for Berty

We don't have codes for Berty.

Are you joking ?? I posted mine in-thread.

Care to explain how he's less scummy? If anything, I think he's more scummy than Catarina was.

Also, not bandwagoning against someone who seems scummy just because they're a noob doesn't seem like a good reason not to bandwagon. Noobs can still be scum.

Vote: Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken)

For his actions earlier today and his scummy behavior.

I'm keeping my eye on you though, Berty.

Did you read my last post? About why I am concerned?

Nice to hear that. I'm watching you carefully too.

Agnes, I am a 323.

Catarina, I am a 6161.

Vicky, I am a 34.

[Calanon]

I really don't believe that Berty is lying about being miller. If he is lying, well I'll be impressed.

The evidence against Larry has me convinced today.

Vote: Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken)

[Duvors]

May I also note you again changed your stance on an issue (in this case the investigator) when it was anathema to your reputation.

Yes, because I discovered I made a mistake and was going after someone for the wrong person, are you literally blind?

*Reason, not person, sorry.*

[Lady K]

For the record, Berty's code did confirm miller with the list he gave me.

We are still working with sharing info and collecting and analyzing things we have. I think those that insist on codes working now are more than likely scum. These things take time, so give us time.

And also for the record I still think the codes are a complete wasted distraction town doesn't need!

[Hinckley]

For the record, Berty's code did confirm miller with the list he gave me.

Thank you.

Any defense against his accusations would involve evading the facts or barefaced lying, and I'm not really going to that now.

Bobby, without self-deprecation, can you please explain this. I've asked once already. Why would you have to "barefaced" lie in order to defend yourself? (bold added for emphasis)

[Lady K]

Thank you.

Bobby, without self-deprecation, can you please explain this. I've asked once already. Why would you have to "barefaced" lie in order to defend yourself? (bold added for emphasis)

Just because the code matches doesn't mean oak or maple. And honestly if two people, through codes, claimed the same role there would be no way to tell which was oak and which was maple.

[Hinckley]

Just because the code matches doesn't mean oak or maple. And honestly if two people, through codes, claimed the same role there would be no way to tell which was oak and which was maple.

True, but it would give us a place to start. If that happens, tell a player you trust to be an Oak and then that person will work to figure out the true claim. If they don't, well then call them out.

[Scubacarrot]

SO... Bobby. You get one vote against you and you decide to give up, go out of your way not to defend yourself, and finally get nasty? What's that all about? I don't think that's the town thing to do. Vote: Bobby Beech (Lord Duvors)

I'm super hesitant to go for a lynch backed by the Bruce and Simon duo. Those fuckers are weird. But yeah, if they are lying, why has the investigator not made that known? I hope tomorrow a third person will be able to confirm that there is indeed an actual investigator. I really do.

I may change my vote later. Especially if Bobby actually puts up a nice defense like I hope he will.

Maggie, today, is once again, not very helpful at all...

I mean, if the investigator was dead, we'd know already, right, because of the stumps... Unless Alastair was the investigator. We know he was in contact with Bruce... What if he claimed investigator and that's why the scum janitored him so they can get away with what is happening now... But wouldn't Alastair tried to save himself in the end by claiming investigator publicly if that was true? I don't know. As I said, tomorrow I hope we will hear some confirmation on this. You better, really. Don't give us crap like: oh the investigator confirmed a power role so we can't talk about it.

At least we can know for sure there IS an investigator because there is a Miller. If the Miller claim is true that is, I think so. Having no investigator would be super weird though. Forgive me for rambling.

[Scaevola]

Yes, because I discovered I made a mistake and was going after someone for the wrong person, are you literally blind?

*Reason, not person, sorry.*

Thank you, I love it when people try to get me to talk while I'm not even online with poorly disguised bandwagoning.

More, 'late game nihilism', and it's only just day three. Why do I feel like this on day three?

Clem says He's suspicious of me, and then he gets upset when someone votes for me?

Right now I'm interested in this ethereal investigator that Simon is saying confirmed him and Bruce, how do we know that he even exists? On the other hand, as has been said before, if this investigator is a fake, why hasn't the real one come foreword? An annoying and strange state of affairs. To help clear this up I'd like my memory refreshed, how was Bruce cleared?

Yes, I saw and comprehended that you meant Berty as opposed to Bruce. However, the core of your posts was queries about the investigator, not centrally regarding Berty. Nevertheless, you abdicated on everything in your prior statement.

I really don't believe that Berty is lying about being miller. If he is lying, well I'll be impressed.

The evidence against Larry has me convinced today.

Vote: Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken)

This is all you have to offer? You dismiss an idea with no justification, then cast your vote without any citations?

[TheLazyChicken]

I really don't believe that Berty is lying about being miller. If he is lying, well I'll be impressed.

The evidence against Larry has me convinced today.

Vote: Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken)

Can you put the evidence in your own words or add something?

[MagPiesRUs]

Well the codes thing is all nice and cute but if not everyone sends in their role it's no use at all. It's a shame the stumps don't get to pm...

So you think the codes will only work if everyone sends them... which is why you're not going to send any yourself????

Vote: Bobby Beech (Lord Duvors)

Just a friendly poke to get you to speak up.

To clarify, this is just a friendly poke, right? You don't particularly suspect Bobby? This is just a friendly way to get him to speak up?

To the maples, vig or serial killer: feel free to kill me tonight. I promise I'll make a good stump. I'll collate everyone's roles, I'll keep them a secret unless need be, I won't even chastise the living (much). Put me in coach, I'm ready!

[jimmynick]

I mean, if the investigator was dead, we'd know already, right, because of the stumps... Unless Alastair was the investigator. We know he was in contact with Bruce... What if he claimed investigator and that's why the scum janitored him so they can get away with what is happening now... But wouldn't Alastair tried to save himself in the end by claiming investigator publicly if that was true? I don't know. As I said, tomorrow I hope we will hear some confirmation on this. You better, really. Don't give us crap like: oh the investigator confirmed a power role so we can't talk about it.

At least we can know for sure there IS an investigator because there is a Miller. If the Miller claim is true that is, I think so. Having no investigator would be super weird though. Forgive me for rambling.

[Hinckley]

Since we have been metagaming noobs, let's metagame some vets. Seriously, looking over the previous days, I've noticed a disturbing trend. Three people fishing for info about Town PRs. I will be pre-empt this by saying that these suspicions are just that, suspicions. Most of what pings me about them is how hard they're pushing for information about the investigator. They could just be heavily scrutinizing to make sure people aren't claiming to Scum. I've earned the reputation. However, it's a bit early to be so sceptical of the information I've brought forward and to be pushing so hard for me to reveal more about it. I'm laying them out as my suspicions in case I'm killed during the night, they are here for everyone to see.

I will, in fairness, metagame myself for the noobs. I have played a lot and am often claimed to. This has had mixed results for the Town even when I am Town. I've learned a lot since some early mistakes and I have obliterated some Town teams as a Scum member or Cult Leader even. But I'm an Oak this time. So far, you only have my word. My point is: Nash, Sammy and William know me well. They're right to be worried with people claiming to me no matter what side they're on. So, that's what I'd like to figure out. Which worried are they?

Nash Ash:

Simon is playing a very maple-y game as well. He is spending a lot of time defending himself. Oaks don't have to do that.

It's a question of when they get all defensive. If serious heat starts to come down on a Oak, then they need to start to start to defend themselves, of course. If every time someone points out something slightly suspect you pounce on them, that starts to look like you've got something to hide.

This pinged me because it felt like Nash was pre-empting my ability to defend myself if wrongly accused, which is what was happening at the time. Sammy was twisting my words around. When someone twists your words around, that arouses suspicion. I was attempting to get to the bottom of why my words were being twisted. This is not a case of defense, it's a case of pointing out what could be a Scum tactic. Suggesting it's over-defensive is encouraging people to disregard it.

It must be very easy to continue to continously demand work out of others!

This pinged me as well because it misrepresents the way I've been playing. I've been looking into my suspicions. I'm tired of people suggesting looking at previous behavior but not actually doing anything about it. It's a Scum tactic for sliding under the radar while appearing to be working on drawing out suspicious behavior.

And then he says that Bruce is confirmed but he can't let us know how. And then he tries to make it seem like any other confirmed person can't possibly be confirmed, even though it would just be their word, same as his. And then he tries to get William to tell him his role as if he himself is confirmed.

This is the first attempt at fishing out more info about the investigator. So, you think asking Sammy about someone who was "confirmed" wasn't something I should do when I'm talking to an investigator? All anyone has said today is that another investigator claim would be suspicious, so when Sammy said that someone has a trusted group of allies, it's important to look further into that. Because that would be a counterclaim. Suggesting that I shouldn't ask Sammy about a person who has a trusted group of allies contradicts the notion that we need to look out for counterclaims. Then, you again twist things around to suit your accusation.

Yeah, wait, didn't yesterday you claim that you had found Bruce to be Oak? So were you already a mouth-piece? And then today he cleared you? But you're the mouthpiece, so you have to tell us about it. This just sounds like you guys have somehow confirmed each other. Even if there's a third party I'm very confused by what you're talking about.

3rd party contacts... you, yesterday, and tells you that they've cleared Bruce, which you then announce but then today Bruce is told by the 3rd party that you have been cleared, so now you're allowed to be the mouthpiece?

Or, 3rd party contacts Bruce yesterday who then tells you that Bruce has been cleared, and then you later clear Bruce?

Very confused.

This ^ is fishing, Berty.

But we only have your word for it. We have your word that Simon is an oak and vice versa. You act as if not accepting that at face value is the absolute worst thing! But it would sound ridiculous to you too, I'm sure.

No, there is another. This sounds a lot like you're trying to get that person to come out and defend us. Fish, fish, fish.

Lynch a scum already, then. Or, you know, post something useful other instead of "no" and "stop thinking".

Now you're suggesting that being confirmed and being able to lynch Scum is the same thing. I am the first to admit that Bruce is overly-cocky, but he is an Oak. That I'm 100% on. Trying to suggest that he should be lynching Scum just because he's verified is a Scummy move.

Sammy Sycamore:

My initial suspicions about Sammy are in this post. Or I've spoilered the post here:

Vote: Sammy Sycamore (Fugazi)

Why would the Maples janitor an Oak on Night One? I was concerned about my private communication with Sammy Sycamore. It seemed like he was subtly trying to undermine my confidence in the Alastair vote. If Alastair is Scum, it would definitely scoot Sammy over into the Scum column in my view.

I am assuming that the Maples have limited Janitor capabilities. Otherwise, it would mess with the game mechanics. Or we won't see results until we kill the janitor which would suck. But he's not a stump. I wonder if all Townies come back as Stumps but all Scum die. This is hurting my brain at the moment.

SNIP

OK, if the Maples have limited janitor-shots, I would imagine Alastair was Scum. Maybe they just want to keep us confused for as long as possible. That's a possibility. But I can't imagine why they would use a janitor shot, if it was limited, this early unless it was a big strategic advantage.

After looking at their posts from yesterday, neither one did very much of anything. Lauren rallied a lynch of Alastair. I think that is literally his only contribution outside of telling Buck to vote. And Buck made like 4 posts. If the vig did kill, I would assume they killed Buck and the Scum killed Lauren...for rallying people to lynch Alastair...who was Scum...then they janitored him. I see no other reason to kill Lauren. Unless the vig or a serial killer killed Lauren and the Scum were blocked or their target protected. I'm doing that speculate about every possibility of kill thing. Lauren would even make more sense as a neutral kill because he wasn't likely to be watched or protected. And maybe Buck was killed by a vigilante who prefers to weed out the low posters. Or there's a serial killer taking out low posters. Or Buck or Lauren said something to Scum in private that made them the kill target. Or something to the vig in private that made them think they were Scum I always yell at people for doing this...

My point is, Chester, you seem to be more concerned about the vig. Do you know something we don't? Perhaps you are Scum and you know the Scum killed one of those two and you're trying to figure out if there's a neutral. That's what you sound like to me. Plus, after Day One, you're on my Scum list.

Why don't you get on that for us? A little eager to go with one solution, huh? Trying to force us to find leads that aren't true because you and your Maple buddies janitored an Oak?

And don't forget, I said Sammy was trying to undermine my confidence in the Alastair vote in private. If Alastair is Scum, doesn't that make Sammy highly suspicious, Catarina? Catarina is out new Oak expert. She's so anti-Maple.

Yet, you clearly understood the result. Maybe your Scum buddies janitored the Town Alastair because you went too far to try to accuse him and his alignment reveal would've incriminated you too much! Everyone said it would be very interesting to see what he flipped considering how hard you went after him. It's really convenient that it tells us nothing about you now, isn't it?

Bold added for emphasis ^

That's quite a leap of logic there. You're assuming that Alastair is Maple, you're making me appear as trying to influence your vote, and you're linking the two inappropriately. Yes, I discussed Alastair with you after you asked for my opinion, and I told you the same thing I said in thread for everyone to hear: I wasn't convinced that he was scum. That's why I kept my vote on Bruce. Where's the subtlety in this?

Why didn't the scum kill Bruce then, he's the one who started the Alasdair bandwagon?

Make up your mind! You're the one heavily pushing for one theory (Alasdair is scum) then you blame others for not looking at alternatives?

By the way, this is what I read about the Janitor role: "Most of the time, Janitors are scum, so the people whose flips are obscured are usually Town." Not sure how accurate this is, but hey, let's keep our options open shall we.

Again bold added for emphasis above and this last line seems to me like Sammy is the one trying to influence people about what to think about Alastair's alignment.

No, I think you might be a Maple because you pushed very hard for one theory that is probably false in order to confuse the Oaks. Eventually you considered the other option half-hardheartedly when it was convenient to you (accusing another tree in the process) yet still toying the idea that I was scum therefore Alasdair too. That's what scum do all the time after janitoring: spreading confusion.

Stick to what? I came in the picture after you spent many posts implying that Alasdair is scum, without really considering the alternative. Since it's not a foregone conclusion, I accused you of trying to impose your view.

It would make me look bad in Simon's mind if Alasdair was Maple.

I've posted most of the quotes that make me suspect Sammy. Again, you can click the arrow next to our names to see the quotes in context. Sammy's continued insistence that I tried to get everyone to believe Alasdair was Maple is what makes me even more suspicious of him than I was yesterday. He has tunnel vision on this issue and he takes what I say out of context or hand picks what he responds to. Insisting one thing when it's clear, at least to me, that it's not true makes me wonder why he's trying so hard to heap suspicion on me. I have the advantage of knowing I'm Town, so having someone misconstrue my words this way makes it clear to me they are Scum. Check the quotes I've posted. You can see all of mine, which postulate Alasdair's alignment going either way, were posted before all of Sammy's. He keeps insisting I was pushing very hard that Alasdair was Scum when I'm clearly, at least in my eyes, looking at all options. Not sure why a Townie would do this? If Sammy isn't Scum, then I propose he take a lesson in reading things more thoroughly. In the second to last quote he finals admits he sees I was considering other options but he says "half-heartedly" in order to conveniently accuse Catarina. What? I was half-heartedly accusing Catarina? I suspect her with all of my heart, damn it! Anyway, I find his behavior very strange.

I still am not a big fan of Larry Larch or Catarina, either. I was suspecting Adelaide as well, but I feel less confident in that suspicion now. I can understand, after looking over the posts again, how what I said sounded odd. I'm not saying she's an Oak, but I'm less suspicious after looking everything over.

In other news, through some behind-the-scenes claims, I can confidently say that Bruce is verified to be an Oak. That's good, huh? I'm sure this will get mixed reviews... William?

Please entertain me... If the investigator trusted you enough to share their result on Day 2, why were you investigated on Night 2? For a moment yesterday I thought that you might be the investigator, therefore couldn't explain how Bruce had been verified. But the latest result shows that you're not it, unless you can verify yourself. How does any of this makes sense?

The miller, the bomb, the investigator... now William? Now what ever William thought to claim to unverified trees like that?

That's what I'm trying to understand: you acted as Bruce/someone else's mouthpiece on Day 2, yet you weren't verified. Bruce was. Then Bruce asks you to become a mouthpiece, and you had to be verified. It doesn't add up. If Bruce is verified, he can speak for the dream team. Please help me understand how you're not stroking each other's back.

This is also fishing. With nobody counterclaiming the investigator and us bringing the info we've found to the rest of the players, what is your concern with who revealed the info? You are either overly paranoid Town (which I commend and you know I've been there too) or Scum trying to avoid the formation of a Town block. This is my biggest dilemma, however, because I understand how a poorly formed Town block can kill the Town. So the fishing pings me, but the caution really does make sense to me. So my suspicion of Sammy may be respect for his game and metagaming because we've played together on both sides with mixed results.

If it's inadvertent then I'm not scum, and you're contradicting yourself. I can only trust and respect those who show respect, but you're arrogant and don't play with the town.

This is reminiscent of a post I've seen from you before so I fully admit it is metagaming. This sounds like you concur with Bruce as an Oak but just don't like his attitude. I bet the Maples are very annoyed with his attitude.

William Willow:

I know his style is aggressive but not normally quite as careless as these two examples.

Hold up. Bruce told me that your verification was "complicated". Investigation is not complicated, it's quite a simple concept. I'm sure you have a simple, non-complicated explanation, right?

There is no reason to ask this in public without verifying things with Bruce in private first. If you are Town, you want to keep any unique feature of our PRs secret from the Scum. You are trying to undermine other people's confidence in Bruce. There is no other responsible Town reason to Dave this private message from Bruce.

If your arguing with Sammy was what you found suspicious, you need new standards, it's around five pages of dribble. With your pushing and ridiculing of Catarina, you might as well have voted first. You don't start a lynch with voting, you start by making a case, or here, by making fun of someone.

What do you mean by six votes?

Well, I meant six posts, I was drinking. You say I posted five pages of dribble. Well, the word is drivel anyway. Needless insults aside, you know I will follow a suspicion through. Town or Scum, Sammy completely misrepresented my posts. That is suspicious. I will get to the bottom of it and make sure people see what I see and hopefully tell me I'm wrong if they don't see it (which some did). Again, this pings me because it seems like you're trying to completely negate my suspicions of Sammy. Why? Are you so confident in Sammy that he is an Oak?

I'm super hesitant to go for a lynch backed by the Bruce and Simon duo. Those fuckers are weird. But yeah, if they are lying, why has the investigator not made that known? I hope tomorrow a third person will be able to confirm that there is indeed an actual investigator. I really do...snip...You better, really. Don't give us crap like: oh the investigator confirmed a power role so we can't talk about it.

This is really weird fishing. Now, since Bruce and I have been confirmed we're supposed to be able to script the Night Action results too, of course. What is your opinion on Larry aside from us voting for him? I'm suspicious of Nash who placed the first vote but I voted for Larry because I find him suspicious and I know what WIFOM is. But if our investigator finds something on Night 3 that I can't reveal on Day 4 because it will jeopardize the Town, I won't reveal it. Regardless of your weird threat.

[Zepher]

Time to clarify some points under this lovely lovely sun! I dunno what else trees like! Photosynthesis!

This pinged me because it felt like Nash was pre-empting my ability to defend myself if wrongly accused, which is what was happening at the time. Sammy was twisting my words around. When someone twists your words around, that arouses suspicion. I was attempting to get to the bottom of why my words were being twisted. This is not a case of defense, it's a case of pointing out what could be a Scum tactic. Suggesting it's over-defensive is encouraging people to disregard it.

Overly-defensive is always, in my opinion, a maple-tell. I thought you were being over-defensive. I stand by it, even! It doesn't make you a maple, but I thought it was worth pointing at with my branches! I won't take it back - and it doesn't prove anything one way or another - but it's still something I think was true!

This pinged me as well because it misrepresents the way I've been playing. I've been looking into my suspicions. I'm tired of people suggesting looking at previous behavior but not actually doing anything about it. It's a Scum tactic for sliding under the radar while appearing to be working on drawing out suspicious behavior.

On the other hand, I don't as much stand by this. I feel that I am guilty of what I've accused others of, regarding you and Bruce. You have been putting in what is a normal amount of work for you (heck! it's evidenced above in that post right above this one!). It's another thing that doesn't prove anything one way or another, but you have been posting a decent amount of evidence for your claims. But either side can do that.

This is the first attempt at fishing out more info about the investigator. So, you think asking Sammy about someone who was "confirmed" wasn't something I should do when I'm talking to an investigator? All anyone has said today is that another investigator claim would be suspicious, so when Sammy said that someone has a trusted group of allies, it's important to look further into that. Because that would be a counterclaim. Suggesting that I shouldn't ask Sammy about a person who has a trusted group of allies contradicts the notion that we need to look out for counterclaims. Then, you again twist things around to suit your accusation.

I think you should questioning Sammy about anyone was 'confirmed' is just as valid as the rest of us asking you about you and Bruce being 'confirmed'. You should be doing it, we should be doing it.

This ^ is fishing, Berty.

I'll assume you mean Nash, here. And it's what I described above. The way you and Bruce can galavant around confirming each other is suspicious to me, especially with the complicated way you two have explained it. I'm assuming that neither of you are the investigator, because that'd be silly and I trust you're both better players than that. There is absolutely no reason you would need to out the investigator to explain the series of events I (and others) asked about. How could you have been told he was cleared by an investigator who only started to talk to you today after you had been cleared? Not asking who the investigator is (and again, I'm fairly certain it's neither of you two). Just the order of actual events.

No, there is another. This sounds a lot like you're trying to get that person to come out and defend us. Fish, fish, fish.

This does sound a little bit like fishing, I'll give you that. In reality, though, I was just trying to get clarification on my question that I detailed (and bolded!) above, which does not require the investigator to come forward at all.

Now you're suggesting that being confirmed and being able to lynch Scum is the same thing. I am the first to admit that Bruce is overly-cocky, but he is an Oak. That I'm 100% on. Trying to suggest that he should be lynching Scum just because he's verified is a Scummy move.

The first part was a little bit of a joke. The second part was serious. Bruce's game has failed to impress me. I challenge anyone to point out the last time he has brought new suspects to the table as opposed to just shutting down other people's suspicions.

[Piratedave84]

So you think the codes will only work if everyone sends them... which is why you're not going to send any yourself????

To clarify, this is just a friendly poke, right? You don't particularly suspect Bobby? This is just a friendly way to get him to speak up?

To the maples, vig or serial killer: feel free to kill me tonight. I promise I'll make a good stump. I'll collate everyone's roles, I'll keep them a secret unless need be, I won't even chastise the living (much). Put me in coach, I'm ready!

Who says we'll invite you to the group PM?

Do you not feel that this day is going nowhere?

[Hinckley]

How could you have been told he was cleared by an investigator who only started to talk to you today after you had been cleared?

I never said I only started talking to the investigator today.

Do you not feel that this day is going nowhere?

Any insight from the stumps about the current lynch-leaders? Not about what they claimed to you guys, but about the suspicions and accusations themselves.

[Zepher]

I never said I only started talking to the investigator today.

So, what, the investigator came to you yesterday to tell you that Bruce was cleared? Why wouldn't they start talking to Bruce instead, and then wait until you were cleared the following day? What a silly silly risky investigator!

Or did Bruce tell you that the investigator had cleared him, and then ask you to announce it? Either way, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me... but I guess it really does make less sense that two maples would put themselves in the spotlight for no real reason...

[Hinckley]

So, what, the investigator came to you yesterday to tell you that Bruce was cleared? Why wouldn't they start talking to Bruce instead, and then wait until you were cleared the following day? What a silly silly risky investigator!

Or did Bruce tell you that the investigator had cleared him, and then ask you to announce it? Either way, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me... but I guess it really does make less sense that two maples would put themselves in the spotlight for no real reason...

What does it matter? This is fishing. You and Sammy and William keep asking for clarification and I've already said I'm not revealing any more about it because I don't want to potentially reveal too much to the Scum.

[Zepher]

It matters because if me and Waldorf told you that we have both confirmed each other in some cloudy way that made it seem like the investigator had claimed to one of us pre-maturely you'd be asking for clarification too.

Also hello Maggie where are you would you like to enjoy the sun with us??

[Duvors]

Yes, I saw and comprehended that you meant Berty as opposed to Bruce. However, the core of your posts was queries about the investigator, not centrally regarding Berty. Nevertheless, you abdicated on everything in your prior statement.

The entire thing was meant as a lead up to an accusation, however due to my mistake it was non valid and I realized it.

Look, just because I admit a mistake doesn't mean that I'm not suspicious about the bloody investigator, where did I ever say that I was no longer suspicious of the claim?

Bobby, without self-deprecation, can you please explain this. I've asked once already. Why would you have to "barefaced" lie in order to defend yourself? (bold added for emphasis)

To contradict an accusation of uselessness that is absolutely true and easily verifiable is a lie. Simple.

To the maples, vig or serial killer: feel free to kill me tonight. I promise I'll make a good stump. I'll collate everyone's roles, I'll keep them a secret unless need be, I won't even chastise the living (much). Put me in coach, I'm ready!

[Hinckley]

I think you should questioning Sammy about anyone was 'confirmed' is just as valid as the rest of us asking you about you and Bruce being 'confirmed'. You should be doing it, we should be doing it.

I did. It just didn't happen in public.

I'll assume you mean Nash, here.

No. I meant Berty. Because I promised him earlier I'd give him an example of fishing.

The way you and Bruce can galavant around confirming each other is suspicious to me, especially with the complicated way you two have explained it.

I know all Oaks must look alike to you Maples, but Bruce and I are two different players. I haven't galavanted anything. And I would say all the fishing you and Sammy and William have done is what's complicating things. I've stated very simply: we were both confirmed by an investigator. Anything unique about the situation, assuming there is, won't be explained publicly or to anyone who isn't trusted. I could put that in my signature so I don't have to keep repeating it. Would that help you three?

I'm assuming that neither of you are the investigator, because that'd be silly and I trust you're both better players than that. There is absolutely no reason you would need to out the investigator to explain the series of events I (and others) asked about. How could you have been told he was cleared by an investigator who only started to talk to you today after you had been cleared? Not asking who the investigator is (and again, I'm fairly certain it's neither of you two). Just the order of actual events.

Insisting that the order of events won't matter when I've repeatedly said I've explained all that needs to be explained is fishing.

Bruce's game has failed to impress me. I challenge anyone to point out the last time he has brought new suspects to the table as opposed to just shutting down other people's suspicions.

I don't think the object of the game is to impress each other. Bruce is an Oak.