Trial by Jury - Day 3

[jluck]

10 minutes ago, Lady K said:

 

Ok, so here is the final vote count for Day 1 and Day 2:

Day1:

Final Vote Count:

 

4 votes for Harry Oldman (fhomess): Tariq j, LegoMonorailFan, Umbra-Manis, Forresto

3 votes for Clifford Schauer (LegoMonorailFan): KotZ, Drunknok, Lady K

3 votes for Cathy Bridger (Drunknok): jluck, Kintober, Khscarymovie4

1 vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K): Kwatchi

1 vote for Dez Hunter (Forresto): Fhomess

Nonvoting (0):

Day 2:

Final Vote Count:

5 votes for Anthony Dodson (Actor Builder): Khscarymovie4, Tariq j, jluck, KotZ, Forresto

5 votes for Tony (jluck): Lady K, Kintober, LegoMonorailFan, fhomess, Actor Builder

1 vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K): Kwatchi

Nonvoting (1):  Umbra-Manis

I have highlighted the votes for you to see of the deceased jury members.  Looking at who voted for who, we can see that Alan jumped on bandwagon each day for a rather newer jury member.  He voted in the middle area so as not to be noticed and never gave solid reasons for his votes.

Harry voted with reasons for who he felt strongest suspicion for.  On day two he did vote for Alan, but as the only vote and as the day played out he had a stronger suspicion of Tony.  Knowing we needed a lynch he switched his vote to Tony while mentioning that he would keep a watch on Alan.

Both Brock and Dez voted for Harry Day 1 and Anthony Day 2.  Essentially, bandwagons.

While both Amanda and Tony voted for Cathy Day 1 and Anthony Day 2 (same jury member spot as Anthony took over from Cathy and Jimmy).

I bring out these four specifically due to being previous jury members they know the importance of a lynch on Day 2.  Day 1 can go either way (lynch or no lynch); usually a loyal town gets lynched on Day 1; but Day 2 it is important to have the lynch and there is always a possibility of getting a scum on the second day's lynch.

On Day 2, a no lynch is a bad idea; and all four of them, in addition to Alan voted for Anthony (an easy target) and  thus effectively splitting the town vote for a second day of no lynch.  

So I question to Amanda, Brock, and Dez; what made Anthony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Tony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?

Also of record, Jared had voted for me two days in a row; indicating that in his mind I was the most suspicious.  

So I pose the same question to Jared:  Was a no lynch Day 2 worth keeping your vote on me (when you were the only one who voted me)?  Even Harry changed his vote to Tony from Alan because he saw the necessity of a Day 2 lynch.

A Day 2 lynch is in the best interest of the town.  

I think your looking at all this through your eyes, accusing everyone who didn't vote for me of splitting the vote and preventing a lynch. I could take your exact wording and ask the same thing back to the "other" bandwagon. Watch:

"On Day 2, a no lynch is a bad idea; and all four of them, in addition to Harry voted for Tony (an easy target) and  thus effectively splitting the town vote for a second day of no lynch.  

So I question to Clifford, Stephanie, and Gary; what made Tony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Anthony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?"

 

The no lynch was bad on day 2, it really hurt us, but your blaming it solely on one faction completely ignores the fact that you and others weren't willing to change your vote either. It's a two way street. The votes were even at 5 a piece, so it's safe to assume the scum hid in both groups.

[mediumsnowman]

You may now vote. With 10 jurors remaining, a majority of 6 is required for a lynch.

Approximately 48 hours remain in the day.

[Actor Builder]

4 minutes ago, jluck said:

I think your looking at all this through your eyes, accusing everyone who didn't vote for me of splitting the vote and preventing a lynch. I could take your exact wording and ask the same thing back to the "other" bandwagon. Watch:

"On Day 2, a no lynch is a bad idea; and all four of them, in addition to Harry voted for Tony (an easy target) and  thus effectively splitting the town vote for a second day of no lynch.  

So I question to Clifford, Stephanie, and Gary; what made Tony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Anthony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?"

 

The no lynch was bad on day 2, it really hurt us, but your blaming it solely on one faction completely ignores the fact that you and others weren't willing to change your vote either. It's a two way street. The votes were even at 5 a piece, so it's safe to assume the scum hid in both groups.

This is, honestly, a fair point.

[Khscarymovie4]

6 hours ago, Lady K said:

Why would you think Alan was a Vig? A Vig is aligned with the loyal town jury members.  It was told to us by the Judge the he was a member of the rival Moletti crime family.

If we had lynch Anthony and he turned up as loyal town then we would have lost two town members yesterday  Please elaborate on what you have found scummy about (Cathy/Jimmy) Anthony over the last two days?  

My first thought was that Alan was a third party like character (all the games I have played the third party has been vig so I guess that's what I first thought of). But then I suppose he would of been revealed as town today. I looked back in the mafia wiki and now think Alan might have been a Serial killer type character. It would explain two kills last night. And that possibly Moletti is just a name for serial killer in this game. As to why I voted Jimantathy (Anthony) I have said many times. First character voted for Clifford with no reasoning in her post and said "that's enough for today" as if she had been waiting for someone to say an odd thing vote and then leave. And then her successor Jimmy posted many scummy things. He first voted for Tina because she was quite, which I believe she had not been online at all since day 2 had been posted. He then voted for Tony for something about hotdogs. Even though in the rules it said no clues in the pictures. As for why I did not vote for Tony was because nothing he did seemed scummy to me. He wanted to lynch Anthony and so did I. We're supposed to vote for who looks scummy and Anthony based on others reasons looked scummy. I wanted a lynch yesterday but I thought Anthony was the one who should have gotten the axe. Something you keep bringing up is the fact that all we needed we're two more members to vote off Tony, and you keep acting as if we're the ones to blame for the no lynch. Anthony had the same amount of votes as Tony did, why didn't you vote for Anthony to try and get a lynch? If it's because you did not think he was acting scummy well that's why I did not vote for Tony. I looked over yesterday and it seems Harry (not Gary) originally voted for Alan before changing his vote. I could see this as a possiblity as to why Harry was killed, Alan (who I think may of had a serial killer role) was somewhat scared of Harry so he killed him. As to why Alan was then killed I don't know. Possibly a just a random kill by scum. Nothing stands out that shows someone afarid or wanting to kill Alan.

[Tariq j]

7 hours ago, Lady K said:

So I question to Amanda, Brock, and Dez; what made Anthony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Tony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?

My desicion was based of what his predecessor (steamedemon) said, now I totally get he came in halfway through the day and had a ton of votes on him, but he didn't make that much of an effort to defend himself, so my vote stayed on. 

12 hours ago, Lady K said:

This really seems like you know what you are talking about with detail....as insider information and I find this highly suspicious.

I don't really see how, there were no kills on night 1, were in a small game, so logically it would make sense that either a blocker/protector was the result of no kills.

 

9 hours ago, Lady K said:

So I question to Amanda, Brock, and Dez; what made Anthony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Tony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?

Hang on, on both days I was the one who said that we should have a lynch, everyone else was saying "no, its better if we don't have a lynch so everyone is alive", simply because we found someone else scummy you didn't doesn't mean we were trying to divide the town.

[Trekkie99]

9 hours ago, jluck said:

I think your looking at all this through your eyes, accusing everyone who didn't vote for me of splitting the vote and preventing a lynch. I could take your exact wording and ask the same thing back to the "other" bandwagon. Watch:

"On Day 2, a no lynch is a bad idea; and all four of them, in addition to Harry voted for Tony (an easy target) and  thus effectively splitting the town vote for a second day of no lynch.  

So I question to Clifford, Stephanie, and Gary; what made Tony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Anthony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?"

 

The no lynch was bad on day 2, it really hurt us, but your blaming it solely on one faction completely ignores the fact that you and others weren't willing to change your vote either. It's a two way street. The votes were even at 5 a piece, so it's safe to assume the scum hid in both groups.

Cathy seemed suspicious originally, but that may have been because she was ill.

As for Jimmy, what was it in particular that you found suspicious about him? Asking about the hot dog cart? I asked about the hot dogs first, and you didn't call me out on it.

And finally Anthony who got here in the middle of day two, had to cast a vote, possibly read up on the past day, and support on his two shoulder pads two previous jurors who are accused of being scummy on accusations I would now call lackluster.

As for what the reasons are that I find you suspicious, I could name a few fairly solid points. Particularly the fact that your accusing the three jurors I've just pointed out. 

[Forresto]

14 hours ago, Lady K said:

I would say you argued more than just squabbling, which implies little disagreements.  I did find where you suggested a third-party, which was curious at the time because we actually discussed a third-party on Day 1 and came to the conclusion that it was too early to tell; so that brings us to the question on why you brought it up Day 2 after no night one kills?   Were you not paying attention Day 1?

Harry was also at odds with Dez as well.

Harry voted for Alan before switching to Tony near the end of the day.

Harry tried to point out the suspicious behavior of Dez, and Alan, and even questionable Clifford but no one wanted to listen to him and instead kept after the bandwagon setting upon (Cathy/Jimmy) Anthony.  Now with him gone we know he was town and Alan was from the Moletti crime family (not town).  So we need to look closer at the past conversations of both of these former jury members.

 

In regards to suspecting a third faction I would like to bring up this conversation we had yesterday. 

On January 17, 2018 at 11:30 AM, Forresto said:

Which is what is making me uneasy.

Last night would have been the perfect night to knock one of us off since we'd have little information to pin point any scum today and retaliate.

Any lynch today is still more likely to knock off a townie and a kill last night would've taken care of another of us. This would allow Scum to kill a third of us tonight and we could have been looking at three dead innocents by day three.

So either:

1) The scum took a calculated risk to avoid suspicion and foolishly refused to kill last night.

2) The scum attempted to kill last night and were blocked by a protector. 

On January 17, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Lady K said:

The problem with this school of thought is that more than likely an innocent townie would have been lynched. Sure we know one loyalty but we would also lose a value townie vote.  Sure we can then look at voting; but Day 1 is always a dice roll.

We still do have all the conversations from yesterday, as well as who voted for who, and who switch votes and why to look at for possible clues for today.

 I feel better with no lynch yesterday and no loss of a townie last night. 

I think it is more likely your second point and that the scum kill was blocked last night.  It doesn't make sense for the scum to not kill night one.

On January 17, 2018 at 11:53 AM, Forresto said:

Which begs the question who then? 

No one has stepped forward and claimed to be, fair enough, that would make them a target and would be a fairly dumb move.

If someone did claim to be I'd be more inclined to suspect them to be scum masquerading as friendly.

Now since no one has asked, do we think there is a third party killer at work? I imagine the lack of a death last night would rule that out.  

On January 17, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Lady K said:

It is uncommon and not wise to reveal any roles here in the trail day thread; as you stated that person would then become a target.

 I am thankful the town blocker was successful last night; please do not reveal yourself here.  Eventually the town will come together privately.

It is too early to determine a third-party.  I merely brought it up yesterday and then explained my reasoning (more than once) as  remembering a previous encounter in a forest a long time ago; brought on by an off hand comment from another jury member.

Nothing but pure speculation on my part, however I was right now wasn't I? 

As for voting for Anthony I made it perfectly clear it had nothing to do with the man himself but his predecessor whose role he shares. Its easy to claim that the Anthony vote split the town, and just as easy to claim that the Tony vote split the town. I may be mistaken but were not more people voting for Anthony prior to Tony?

As for outright arguments the same could be said of you and Jared?

Speaking of Jared, @Kwatchi & @Umbra-Manis, you both could have cast a deciding vote? Why did ya'll throw your votes away?

[Kwatchi]

29 minutes ago, Forresto said:

Speaking of Jared, @Kwatchi & @Umbra-Manis, you both could have cast a deciding vote? Why did ya'll throw your votes away?

((sip))

I have tried to be open about my stance from day 1 about this, though I probably could have been more eloquent at times.  My voting has come down to two (2) things:

1) I don't believe "blind" lynching is a valid strategy.  My belief is keeping as many potential town in the game - and therefore as many power-roles active and collecting information - is a better philosophy than whittling down numbers in a blind hope of a hit.  That info will be crucial in a very short amount of time.  Frankly, the lack of day 1 kills was a gawd-send in that respect. The fact that Oldman was high in votes two days running, and then flipped town last night seems to bear out my thinking.  I realize not everyone agrees here, and I'll assume not includes a good number of town members, but that is my stance.  I'll continue to vote based on my perception of behaviour and not go with the crowd.  And that of course leads to...

2) I have have not wavered in my suspicion of Stephanie (LadyK).  I've have done my best to explain that I have identified her using PR/debate tactics that both deflect and obfuscate, which would be the definition of suspicious behaviour far beyond what I'd expect for someone under the pressure of a single vote.  My make no apologies for this and my hope is that should I unhappily not make it to the end of the trial, that the spotlight will shine immediately on her and I'll get my woman from beyond the grave.

Now, I do have a slight change in my suspicions of Stephanie.  I can longer assume she is simply Balagio but now I have to consider she may be Moletti instead.  I am still trying to figure out the risk/reward of that fact.  And thanks for the experienced jurors who have helped undertsand the nuances of the possible roles.

On 1/21/2018 at 11:01 PM, Kintobor said:

 I'm being upfront, I find Tony and Jared the most suspicious people going into day 3, although we'll see where my thoughts go from here.

While can't say I am flattered or happy by this, but I'm not going to complain about it.  We obviously have very different philosphies on "blind"  lynching.  You are for and I am against.  Since I disagree with your stance, I naturally do keep an eye on you as well.  But the important thing is he has put it out their publicly, and that I applaud because this is info we will need later.

 

And since someone will ask, my vote at the moment will either be Stephanie or someone who continues to push for blind lynching.  It is not a threat so much of where my thought space is right at this moment.  And since everyone is still being cagey, I'll start things off in unsurprising fashion.  One way or another, I want my suspicions of Stephanie confirmed.

Vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K)

But as I have stated since day 1, if anyone can make a valid case for me to change my vote to someone else, based on facts and not "hunches", I will consider it.

((sip))

[Forresto]

I've found Stephanie Diaz suspicious for a while now. She plays the game and plays it well, almost too well. However i've not had enough to vote on. 

I don't think Stephanie is vanilla, she's definitely more then that.

Now that she has tentatively gone after me my hands are tied.

If I vote for her everyone considers it a revenge vote. For whatever reason people already find me suspicious, doubly so due to my prior disputes with Harry who is innocent, therefore an easy dismissal of my vote being genuine and not deflection. If I don't vote and she is indeed scum then I've singled myself out.  

So my top two candidates for vote are Anthony (my opinions have yet to change from yesterday on him) and Stephanie. I will hold off on voting to give them some chance to respond.

[jluck]

Just now, Forresto said:

I've found Stephanie Diaz suspicious for a while now. She plays the game and plays it well, almost too well. However i've not had enough to vote on. 

I don't think Stephanie is vanilla, she's definitely more then that.

Now that she has tentatively gone after me my hands are tied.

If I vote for her everyone considers it a revenge vote. For whatever reason people already find me suspicious, doubly so due to my prior disputes with Harry who is innocent, therefore an easy dismissal of my vote being genuine and not deflection. If I don't vote and she is indeed scum then I've singled myself out.  

So my top two candidates for vote are Anthony (my opinions have yet to change from yesterday on him) and Stephanie. I will hold off on voting to give them some chance to respond.

I've got a bit to say on the topic of Stephanie, but it may take me a bit to dig up relevant posts to quote. However, I will say this while I'm doing it, I've had "jury duty" many times with Stephanie and I cannot read her. She plays at a vicious speed which in some aspects helps drive a conversation but can also hijack the thread if others aren't active (personally I'm always happy when she's involved, she's a fun member. Kinda reminds me of when @Shadows was at his peak).

With all that out of the way, I'm still trying to figure out her position here. There is no doubt in my mind that she has driven at least 50% of the narrative of this jury. What I can't decide is if she is bold because she has nothing to hide or bold in order to hide. 

I promise I'll add some relevant quotes when I have them all together.

[Kintobor]

35 minutes ago, Kwatchi said:

And since someone will ask, my vote at the moment will either be Stephanie or someone who continues to push for blind lynching.  It is not a threat so much of where my thought space is right at this moment.  And since everyone is still being cagey, I'll start things off in unsurprising fashion.  One way or another, I want my suspicions of Stephanie confirmed.

Vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K)

But as I have stated since day 1, if anyone can make a valid case for me to change my vote to someone else, based on facts and not "hunches", I will consider it.

((sip))

You have continually split the vote by voting for Stephanie. You could've helped yesterday by voting for Oldman or Tony, and still you continued to split the vote by voting for Stephanie, a lead that would lead nowhere. You cannot deny this, as the voting evidence is there. As far as I am concerned, you voting for Stephanie for a third day in a row is the flat out scummiest thing I've yet to see. I have in fairly good confidence reason to believe Stephanie isn't scum, and you continually hammering on her, as well as your lack of confidence in the one power you have, your vote and the power to lynch, has not helped in the slightest. We as a town NEED a lynch today, and between Tony and Jared, Jared's the scummier of the town.

Vote: Jared Hartman (Kwatchi)

I'm shocked that people are not voting. At this point, if you haven't voted, you're withholding for a reason. The fact that the town is this quiet worries me. The scum have already seemingly grabbed some of you by the ear and are leading us to slaughter. 

[jluck]

1 minute ago, Kintobor said:

You have continually split the vote by voting for Stephanie. You could've helped yesterday by voting for Oldman or Tony, and still you continued to split the vote by voting for Stephanie, a lead that would lead nowhere. You cannot deny this, as the voting evidence is there. As far as I am concerned, you voting for Stephanie for a third day in a row is the flat out scummiest thing I've yet to see. I have in fairly good confidence reason to believe Stephanie isn't scum, and you continually hammering on her, as well as your lack of confidence in the one power you have, your vote and the power to lynch, has not helped in the slightest. We as a town NEED a lynch today, and between Tony and Jared, Jared's the scummier of the town.

Vote: Jared Hartman (Kwatchi)

I'm shocked that people are not voting. At this point, if you haven't voted, you're withholding for a reason. The fact that the town is this quiet worries me. The scum have already seemingly grabbed some of you by the ear and are leading us to slaughter. 

OK, so I just want to be clear on this, your saying you have reason to vouch for Stephanie? If so, this changes the entire conversation so I just want to clarify.

[Lady K]

13 hours ago, jluck said:

I think your looking at all this through your eyes, accusing everyone who didn't vote for me of splitting the vote and preventing a lynch. I could take your exact wording and ask the same thing back to the "other" bandwagon. Watch:

"On Day 2, a no lynch is a bad idea; and all four of them, in addition to Harry voted for Tony (an easy target) and  thus effectively splitting the town vote for a second day of no lynch.  

So I question to Clifford, Stephanie, and Gary; what made Tony so much more suspicious in your eyes than Anthony that you were willing to spit the town and have a no lynch?"

 

The no lynch was bad on day 2, it really hurt us, but your blaming it solely on one faction completely ignores the fact that you and others weren't willing to change your vote either. It's a two way street. The votes were even at 5 a piece, so it's safe to assume the scum hid in both groups.

Although this would seem to make sense except for two points:

1.  Cathy/Jimmy were new jurors; as I have stated before, I have seen many times before new jurors make scummy mistakes Day 1 just because it was there first time on the jury.  Given time, usually by Day 3 they start to make up for lack of experience or are then lynched for extremely poor performance.  Usually the Day 1 lynch is town affiliated; so a lost of a loyal jury member just to have a lynch and get rid of the new guy/gal.  Their CathyJimmy behavior to me seemed just that; scummy due to lack of experience.

No scum crime family worth their reputation would let a new member get away with that blatant obviously scummy behavior without counseling them in private.

So again newbie.

2. You,however, have plenty of jury experience and I have seen both sides of your loyal and scummy behavior.  Now, yes, I could be wrong (and would give an apology) but your Day 1 lynch the new girl/guy and on Day 2 again; brings back thoughts of your previously scummy behavior.  

In essence I believe you to be the best lynch choice again for today.

You have given no indication that you are loyal town, even when the lynch could have gone for you yesterday.  You gave no defense to change the minds of those who voted for you.  And I believe this is why Harry was killed.  Because he changed his vote from Alan yesterday to you because he found you more suspicious.

 Your drive to eradicate the newbie as suspicious reminds me of past experiences; which is why I am extremely suspicious of you and that you are trying to lead the town in the wrong direction.  The thing that bugs me the most is you have brought up no one else as suspicious and lynch worthy as the CathyJimmyAnthony.   This stands out as anti-town.  I hate losing your experience, but at the same time I can't risk that you are a Ballagio family member.

8 hours ago, Khscarymovie4 said:

My first thought was that Alan was a third party like character (all the games I have played the third party has been vig so I guess that's what I first thought of). But then I suppose he would of been revealed as town today. I looked back in the mafia wiki and now think Alan might have been a Serial killer type character. It would explain two kills last night. And that possibly Moletti is just a name for serial killer in this game. As to why I voted Jimantathy (Anthony) I have said many times. First character voted for Clifford with no reasoning in her post and said "that's enough for today" as if she had been waiting for someone to say an odd thing vote and then leave. And then her successor Jimmy posted many scummy things. He first voted for Tina because she was quite, which I believe she had not been online at all since day 2 had been posted. He then voted for Tony for something about hotdogs. Even though in the rules it said no clues in the pictures. As for why I did not vote for Tony was because nothing he did seemed scummy to me. He wanted to lynch Anthony and so did I. We're supposed to vote for who looks scummy and Anthony based on others reasons looked scummy. I wanted a lynch yesterday but I thought Anthony was the one who should have gotten the axe. Something you keep bringing up is the fact that all we needed we're two more members to vote off Tony, and you keep acting as if we're the ones to blame for the no lynch. Anthony had the same amount of votes as Tony did, why didn't you vote for Anthony to try and get a lynch? If it's because you did not think he was acting scummy well that's why I did not vote for Tony. I looked over yesterday and it seems Harry (not Gary) originally voted for Alan before changing his vote. I could see this as a possiblity as to why Harry was killed, Alan (who I think may of had a serial killer role) was somewhat scared of Harry so he killed him. As to why Alan was then killed I don't know. Possibly a just a random kill by scum. Nothing stands out that shows someone afarid or wanting to kill Alan.

Thank you for clarifying your thoughts.  On all my previous jury duties; the vig was town.  And in all honesty I haven't served jury duty with you before so your experience is different than mine.

3 hours ago, Tariq j said:

My desicion was based of what his predecessor (steamedemon) said, now I totally get he came in halfway through the day and had a ton of votes on him, but he didn't make that much of an effort to defend himself, so my vote stayed on. 

I don't really see how, there were no kills on night 1, were in a small game, so logically it would make sense that either a blocker/protector was the result of no kills.

 

Hang on, on both days I was the one who said that we should have a lynch, everyone else was saying "no, its better if we don't have a lynch so everyone is alive", simply because we found someone else scummy you didn't doesn't mean we were trying to divide the town.

Day 2 I was in agreement with the lynch, however the scummy crime family was every effective in splitting the town vote so we had no lynch.

1 hour ago, Forresto said:

In regards to suspecting a third faction I would like to bring up this conversation we had yesterday. 

Nothing but pure speculation on my part, however I was right now wasn't I? 

As for voting for Anthony I made it perfectly clear it had nothing to do with the man himself but his predecessor whose role he shares. Its easy to claim that the Anthony vote split the town, and just as easy to claim that the Tony vote split the town. I may be mistaken but were not more people voting for Anthony prior to Tony?

As for outright arguments the same could be said of you and Jared?

Speaking of Jared, @Kwatchi & @Umbra-Manis, you both could have cast a deciding vote? Why did ya'll throw your votes away?

Thank you for your response.  However, I did mention that I had re-read this conversation and what confused me was that after the discussion of a third-party on Day 1, why did you bring it up again on Day 2?

19 minutes ago, Kwatchi said:

((sip))

I have tried to be open about my stance from day 1 about this, though I probably could have been more eloquent at times.  My voting has come down to two (2) things:

1) I don't believe "blind" lynching is a valid strategy.  My belief is keeping as many potential town in the game - and therefore as many power-roles active and collecting information - is a better philosophy than whittling down numbers in a blind hope of a hit.  That info will be crucial in a very short amount of time.  Frankly, the lack of day 1 kills was a gawd-send in that respect. The fact that Oldman was high in votes two days running, and then flipped town last night seems to bear out my thinking.  I realize not everyone agrees here, and I'll assume not includes a good number of town members, but that is my stance.  I'll continue to vote based on my perception of behaviour and not go with the crowd.  And that of course leads to...

2) I have have not wavered in my suspicion of Stephanie (LadyK).  I've have done my best to explain that I have identified her using PR/debate tactics that both deflect and obfuscate, which would be the definition of suspicious behaviour far beyond what I'd expect for someone under the pressure of a single vote.  My make no apologies for this and my hope is that should I unhappily not make it to the end of the trial, that the spotlight will shine immediately on her and I'll get my woman from beyond the grave.

Now, I do have a slight change in my suspicions of Stephanie.  I can longer assume she is simply Balagio but now I have to consider she may be Moletti instead.  I am still trying to figure out the risk/reward of that fact.  And thanks for the experienced jurors who have helped undertsand the nuances of the possible roles.

While can't say I am flattered or happy by this, but I'm not going to complain about it.  We obviously have very different philosphies on "blind"  lynching.  You are for and I am against.  Since I disagree with your stance, I naturally do keep an eye on you as well.  But the important thing is he has put it out their publicly, and that I applaud because this is info we will need later.

 

And since someone will ask, my vote at the moment will either be Stephanie or someone who continues to push for blind lynching.  It is not a threat so much of where my thought space is right at this moment.  And since everyone is still being cagey, I'll start things off in unsurprising fashion.  One way or another, I want my suspicions of Stephanie confirmed.

Vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K)

But as I have stated since day 1, if anyone can make a valid case for me to change my vote to someone else, based on facts and not "hunches", I will consider it.

((sip))

We understand your suspicions of me; but for the town to win we need to eliminate all the Ballagio crime family members and spit voting after Day 1 really doesn't help.  A lynch at the end of the day is what helps.  Keeping a single vote doesn't help the town and only looks anti-town.

3 minutes ago, Forresto said:

I've found Stephanie Diaz suspicious for a while now. She plays the game and plays it well, almost too well. However i've not had enough to vote on. 

I don't think Stephanie is vanilla, she's definitely more then that.

Now that she has tentatively gone after me my hands are tied.

If I vote for her everyone considers it a revenge vote. For whatever reason people already find me suspicious, doubly so due to my prior disputes with Harry who is innocent, therefore an easy dismissal of my vote being genuine and not deflection. If I don't vote and she is indeed scum then I've singled myself out.  

So my top two candidates for vote are Anthony (my opinions have yet to change from yesterday on him) and Stephanie. I will hold off on voting to give them some chance to respond.

Revenge voting is obvious when the voter has no good reasons for the vote.

If you find me suspicious, ask me question, evaluate my responses, make a decision, back it up.  I have nothing to hide so I will answer your questions.

 

[Kintobor]

Just now, jluck said:

OK, so I just want to be clear on this, your saying you have reason to vouch for Stephanie? If so, this changes the entire conversation so I just want to clarify.

I do have reason to vouch for Stephanie. Stephanie was the target of Day One's Night Kill. I've been in contact with the Town Doctor, and they've relayed this information to me. 

[jluck]

2 minutes ago, Lady K said:

Although this would seem to make sense except for two points:

1.  Cathy/Jimmy were new jurors; as I have stated before, I have seen many times before new jurors make scummy mistakes Day 1 just because it was there first time on the jury.  Given time, usually by Day 3 they start to make up for lack of experience or are then lynched for extremely poor performance.  Usually the Day 1 lynch is town affiliated; so a lost of a loyal jury member just to have a lynch and get rid of the new guy/gal.  Their CathyJimmy behavior to me seemed just that; scummy due to lack of experience.

No scum crime family worth their reputation would let a new member get away with that blatant obviously scummy behavior without counseling them in private.

So again newbie.

2. You,however, have plenty of jury experience and I have seen both sides of your loyal and scummy behavior.  Now, yes, I could be wrong (and would give an apology) but your Day 1 lynch the new girl/guy and on Day 2 again; brings back thoughts of your previously scummy behavior.  

In essence I believe you to be the best lynch choice again for today.

You have given no indication that you are loyal town, even when the lynch could have gone for you yesterday.  You gave no defense to change the minds of those who voted for you.  And I believe this is why Harry was killed.  Because he changed his vote from Alan yesterday to you because he found you more suspicious.

 Your drive to eradicate the newbie as suspicious reminds me of past experiences; which is why I am extremely suspicious of you and that you are trying to lead the town in the wrong direction.  The thing that bugs me the most is you have brought up no one else as suspicious and lynch worthy as the CathyJimmyAnthony.   This stands out as anti-town.  I hate losing your experience, but at the same time I can't risk that you are a Ballagio family member.

 

So because the new player's posts weren't carefully constructed they must not be scum? Would you have been suspicious of posts that were well done by new players? Because Clifford is new and he's played one heck of a game.

See, here's the thing. I know I'm town, but there is no way to prove it short of being investigated (I would welcome this!), role claiming, or being killed (I would not welcome this). So nothing I do will change your mind. However, if you are successful in offing me, you'll find yourself another townie short and 2 days of voting wasted, and all the town will get is your apology.

1 minute ago, Kintobor said:

I do have reason to vouch for Stephanie. Stephanie was the target of Day One's Night Kill. I've been in contact with the Town Doctor, and they've relayed this information to me. 

Thank you, this is very valuable info.

8 minutes ago, Lady K said:

(snip)

We understand your suspicions of me; but for the town to win we need to eliminate all the Ballagio crime family members and spit voting after Day 1 really doesn't help.  A lynch at the end of the day is what helps.  Keeping a single vote doesn't help the town and only looks anti-town.

(snip)

 

Who's we?

[Lady K]

27 minutes ago, jluck said:

I've got a bit to say on the topic of Stephanie, but it may take me a bit to dig up relevant posts to quote. However, I will say this while I'm doing it, I've had "jury duty" many times with Stephanie and I cannot read her. She plays at a vicious speed which in some aspects helps drive a conversation but can also hijack the thread if others aren't active (personally I'm always happy when she's involved, she's a fun member. Kinda reminds me of when @Shadows was at his peak).

With all that out of the way, I'm still trying to figure out her position here. There is no doubt in my mind that she has driven at least 50% of the narrative of this jury. What I can't decide is if she is bold because she has nothing to hide or bold in order to hide. 

I promise I'll add some relevant quotes when I have them all together.

Finally.  At least you are now looking at someone else; even if it is me.   I have nothing to hide, but I look forward to the discussion.....unless you are trying to distract the town. 

6 minutes ago, Kintobor said:

You have continually split the vote by voting for Stephanie. You could've helped yesterday by voting for Oldman or Tony, and still you continued to split the vote by voting for Stephanie, a lead that would lead nowhere. You cannot deny this, as the voting evidence is there. As far as I am concerned, you voting for Stephanie for a third day in a row is the flat out scummiest thing I've yet to see. I have in fairly good confidence reason to believe Stephanie isn't scum, and you continually hammering on her, as well as your lack of confidence in the one power you have, your vote and the power to lynch, has not helped in the slightest. We as a town NEED a lynch today, and between Tony and Jared, Jared's the scummier of the town.

Vote: Jared Hartman (Kwatchi)

I'm shocked that people are not voting. At this point, if you haven't voted, you're withholding for a reason. The fact that the town is this quiet worries me. The scum have already seemingly grabbed some of you by the ear and are leading us to slaughter. 

This bothers me as well.  With only a very small number of us willing to have a conversation, and now one is dead and was a loyal town, scum will use this to their advantage and lead us astray.  I had expected to see at least a couple of votes before I got here the first time this morning.  A quiet town=a dead town. 

1 minute ago, jluck said:

OK, so I just want to be clear on this, your saying you have reason to vouch for Stephanie? If so, this changes the entire conversation so I just want to clarify.

???

It seems I am in cross conversation here, sorry If what I ask has already been answered. 

[Forresto]

@jluck Precisely my sentiment. I've reread through Day 2 and i've determined my course of action, even if it proverbially damns me.

~

Stephanie was reticent to lynch day one. Fair enough, reasonable strategy.

Tony was suspicious of Cathy. 

Stephanie however she was defensive of Cathy, on multiple occasions, and when pressed deferred to Amanda and Tina EACH time deflecting the focus away from Cathy. 

Cathy was then replaced by Jimmy

Stephanie votes for Tony and then Jimmy votes for Tony both in defense of Cathy. 

As suspicion mounts against Jimmy, Stephanie defends Jimmy and deflects again to Amanda. 

Again suspicion is focused on Jimmy and Stephanie distracts by presenting this whole essay on voting and again deflects to Amanda! This is a bizarre pattern.

Then Jimmy is replaced by Anthony. 

I vote for Anthony. Anthony votes for me. 

Stephanie then once again tries to break the vote against Cathy/Jimmy/Anthony.

Later as you Tony double down Stephanie defends Anthony putting blame also on Amanda.

Surprise, surprise Anthony votes for Tony.

Finally Stephanie makes a final case for people to switch onto the bandwagon against Tony, which is odd given her prior reticence for so called band wagons. 

~

Stephanie first defended Cathy inexplicably, then tried to separate Jimmy from Cathy, and then Anthony from Jimmy despite them all holding the same role. 

She and who I believe is her compatriot Anthony aka Jimmy aka Cathy have led the anti-tony campaign simply because of his original suspicion and day 1 vote of Cathy, Anthony's predecessor.

Is there a chance Tony is scum? Maybe, but he's been on the defensive.

Unlike Tony, Stephanie has attempted to control the narrative the last two Days and guide us all in a vote against Tony with no real evidence.

Extremely suspicious behavior. 

~

Therefore I accuse both Stephanie Diaz and Anthony Dodson of being scum and traitors to our community!

I vote Stephanie Diaz (LadyK) for the reasons stated above.

[jluck]

2 minutes ago, Kintobor said:

I do have reason to vouch for Stephanie. Stephanie was the target of Day One's Night Kill. I've been in contact with the Town Doctor, and they've relayed this information to me. 

So with this new info I think we can actually build a little bit. If Stephanie was the night one target, she must have at least ruffled some scummy feathers. Day 1 could have some clues. Additionally, this would indicate the scum did indeed attempt to kill on the first day, not recruit or such. I assume the Doc got a "successful" reply on their night 1 action, indicating the Stephanie was indeed targeted, is there anyway of knowing which family targeted her?

2 minutes ago, Forresto said:

@jluck Precisely my sentiment. I've reread through Day 2 and i've determined my course of action, even if it proverbially damns me.

~

Stephanie was reticent to lynch day one. Fair enough, reasonable strategy.

Tony was suspicious of Cathy. 

Stephanie however she was defensive of Cathy, on multiple occasions, and when pressed deferred to Amanda and Tina EACH time deflecting the focus away from Cathy. 

Cathy was then replaced by Jimmy

Stephanie votes for Tony and then Jimmy votes for Tony both in defense of Cathy. 

As suspicion mounts against Jimmy, Stephanie defends Jimmy and deflects again to Amanda. 

Again suspicion is focused on Jimmy and Stephanie distracts by presenting this whole essay on voting and again deflects to Amanda! This is a bizarre pattern.

Then Jimmy is replaced by Anthony. 

I vote for Anthony. Anthony votes for me. 

Stephanie then once again tries to break the vote against Cathy/Jimmy/Anthony.

Later as you Tony double down Stephanie defends Anthony putting blame also on Amanda.

Surprise, surprise Anthony votes for Tony.

Finally Stephanie makes a final case for people to switch onto the bandwagon against Tony, which is odd given her prior reticence for so called band wagons. 

~

Stephanie first defended Cathy inexplicably, then tried to separate Jimmy from Cathy, and then Anthony from Jimmy despite them all holding the same role. 

She and who I believe is her compatriot Anthony aka Jimmy aka Cathy have led the anti-tony campaign simply because of his original suspicion and day 1 vote of Cathy, Anthony's predecessor.

Is there a chance Tony is scum? Maybe, but he's been on the defensive.

Unlike Tony, Stephanie has attempted to control the narrative the last two Days and guide us all in a vote against Tony with no real evidence.

Extremely suspicious behavior. 

~

Therefore I accuse both Stephanie Diaz and Anthony Dodson of being scum and traitors to our community!

I vote Stephanie Diaz (LadyK) for the reasons stated above.

 Well given that we have a night action result, this may be a dead end after all. I'm still processing the new info, but it would be a bold scum act to claim a night result.

[Forresto]

2 minutes ago, jluck said:

So with this new info I think we can actually build a little bit. If Stephanie was the night one target, she must have at least ruffled some scummy feathers. Day 1 could have some clues. Additionally, this would indicate the scum did indeed attempt to kill on the first day, not recruit or such. I assume the Doc got a "successful" reply on their night 1 action, indicating the Stephanie was indeed targeted, is there anyway of knowing which family targeted her?

 Well given that we have a night action result, this may be a dead end after all. I'm still processing the new info, but it would be a bold scum act to claim a night result.

Considering there are two groups of mafia.

Now mind you I did write my accusation before that revelation, however i'm unconvinced as of yet.

[jluck]

4 minutes ago, Forresto said:

Considering there are two groups of mafia.

Now mind you I did write my accusation before that revelation, however i'm unconvinced as of yet.

A healthy skepticism is best. I'm trying to figure out if there are any scenarios where Stephanie could still be dangerous. Here's what I have:

1) This is a very bold scum ploy. This seems unlikely as it would expose multiple people.

2) The Doc misunderstood the result. This is unlikely as the Doc could compare the wording of yesterday's result to the night 1 wording to be sure they did stop Steph from being killed.

3) Stephanie is scum and was targeted by the Vig. The Doc inadvertently saved a scum.

4) Stephanie is a member of a rival family, was targeted, but the Doc saved her.

Of these options, if steph is scum, it seems 3 and 4 are the only likely ones. Am I missing anything?

[Lady K]

5 minutes ago, jluck said:

So because the new player's posts weren't carefully constructed they must not be scum? Would you have been suspicious of posts that were well done by new players? Because Clifford is new and he's played one heck of a game.

See, here's the thing. I know I'm town, but there is no way to prove it short of being investigated (I would welcome this!), role claiming, or being killed (I would not welcome this). So nothing I do will change your mind. However, if you are successful in offing me, you'll find yourself another townie short and 2 days of voting wasted, and all the town will get is your apology.

Thank you, this is very valuable info.

Who's we?

Remember I was the one started the vote on Clifford Day 1 and he is new. His contributions have improved,  and now we have a way analyze his actions better.

My suspicion was due to you only focusing on one target for Day 1 and then again on Day 2, a target who just did typical new behavior.  Using the vote initial to gain info is one thing; however you just kept on when by Day 2 there were other possibilities developing and you completely ignored any other option.  With your experience this looked extremely scummy.  Could the CJA members be scummy for either of the crime familys; yes, but on Day 1 it wasn't worth the risk.  Day2 you didn't focus on anyone else; so still the risk was too high and it gave the appearance of you not helping town.

I would welcome you being investigated as well. 

3 minutes ago, Forresto said:

@jluck Precisely my sentiment. I've reread through Day 2 and i've determined my course of action, even if it proverbially damns me.

~

Stephanie was reticent to lynch day one. Fair enough, reasonable strategy.

Tony was suspicious of Cathy. 

Stephanie however she was defensive of Cathy, on multiple occasions, and when pressed deferred to Amanda and Tina EACH time deflecting the focus away from Cathy. 

Cathy was then replaced by Jimmy

Stephanie votes for Tony and then Jimmy votes for Tony both in defense of Cathy. 

As suspicion mounts against Jimmy, Stephanie defends Jimmy and deflects again to Amanda. 

Again suspicion is focused on Jimmy and Stephanie distracts by presenting this whole essay on voting and again deflects to Amanda! This is a bizarre pattern.

Then Jimmy is replaced by Anthony. 

I vote for Anthony. Anthony votes for me. 

Stephanie then once again tries to break the vote against Cathy/Jimmy/Anthony.

Later as you Tony double down Stephanie defends Anthony putting blame also on Amanda.

Surprise, surprise Anthony votes for Tony.

Finally Stephanie makes a final case for people to switch onto the bandwagon against Tony, which is odd given her prior reticence for so called band wagons. 

~

Stephanie first defended Cathy inexplicably, then tried to separate Jimmy from Cathy, and then Anthony from Jimmy despite them all holding the same role. 

She and who I believe is her compatriot Anthony aka Jimmy aka Cathy have led the anti-tony campaign simply because of his original suspicion and day 1 vote of Cathy, Anthony's predecessor.

Is there a chance Tony is scum? Maybe, but he's been on the defensive.

Unlike Tony, Stephanie has attempted to control the narrative the last two Days and guide us all in a vote against Tony with no real evidence.

Extremely suspicious behavior. 

~

Therefore I accuse both Stephanie Diaz and Anthony Dodson of being scum and traitors to our community!

I vote Stephanie Diaz (LadyK) for the reasons stated above.

I wasn't defending the CJA trio; merely pointing out other possibilities that were being ignored.  The focus solely on the CJA trio can be indicative of scum knowingly getting rid of an easy town target; especially on Day 1.  Easy because of the lack of experience of the CJ jury members; so the lack of participation looked scummy and suspicious.  I brought up Amanda and Tina at the time because they were quiet and have the experience to know how to participate and be active or alternately how to hide and fly under the radar. 

3 minutes ago, jluck said:

A healthy skepticism is best. I'm trying to figure out if there are any scenarios where Stephanie could still be dangerous. Here's what I have:

1) This is a very bold scum ploy. This seems unlikely as it would expose multiple people.

2) The Doc misunderstood the result. This is unlikely as the Doc could compare the wording of yesterday's result to the night 1 wording to be sure they did stop Steph from being killed.

3) Stephanie is scum and was targeted by the Vig. The Doc inadvertently saved a scum.

4) Stephanie is a member of a rival family, was targeted, but the Doc saved her.

Of these options, if steph is scum, it seems 3 and 4 are the only likely ones. Am I missing anything?

Yes, you are.  The option you are missing is that I am town with nothing to hide.  I am actively trying to engage the town in conversation so the town wins.  And I was saved by the doctor from the scum kill; if the scum had been successful then just how active would the conversations be right now?  I am even welcoming the debate about me just to get this quiet town talking, would a crime family member do that?  No.  The best win for the crime family is a quiet divided town that can't stand together and make a decision.

And yes to your comment earlier, I wouldn't doubt that the crime family is all over the place in voting; in keeping the votes split there is less likely one of them will be lynched. 

[Trekkie99]

38 minutes ago, Kintobor said:

I do have reason to vouch for Stephanie. Stephanie was the target of Day One's Night Kill. I've been in contact with the Town Doctor, and they've relayed this information to me. 

If this is true, then that indeed gives us something to work on. However as @jluck mentioned, this doesn't prove Stephanie is town.

 

18 minutes ago, jluck said:

A healthy skepticism is best. I'm trying to figure out if there are any scenarios where Stephanie could still be dangerous. Here's what I have:

1) This is a very bold scum ploy. This seems unlikely as it would expose multiple people.

2) The Doc misunderstood the result. This is unlikely as the Doc could compare the wording of yesterday's result to the night 1 wording to be sure they did stop Steph from being killed.

3) Stephanie is scum and was targeted by the Vig. The Doc inadvertently saved a scum.

4) Stephanie is a member of a rival family, was targeted, but the Doc saved her.

Of these options, if steph is scum, it seems 3 and 4 are the only likely ones. Am I missing anything?

@Forresto, I stand by Stephanie when I agree that Cathy and Jimmy's "suspicious behavior" was simply newbie behavior*. (I speak from experience.)*

 

41 minutes ago, jluck said:

So because the new player's posts weren't carefully constructed they must not be scum? Would you have been suspicious of posts that were well done by new players? Because Clifford is new and he's played one heck of a game.

I have? I find that statement confusing.

And finally @Kwatchi. You hating on Stephanie (dab on the haters) is getting lame. And as I've stated before (to which you never replied) you sipping your latte, giving some commentary, and then voting for Stephanie gives the appearance of being involved in the jury, without actually doing much. Do I think your scum? Not really. But your definitely not being a good townie if one were to assume you are.

[jluck]

2 minutes ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

(snip)

I have? I find that statement confusing.

(snip)

This comment was meta, not in character. I wanted to complement how well you've done as a newb, especially in comparison to your other newb counterparts.

[Trekkie99]

1 minute ago, jluck said:

This comment was meta, not in character. I wanted to complement how well you've done as a newb, especially in comparison to your other newb counterparts.

Well thank you. 

A little surprising from you since just yesterday I wanted the police chief to haul you off to the station. 

[jluck]

1 minute ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

Well thank you. 

A little surprising from you since just yesterday I wanted the police chief to haul you off to the station. 

Keep playing your game, don't let me meta comment through you. As Tony, I still hate you