The Pearl - Day Two

[Hinckley]

Pierre, your assertion that you shouldn't target people whose be lynched is total megablocks. Why not target them to see if they do anything to support a lynch or support saving them from a lynch. Why just assume they'd be lynched? And both of them? Why assume you could only catch them doing something wrong.

Yes, Pierre's response is rational but his Actions are still Scummy.

And everything I said about him and our interactions is true.

[Palathadric]

Timmy, how have I been defensive of Jonathan? If I am, it is because I trust him. I sort of see neutrals as helpful, but they are usually more of a nuisance.

Oops, I may have mistaken Holly for you.

My other points still stand or at least did at the time.

[Palathadric]

And everything I said about him and our interactions is true.

I have to say though that you painted him in a pretty bad light in your "play" whereas in the PMs he didn't come off nearly the same way, which makes me wonder, if you are town, why you didn't try to give a clearer representation of what happened. Heck, you could have even quoted the PMs without adding the name.

However, there certainly are oddities in the case, such as Pierre's choice of targets, his keeping quiet after Jon's "play," etc.

What the hell is this?

Generally I give it time after I defend myself to bring up suspicion on anyone else, else I be accused of trying to throw suspicion off me.

Sounds a bit like you're trying to "appear townie," as they say. Odd thing to do if you are town.

Still, Pierre, you do seem more reasonable than your accusers for now.

Since the votes won't make a difference whether I change them or not, I'll keep mine where it is.

I would like to know what some of our quieter members who voted for Mary find suspicious about her? And even those who voted for Alice. Some people seem to just be jumping on the bandwagon because other people did it before them. I know I'm not one to talk, as I voted late yesterday and not exactly early today, but still...

[Peanuts]

Okay, Weird Number Girl is lynched. That's good, now we don't have to bother about her anymore. There's, like, a good chance she'll turn up scum, but I'm a bit disappointed the whole two trackers thing wasn't acted on, and neither did any other jewel thieves come up. No matter what allegiance Number Girl has, we should look deeper into the tracker thing tomorrow; if there really are two tracker claims (that is, if Thief Girl doesn't lie), I'd bet a lot of money that one of them is scum. It's possible neither is, since their roles are apparently different, but it's something we can't ignore.

But there is more than 2 scum members, and I've been, like, very suspicious of Michael. I already have been so earlier, but the tracker/thief thing seemed more important, and I didn't want to distract the town form the task at hand, but now that the day is coming to an end, here we go.

Ever since the whole two tracker thing came up, all he said was:

I shall too Vote: Mary (TheBoyWonder) since I happen to think she is more suspicious than Alice, due to the time she took to place her vote and for not contributing that much when she is accused of something.

For now I shall look back what happened today and see if there's something I need to adress...

Not even talking about it, or about the fact that there is at least one neutral person, and possibly even more, with a potentially deadly action. So, did you find something you need to address? Once again, you were flying under the radar. I had already accused you earlier of this, as well as distracting from the numbers, but I think you didn't reply. I don't know, I thought you said something, about me being contradicting myself, but I couldn't find that comment, and I feel like I'm hallucinating because of it.

So, since my vote isn't going to change anything, I'll use this opportunity to

Vote: Michael (badboytje88)

I'm just suspicious of you, I don't want to repeat myself, so if anyone wants to know why exactly, please look at everything I said about Michael today.

I don't think he should be our lynch today, or even tomorrow, but he should be scrutinized, after we're done with the business of the two tracker claims and the neutral jewel thief (thieves?).

[Hinckley]

I have to say though that you painted him in a pretty bad light in your "play" whereas in the PMs he didn't come off nearly the same way, which makes me wonder, if you are town, why you didn't try to give a clearer representation of what happened. Heck, you could have even quoted the PMs without adding the name.

You're not the only one saying this. There's a lot lacking in Pierre's defense and a lot fueling my suspicion of him. Specifically lacking is any sort of Town talk. "Have you found anything?" "That's a weird claim from Barbara." or "Back off of Barbara. Her story could actually pan out to be true." "The tracker talking to Barbara is lying." "The other tracker could be telling the truth."

At no point was there any "Why should I believe you're Town? You tricked me into revealing a Night Action. If you're Scum, etc etc." No, he pretty much works from the assumption that I'm Town. No qualms, no paranoia about my affiliation. That is odd.

Where was the engaging game play before I revealed him? He had plenty of time to discuss my findings and other people's reactions.

Let's go as far as to compare his lines from my play with the actual PMs, shall we?

Lynette Squeaky Fromme: Helter Skelter, I was tracking someone.

I was using my night action.

I don't find you suspicious, but since last game I've decided to keep that more quiet than I usually do. I'm trying to stop claiming every time anyone asks what my role is.

I paraphrase to the point where he actually revealed it. But, yes, it's calm and straightforward.

He says he doesn't find me suspicious. Why doesn't he? Everybody else seems to.

Lynette Squeaky Fromme: I tracked Scott. He didn't target anybody. Boy, your first question scared the crap out of me.

CM, so forgive me being nervous telling you about my role earlier. Your initial message scared the crap out of me. He didn't target anyone, which leads me to believe he was vanilla.

People have glossed over this, but why would my initial message scare the crap out of him? Getting caught tracking the dead player? Perhaps, but if it's completely innocent, why would you be so scared? I still think it's possible he was assuming I actually did have Cornelius watched and knew that he (Pierre) had targeted him (Scott). It's a convenient claim, tracker, at that point. A role that leaves no evidence but the target itself and no way to confirm the result.

]Lynette Squeaky Fromme:[/b] It was a shot in the dark.

Why? Nobody had given me any particular indication they might've had a night action, it was pretty much a shot in the dark.

Here he gives the indication that he should track someone who seems like they have a night action, but not knowing he just "shoots in the dark" at Cornelius, a smart and usually proactive Town player.

]Lynette Squeaky Fromme:[/b] I assumed one of them would be lynched, so I tried to use my informative role to find someone I could trust. If Scott didn't target anyone, then I'd assume he was vanilla and could work with him.

Well, I assumed they would probably get lynched pretty quickly.

Generally the first thing I do with an informative role is find someone I'd be able to trust. If CM didn't target anyone, he was almost sure to be a vanilla, thus I'd be able to get into contact with him and be able to trust him.

Now, he's changed his story that the role should be used to find someone he trusts to work with. So, at first, he couldn't see anyone that indicated they had a Night Action, meaning that's what he should do with his role and now it's best used to find someone to trust to work with. This is what seems so Scummy to me, especially with another tracker claim out there. He contradicts himself about how he's going to use his role, and then he contradicts himself about why he targeted Scott. Again, there's a flimsy reason and a weak and Scummy claim for targeting the man who is dead. Not to mention, his story about wanting to find someone to trust. Why? To work together? He says he doesn't find me suspicious but he doesn't work with me, really. Yes, he gives me short answers about his role and what he did on Night One, but there's not other "Town work" going on.

His answers and defense, while calmly stated, are weak and Scummy and this is why I thought he was lying and presented it the way I did. Perhaps you all read it as something more severe, but I thought it was a pretty accurate representation. At the time, I considered Barbara the more likely to be lying. I don't trust either one of them, but I think it's somewhat short-sighted to dismiss any concerns about Pierre, based on how calm and level-headed his responses are. That's easy to do with 24 hours to prepare a defense. But look at the timing and the things he is saying and the contradictions and you may see that maybe we shouldn't be so apathetic towards him.

Or maybe I'm wrong. Highly unlikely But possible.

[Piratedave84]

This puzzles me:

Jonathan you make a strong case against Pierre and said like 47 times you thought he was scummy; why not vote for him???

Re-reading the rules and the last statement by Bob, it is not too late to change votes and vote for the person you feel is scum.

[Hinckley]

As long as everyone wants to vote for Mary who did nothing but get her own set number wrong, I'll stick with the group. I'm still sarcastically sticking to that vote since so many people seem to think my discovering if other candidates means we're Scum buddies and I'm defending her.

Also, I'd still like to hear what Pierre says in response to what I just said.

Also, Barbara has gone relatively quiet.

[Piratedave84]

SNIP

So, since my vote isn't going to change anything, I'll use this opportunity to

Vote: Michael (badboytje88)

I'm just suspicious of you, I don't want to repeat myself, so if anyone wants to know why exactly, please look at everything I said about Michael today.

I don't think he should be our lynch today, or even tomorrow, but he should be scrutinized, after we're done with the business of the two tracker claims and the neutral jewel thief (thieves?).

Your vote does count and it may j

Sorry about that!!!

Why vote for michael if you don't think he should be lynched!? How does that make sense? "Hey! Look at me voting for this guy who I'm suspicious of but we should not lynch!! Let's sceutinize him but not vote for him!"

WTF! Votin is not mandatory and if you are just gonna vote "but not to get a lynch" then withhold your vote!

^ that by the way was a double post ... And this is a triple post!!!

As long as everyone wants to vote for Mary who did nothing but get her own set number wrong, I'll stick with the group. I'm still sarcastically sticking to that vote since so many people seem to think my discovering if other candidates means we're Scum buddies and I'm defending her.

Also, I'd still like to hear what Pierre says in response to what I just said.

Also, Barbara has gone relatively quiet.

As said above... WHYYYYYY! Why not vote for who you think is scum rather than stick with the group!

[Hinckley]

As said above... WHYYYYYY! Why not vote for who you think is scum rather than stick with the group!

I just answered you. You yell at Bristol for voting for who she thinks is Scummy and then tell me to do it. Is Bristol supposed to vote with the group and I'm supposed to vote for who I think is the most Scummy?

No, I'm making a point in sticking to my vote for Mary. You even quoted it and yet you ask again. I'm sarcastically sticking to a stupid vote. So many people are trying to distract us from actual discovery by suggesting I'm trying to save my Scum buddy Mary, so let's lynch her to get that theory out of the way and we can start pointing the finger at the people who are really trying to cause distractions.

Mary may be Scum, anyway. Hell if I know. However, messing up her set number compared to the weird things we have two other people saying, two people who admit to targeting Scott, is not a big deal or a good reason to lynch her.

One thing I thought Pierre should've done with his role is work with the Town. Barbara and Mary were highly suspected at the end of the day, by the group. So he should've tracked one of them to help the group decide who to lynch. Or at least to form his own vote today. That's my opinion. The group seems to want Mary dead so I'm playing along to show I'm not afraid to prove that I'm not defending her because we're both Scum. I'm not Scum, no matter what her affiliation is and I'm not afraid to lynch her to try and get that doubt out of people's heads.

So, you all think that Barbara and Pierre are both telling the truth? Don't you think after all of the experience they've gained that they would've learn how to tell a good lie? They targeted Scott, but they admitted it, so they can't possibly be lying. What caused Barbara and Zangara to start talking in the first place, I wonder? Had Pierre talked to anybody else about his ability? People are way too quick to believe them both. I find it odd and disturbing. Are all the Scum active and the Town is not paying attention?

[Captain Genaro]

Thomas did say that either Barbara or Pierre had to have killed Scott but yet he has voted for Mary.

Why?

A valid question, allow me to respond.

My guess is that either Pierre or Barbara killed Scott. They both claimed to have targeted him and I find it unlikely that a third person would also have targeted Scott. Because of this, I'm assuming that one of them killed Scott.

When it comes to Pierre, I find his story to be believable. Maybe he should have targeted someone who was more likely be a potential lynch candidate but I also understand just trying to find an ally on night one, someone who you can report your findings to and who can share them with the group if anything happens to you. Yes, tracker is an easy role claim and yes, Pierre could just be a great liar but I think his story adds up.

I don't like Barbara's role claim. It seems plausible, and quite fun, but not likely (at least, not the way it has been described to me). For example, if neutral 1 steals the diamond and dies, are the other neutrals out of luck? Their role seems to be removed from the game. Unless there's a win requirement that I am unaware of, neither the town nor the scum need to worry about neutrals. They're about as useless as you can get. Sure, the town could try and strike a deal with them but why would the neutrals help the town? I can't imagine that the town would lynch a non-killing neutral. No one else has verified this and I still think it's odd that she chose to target Scott. At this point, I don't want to lynch her because of her (possibly faked) tracker.

[def]

Babs has a job. Job > mafia. Mafia doesn't pay the bills. Back to work (pretty suspicious, going quiet like that )

[TrumpetKing]

Your vote does count and it may j

Sorry about that!!!

Why vote for michael if you don't think he should be lynched!? How does that make sense? "Hey! Look at me voting for this guy who I'm suspicious of but we should not lynch!! Let's sceutinize him but not vote for him!"

WTF! Votin is not mandatory and if you are just gonna vote "but not to get a lynch" then withhold your vote!

^ that by the way was a double post ... And this is a triple post!!!

As said above... WHYYYYYY! Why not vote for who you think is scum rather than stick with the group!

Your aggressiveness raises an eyebrow. Don't make me pull out the Antoine Dodson emoticon again.

As for Pierre, I'm sure Barbara wasn't lying about being neutral, but perhaps she is a Serial Killer, considering most neutrals are Serial Killers, I wouldn't be surprised if she was lying. Pierre send to have a pretty plausible and believable story, but I'm sure we can look further into him tomorrow.

[Sandy]

I still think it's possible he was assuming I actually did have Cornelius watched and knew that he (Pierre) had targeted him (Scott). It's a convenient claim, tracker, at that point. A role that leaves no evidence but the target itself and no way to confirm the result.

That is the line I've been waiting for! My biggest concern about Pierre was that if he was the killer, why would he have told you he targetted Scott without you mentioning anything about it to him? But if you think it is possible that he assumed you knew his target beforehand, then it incriminates Pierre once more.

Sorry about being wishy-washy with my votes, but this confirmation puts Pierre back on top of my list of suspects, whereas I was only voting for Mary to get a conviction.

If there is still time to turn this around as you say there is, I'm going to:

Unvote: Mary (TheBoyWonder)

Vote: Pierre (CallMePie)

[def]

As for Pierre, I'm sure Barbara wasn't lying about being neutral, but perhaps she is a Serial Killer, considering most neutrals are Serial Killers, I wouldn't be surprised if she was lying. Pierre send to have a pretty plausible and believable story, but I'm sure we can look further into him tomorrow.

Now, I've never played mafia in Bizarro World where you apparently learned, but I want to tell you something about the SK. The Serial Killer is likely to do a few things. 1) kill other players and 2) work hard to appear like they didn't, and that they are town. Maybe the SK's you're accustomed to do differently.

Why do people know I'm a third party? Because I said so. Why do people know I targeted Scott? Because I said so. Why did I say so? Because I have a harmless third party role that will only be supported by any watcher/tracker/blocker/whatever the town hits me with. But, feel free to throw a lynch at me anytime. I won't win, but I will be free of repeating the details of my bizarre role.

Now, as to Pierre, I agree with Stacy's reasoning.

Unvote: Mary (BoyWonder)

Vote: Pierre (CallMePie)

Dianne, you think Pierre's story is plausible? Plus you tried to fish me for info on the tracker I've talked to today (which I didn't give)? Sorry, but if Pierre comes up scum, you are 95% likely to be scum.

I don't like Barbara's role claim. It seems plausible, and quite fun, but not likely (at least, not the way it has been described to me). For example, if neutral 1 steals the diamond and dies, are the other neutrals out of luck?

If I die, who knows. But likely, if the scum kill me, they'd get the diamond back. It is a role 100% made up by the host, so you're better off asking him yourself.

[Ferrik]

For that matter, the number of people who are purely checking in is a concern as well. As of this moment, this is all the posts some people have managed to squeeze in in near 48 hours (one of which being a Sunday, when almost everybody has a day off):

Ferrik 2 TinyPiesRUs 2 TheBoyWonder 2 Rumble Strike 2 Palathadric 2 Piratedave84 2 Dannylonglegs 1

It's likely there are at least two scummies in that list.

Well normally I am a lot more active in mafias, but I started reading Day 2 late and there was about 7 pages to get through so it was hard for me to participate. But I'll be sure to talk a lot more during other days.

[CMP]

You're not the only one saying this. There's a lot lacking in Pierre's defense and a lot fueling my suspicion of him. Specifically lacking is any sort of Town talk. "Have you found anything?" "That's a weird claim from Barbara." or "Back off of Barbara. Her story could actually pan out to be true." "The tracker talking to Barbara is lying." "The other tracker could be telling the truth."

I have brought up almost all of this in public. I'll dig up quotes for that in a bit if you need them. Like I said, when you're so seriously convinced I'm scum, it's easy for you to take questions or statements like these and turn them around against me. I don't comment much on other cases when I'm being attacked because I know at least a few people are going to call me out for 'deflecting suspicion.'

At no point was there any "Why should I believe you're Town? You tricked me into revealing a Night Action. If you're Scum, etc etc." No, he pretty much works from the assumption that I'm Town. No qualms, no paranoia about my affiliation. That is odd.

I think we talked about this in private. Everyone thinks you suspicious because you're being aggressive, but I know that's just how you play townie.

Where was the engaging game play before I revealed him? He had plenty of time to discuss my findings and other people's reactions.

I don't exactly understand this question. Are you asking why I didn't comment on the play, or in general in earlier days?

He says he doesn't find me suspicious. Why doesn't he? Everybody else seems to.

Answered this above. To add to that, you're the only person that seems like you're trying to get anything done.

People have glossed over this, but why would my initial message scare the crap out of him? Getting caught tracking the dead player? Perhaps, but if it's completely innocent, why would you be so scared? I still think it's possible he was assuming I actually did have Cornelius watched and knew that he (Pierre) had targeted him (Scott). It's a convenient claim, tracker, at that point. A role that leaves no evidence but the target itself and no way to confirm the result.

That's an easy one: because it leads to crap like this. If I was seen targeting CM, I would be in trouble, which isn't a very good thing for a power role.

Oh! Look, I was seen targeting CM. Now I'm in trouble and we've more or less lost a power role.

I'm sorry my role's convenient for a scum to claim. But it's my role. I can't defend myself against that. And it's easy to confirm, you just have me track someone and see if my result matches up with the person that someone targeted. Gonna be much harder now that my role's known, though.

Here he gives the indication that he should track someone who seems like they have a night action, but not knowing he just "shoots in the dark" at Cornelius, a smart and usually proactive Town player.

When did I give that indication? I try to track people who don't seem like they have night actions so I can claim to them and have a trustworthy contact. I can't remember the last time I've seen an actionless scum. It's pretty rare nowadays. Know that you mention it though, maybe it wasn't a complete shot in the dark. I did want my contact to be experienced in these games.

Now, he's changed his story that the role should be used to find someone he trusts to work with. So, at first, he couldn't see anyone that indicated they had a Night Action, meaning that's what he should do with his role and now it's best used to find someone to trust to work with. This is what seems so Scummy to me, especially with another tracker claim out there. He contradicts himself about how he's going to use his role, and then he contradicts himself about why he targeted Scott. Again, there's a flimsy reason and a weak and Scummy claim for targeting the man who is dead. Not to mention, his story about wanting to find someone to trust. Why? To work together? He says he doesn't find me suspicious but he doesn't work with me, really. Yes, he gives me short answers about his role and what he did on Night One, but there's not other "Town work" going on.

That wasn't as much a contradiction as poor wording on my part. I generally target people who aren't being suspicious Day One. Out of those people, it wasn't a very informed decision that I targeted CM.

I try to find at least one person to trust to pass on any particularly useful tracking results without revealing myself. What the hell is 'Town work?' Sorry, I didn't think you'd exactly be cooperative considering I was in the middle of defending myself. I've seen in previous games how to tend to toy around and open lively discussion with suspects just to get a better feel for them. And I guess you succeeded in that partially in our PM. But how can I expect to help you get anywhere in 'Town work' when you don't trust me?

You asked for information, and I was happy to help because you said it was for the town. If you want to take it and just strangle your tracker to death with it, so be it.

I call complete megablocks on that you had CM watched, by the way. You're just trying to assure everyone of your theory by crafting the situation you say I was protecting myself against. If that's how convinced you are, fine, go string along every single person here to get me lynched. At least you're trying.

[Palathadric]

I don't think Jonathon claimed that he had Scott watched. He was saying that he is thinking that you thought he may have been watched.

The problem I have with voting off the likes of Mary, Michael, and Alice, etc, is that it is really hit and miss. One cannot really differentiate between their "Townie style" and their "Scum style" of playing. They are, generally speaking, equally suspicious when they are playing either role. Thinking it over, I am still not convinced that Pierre is scum, but I think there's a lot that could be learned from his lynch, especially in regards to Barbara and a couple others. Furthermore, since his role has been compromised, even if Pierre does turn out to have been telling the truth, his role is practically useless now, because the scum scumsters are on to him, so he may as well not have a power role.

Hence, I no longer have too much of a problem switching my vote:

Unvote: Alice (Rumble Strike)

Vote: Pierre (CallMePie)

[CMP]

I don't think Jonathon claimed that he had Scott watched. He was saying that he is thinking that you thought he may have been watched.

Whoops. Okay, redact that last line and the bit where I said that's exactly what happened.

[Scubacarrot]

Okay that list bit is pretty scummy... But am I really missing something or is the case that Barbara also knows a tracker? Surely one of them must be lying/scum, can we get more info on the one from Barbara?

What I meant is the fact that Pierre misinterpretated that is scummy, thinking that Scott was watched was a good reason for him to lie about, say having a tracker role.

[def]

The tracker who contacted me knew I targeted Scott, so they have that ability. They were also told I was unsuccessful, giving them the confidence to confide in me, and I them. So far, they appear townie to me, and there is zero doubt they are a tracker.

[Scubacarrot]

Okay thanks for the clear information. I see the case against Pierre now. Unvote: Mary (TheBoyWonder) Vote: Pierre (Callmepie)

One thing: We are against thieves right, but you are a Jewel thief, uhhh? If you are lying we would be lynching our own tracker...

[def]

If I were scum, I wouldn't even have gotten myself involved in the first place.

Sorry, my role title is master criminal, but all I do is steal jewels.

[Rufus]

Barbara, when did your tracker contact you? At the start of the day, or later?

[def]

Early in the day.

Just checked it, it's dated two hours after I got my results.

[Bob]

Vote Count:

Mary / TheBoyWonder: 9 (Captain Genaro, ADHO15, The Legonater, Rumble Strike, Hinckley, Ferrik, badboytje88, Rufus, TrumpetKing67)

Alice / Rumble Strike: 3 (Nightshroud99, Piratedave84 )

Pierre / CallMePie: 6 (Capt. Redblade, Dannylonglegs, Sandy, def, Palathadric, Scubacarrot)

Michael / badboytje88: 1 (Peanuts)

With 21 players, a majority of 11 votes is needed for a lynch.