MagPiesRUs

Peter was never cleared in my eyes, but Berty did seem like a stronger lynch in light of Hazel's demise. How is that fishing? I never even mentioned the vig in my discussion. I was just hoping Simon would see why Peter seemed so suspicious. Simon pointed out that Peter always does weird things and that this instance was no different, which made me hesitate a little on my stance against Peter. As I've pointed out, how you define a vote that matters doesn't make much sense to me. I hammered Larry on Day 3, which somehow doesn't matter, and I voted for Alastair after the hammer, which for some reason matters. I'm not entirely convinced by the case against Jack though. Didn't I read that he'd been cleared by the investigator? That would probably rule him out as a SK, and he has appeared fairly proactive and anti-maple, which makes it difficult for me to see him as the godfather.

I trust it. There was no indication that one of the Night 3 kills was a bomb, anyway. The way last night played out strongly suggests a bomb however. I feel I have answered his accusations as well as I can. Is there anything in particular you still want addressed?

Ok, I'd forgotten that you said you kill your hammerer rather than choose a target yourself. That makes things harder. Obviously at this late stage in the game, a maple wouldn't want to hammer you, and an oak wouldn't want to hammer you unless they were 100% sure you were scum. That's a smart claim to make if you're a maple. Simon has mentioned that the vig didn't kill on nights 1 and 4. What excellent points did he make?

That would never be a great defense anyway. I'm not sure why you think this is scummy. A lot of this is speculation on your part that I can't really defend against. Why would I vote for Catarina when I wasn't entirely satisfied with the case against her? Why wouldn't I bring up someone who I believed was more likely to be a maple? As I said, I wasn't around for the final hours of the day. If I were, I would have still preferred to have seen Peter lynched, but I would have switched my vote if it was required. It was Hazel's behaviour after being voted off that convinced me most. It also made me question whether or not I was right about Peter after all. The case against Berty was strong (sorry Berty), so that's where my focus was. Simon asked me in thread why I found Peter scummy. As I've said, I wasn't around for the end of the day, so I explained to Simon why I found Peter scummy afterwards. I was hoping the town block would kill Peter too that night. I'd love to hear more from William today. He seems to have fallen almost completely off the radar after his scuffle with Simon. A vengeful claim bluff doesn't sound like something a maple would want to try, but his argument with Simon still doesn't sit quite right with me. It felt as if he was angry that Simon was going after him for the wrong reasons. Do you mind if we take you up on your offer to be lynched, William? Yes. Basically what I said I've already posted in thread now (regarding Peter's overexcitement that Hazel must be a maple for deleting his avatar and sig). I can tell you that if I was a maple, I would never endorse or attempt to capitalise on a teammate cheating and manipulating the living after having been killed.

I don't quite follow the logic behind your vote analysis. It seems like you're picking and choosing what was a relevant vote and what wasn't. Was hammering Larry an irrelevant vote? Was voting for Alastair after being hammered relevant? Was voting for Peter on Day 4 a relevant vote? Of course I'm going to be 100% accurate when you're manipulating the vote analysis like that. How was the vote on Nash a wasted vote? Compared to the 4 additional votes that followed the Catarina lynch, I'd say it was more useful. I can't say I was particularly convinced that Catarina was scum, and was happier to vote for someone I was more sure to be a maple. As far as the Hazel lynch goes, I can say I wasn't around for the final 10 hours or so of the day, but I was happy with my vote for Peter when I left. I was still more confident in Peter than Hazel by the end of the day, but I would have probably switched my vote if I was around and if it was needed. I continued to talk with Simon about why I found Peter suspicious after the day was over, and I was hoping he would be the vig target that night. After taking a quick scan, it looks like my post count per day is roughly equal to Sammy's and Bruce's, and more than Lassie's and Sue's. William has also been fairly quiet, only spiking in activity when he was under suspicion. I don't usually post a great deal, but I'd like to think that most of them contribute to the overall discussion. Is it? I haven't seen it for a while. I think it's a lot more common to have a single killer.

Yes, you made a post after Hazel's self-vote in defense of yourself, and didn't mention her situation at all. Then you switched your vote to her when you knew her lynch was definitely going to happen. Ok. I've personally been thinking of Peter as a maple for a while. It's hard to ignore what he said in the C&D either. I've actually thinking about this before I knew about this Hazel-Berty debacle today, but does anyone find it odd how eager Peter was to follow along with my theory that Hazel was scum for removing her avatar/sig so quickly? Oh my god that ia just Brilliant. Affiliation comfirmed: Maple!

You're right, I forgot the vig didn't target anyone on Night 4. So that means there were 2 nights where the scum or SK failed to kill. Now that I think about it more, I guess Peter was the maple killer, so unless the maples can switch roles amongst themselves (which isn't especially common), seeing who was blocked won't help us find the maples. It could help us find the SK, but not a maple.

Ok, I was still teeny bit worried about Simon and the town block, but I think scummy scum scum Peter stumbling into the bomb pretty much confirms that Simon and anyone else who knew about the bomb are oaks (well, unless Peter was the SK...) I was about to believe Barry's weird one-shot neutral kill claim was the explanation for the three deaths on Night 3, but this makes things a little more complicated. Still, it is weird that the SK or scum have failed to kill on three out of five nights. I wouldn't be opposed to lynching someone who was blocked on one of those nights today. Sue, why did it take almost 24 hours for you to switch your vote to Hazel after his self-vote when it is one of the scummiest actions possible in your mind? Were you hoping to split the vote and get a no-lynch that day?

As far as I'm aware, Alastair was the only one of the maples so far to have exhibited this behaviour. Can you point out any evidence of Hazel, Barry or Berty doing this too? Because at the moment I can't find any. Based on Alastair's one action, you think that Sue, Nash and I have deliberately poked at each other to distance ourselves from one another? Even though thus far, we don't seem to have poked any of the confirmed maples? I was under the impression that the town never had to kill off the neutrals in order to win. In past lives, the rules have never specified that neutrals need to be killed for a side to win. Mafiascum seems to say that SKs usually need to be killed, but that's news to me...

Unfortunately all of these pokes seem to involve me, so I know that Sammy's theory is wrong. It looks like you're starting to get tunnel vision on this. I can't say I trust Nash or Sue though, just not for that reason. Sue, why did you wait almost 24 hours to vote for Hazel after he self-voted, when you have later claimed that his move was one of the scummiest actions possible?

Is that why you're trying not to flip-flop now? It's ok to flip-flop as an oak. Oaks can't know everything, so when new evidence appears, it makes sense for us to change our minds about people. It is odd that you're so dead-set that Hazel is a townie. Why would an Oak be so sure of this, when you have no concrete evidence to suggest Hazel is town? It really sounds like you're just sticking with the "Hazel is an oak" viewpoint because in your mind, consistency=oaky and flip-floppy=mapley.

Again, I never expected you to confirm or deny anything. I know that you're careful with information. I mainly left you with that list to discuss it with the town block and to see if it helps to support any knowledge you'd gathered. Agreed, this is what strikes me the most about Berty. Why is she so confident that Hazel is an oak? A townie shouldn't be this sure about the allegiance of someone who hasn't been verified in any way. It sounds like she thinks that if she does a 180 on the Hazel issue today, people will think she's scum. So instead she's sticking to her guns despite the majority of evidence pointing towards Hazel being scum (not appearing as a stump today, his comments about the janitor yesterday, teasing us about what we'll find out about him tomorrow, deleting his avatar and signature...) Vote: Berty Birch (Dragonfire) You lost me a little bit here though. If Hazel's self-vote was one of the scummiest actions possible, why did it take 22 hours for you to switch your vote from Peter to Hazel? You didn't even comment on Hazel's self-vote until the point where you voted for her.

So you don't find it odd that two investigators have been killed in two nights? It's not impossible for the maples to stumble into both investigators, but it is quite a coincidence. I suppose the revealing of vanillas on Day Three didn't help though. As far as Lassie goes, I wasn't fishing. I know what you're like, I never expected you to confirm or deny what I said. I was just explaining my thought process. As for Peter, I explained what I found odd about him because you had asked me in the thread and I didn't have a chance to respond. Sorry, looks like I interpreted your comment the wrong way. When you said you were reconsidering the theory, I thought you meant you were starting to doubt it.

Why would you say that? You seemed fairly confident that Hazel was scum yesterday? So why does her being blown up today change your opinion on the "only oaks become stumps" theory? Personally, I find myself agreeing more with the theory today. Does anyone find it odd that Hazel removed her avatar and signature soon after she was lynched? Seems like she wasn't expecting to return to us today... Didn't we already establish yesterday who the vig targeted? Don't you find it odd that both investigators have been killed on successive days? Both yours and Clem's night kills have felt a little strange to me, since neither of you were particularly pro-town. Either someone in the town block is a maple, or the maples have been paying very close attention to how everyone has been interacting with each other publicly.

For those of you keeping track at home, here are Peter's and Bobby's final posts from yesterday, in chronological order (click on the top left of each quote to get the full context): That's the last post Bobby makes before he dies. Peter, can you point out which part of Bobby's defense changed your mind about him? Was it the part where he said he was a nihilist? Was it where he kept changing his opinion on the investigator? How about the part where he admitted to being useless? (that's funny, Hazel is trying to use that same defense today...) After these posts, Peter comes back, realises he's under heat, and tries to defend his vote: Eventually, he caves and unvotes Bobby. Only when prompted does Peter start talking about how suspicious Larry is: It doesn't look it was Bobby's defense that convinced Peter to switch votes. It looks to me like he was pressured into changing his vote. If I was a gambling tree, I'd bet that you would've been content with your vote if no one had called you on it. Vote: Peter Cedar (badboytje88) It looks like Maggie has about 12 hours left to post until she's mod-killed...

No, you didn't switch your vote because he defended himself. You switched because we called you out on your vote: Bobby did not speak between this post and your next post... And here's your first defense of your vote (note that Bobby did not say anything between this post and the two posts of Peter's that followed): Also, why haven't you posted a code claim to the stumps yet? You claim to have accidentally sent the same codes to everyone, but you don't seem to have made any attempt to fix this.

So do you just have a gut feeling about Nash and Chester? You can't PM the stumps, but you can post a code for them in this thread. Have you PMed anyone with a list of codes yet? If not, why not? Has anyone who has died sent you their codes? Also, who did Clem investigate, Bruce or Simon? Clem, is there anyone you're sure is an oak? Should the stumps start sending their info back to a trusted living oak via code, or does no one want to risk sending it to a possible scum?

So the vig has been active every night? So unless there is no serial killer, another killer was blocked/protected against on the first two nights? Do you have any case against them?Why do you expect us to go after them when you die if you have given us nothing to work with? Why haven't you sent any codes to the stumps yet? Don't say it's because you're useless...

Oops! Sorry, I guess I missed that.

Being lynched doesn't stop you from being janitored. Alastair was lynched, and we don't know his allegiance. And you'd rather vote yourself out (the only person you should know for certain is an Oak) rather than the people you say we should look into when you die? Why not vote for Nash? Or Chester? By the way, here's a list of people who still don't appear to have claimed codes publicly: Bob and Goliath - These two have acted confused about them and have claimed that they won't work. I am baffled that they don't seem to have made any attempt to understand the significance of the codes. Possibly scum riding on the back of other's confusion, or possibly just very lazy oaks... LegoSpy - Has made no mention at all of the code idea. Completely ignored them. badboytje - Sent codes out but sabotaged them by giving the same ones to each person; doesn't seem to have made any attempt to correct this. fhomess and Calanon - Both have openly supported the use of codes, yet have not actually claimed any publicly. Why is this?

I don't think the maples would be told who was going to die while they're still planning night actions. If the janitor is told who will die, I would think they'd be told after the first 24 hours of night is over, giving them the final 24 hours of night to decide what to do. I'm not sure how helpful this is, but here's the number of lynchwagons each tree has joined. Those who voted for janitored Alastair are in brown: 3: Hinckley, Tamamono, Bob, Lego Spy, jamesn 2: Zepher, Calanon, TinyPiesRUs, Goliath, Dragonfire, badboytje88, fhomess 1: Fugazi, mostlytechnic (both only part of the Catarina bandwagon) 0: Scubacarrot

I wasn't so much defending Simon as I was asking why William seemed so convinced he was scum. I found it odd that he was so convinced Simon was scum when the "lies" he accused him of weren't blatant lies at all, and were instead interpretations of William's behaviour. In contrast, it was strange that William was taking such a relaxed stance against Berty, whose story about Barry contradicted William's. Now that William has explained his conversation with Barry though, it makes sense that William and Berty could both be telling the truth. It's not my fault the codes haven't given us much. Blame the people who haven't bothered/deliberately avoided following the plan for that. It sounds as if it's starting to help the stumps somewhat anyway. Wait, what? What does that count for? I only voted for him on Day Two, anyway.

The "contradiction" accusation does make sense. You said the asterisks were BS, but that Catarina's behaviour was scummy. I don't think anyone voted for her because of the asterisks, they voted for her primarily because they found her posts scummy. You can't act as if the vote against Catarina hinged on asterisks, and take the high ground because of it. As for the fishing: everyone knows that Simon is paranoid. I highly doubt that's going to happen again. I'm sure the stumps have learned their lesson. It is a little odd how much you and Bruce have been trying to discredit the codes and the stumps, expecting the stumps to do the exact thing we've complained about endlessly again.

Pushing to scumhunt? But only one of your posts yesterday were actually about suspects. The rest were all about game mechanics and codes. A vengeful tree isn't strictly an oaky role though. It's possible to have a vengeful scum. What makes you 100% sure Simon is scum? Because from where I've been standing, the accusations he made against you made sense. I don't necessarily agree that these accusations prove that you're scum, but I can definitely see the logic behind Simon's thinking. I would have thought the investigator would have sent their codes to one of the stumps by now. It's odd that they haven't, because there's no reason for them not to.

Unvote: Bobby Beech (Lord Duvors) Vote: Larry Larch (TheLazyChicken)