MagPiesRUs

The white epaulettes might have looked ok if they hadn't reused the 2009 shako print. As it is, the red plume of the shako doesn't really fit with the colour scheme at all.

Between Alastair, Hazel and Catarina, there's been a lot of weirdness today that I'm struggling to make sense of. As far as Alastair goes, I keep flip-flopping on my read of him, but obviously it's best we get a lynch today. As long as he lives, his allegiance is going to niggle me, so I will Vote: Alastair Pear (Brickelodeon).

Fair enough. I was getting the impression you were dragging the Alejandro business out a little too much, but looking back it wasn't as bad as I thought. Since you've mentioned that those who contacted you do this all the time, I'm more comfortable about them, but I can only really go off of your own private experiences with them. I sent you a message just to get a better read on you, and also to make a joke. Bandwagoner! Maple! But seriously, it's good that you've decided to vote for the person you suspect the most. I see no reason why you should be concerned about how people will perceive your vote, as long as you believe it's the right choice to make.

What's suspicious about Bobby's editing shenanigans? Are you suggesting he was covering something up? It sounds to me as if you're trying to get an easy lynch here, capitalising on the 5 penalty votes Bobby has already acquired. I'm still somewhat baffled as to why Simon Persimmons started this whole 'Alejandro' business though. Giving someone a codename attaches a certain stigma to them. Why didn't you publicly release this information from the outset?

I don't understand why we need to protect Alejandro's identity here. I see no reason why someone needs to remain anonymous simply because they claimed that someone else was suspicious in private. This is just complicating things and denying Alejandro the opportunity to explain him/herself.

Hi, I'm Adelaide! Does anyone want an apple? Your hollow threats don't worry me. You're all bark and no bite!

Here's hoping we all become talking tree stumps when we die...

I was planning on taking another break, but this concept intrigues me. Plus, my first acting role was a piece of foliage, so as far as roleplay goes I'm confident I'll do a good job. 1. I've played at least one 2. Yes 3. Yes

I think the town did a great job. As has been said, we got lucky a few times, and it would have been hard for the town block to predict what had happened. I think there was one hint that something was amiss though - Stickfig vigilante roleclaim. Why would he be confident enough to claim vig if he knew there might be a counter-claim? Why not claim a safer, less contestable role? That said, a scum win was far from inevitable. If a single thing had gone wrong over the last three days, I think we would have been in trouble. By Day 7, we had killed every non-PR townie - the only unconfirmed players left were adventurer and LegoSpy. If either of them were lynched, it would have made things a whole lot harder.

Thanks for hosting Tammo, it was a lot of fun! Great presentation, and very funny at times too. I'm actually quite surprised we managed to pull off a win. Things weren't looking great when Sitckfig and Scaevola were lynched and we had a couple of close calls, but everything came into place after that and we lucked out. I don't think we would have been able to pull it off any other way - if anyone but Piratedave, Bob and Mencot (thanks Mencot!) were lynched, we would have been in trouble. Adventurer was under some scrutiny from beginning to end, and there were only so many times the town was going to buy me not using my vig-kill. I'm not sure we would've been able to survive if anything went wrong and we had to play a Day 8. I might be a bit biased, but I think the one-shot conversion was fine. It was a big risk to use (we weren't allowed to kill on the same night) and we had no way of verifying who was convertible and who wasn't.

Vote: Molly Callaghan (Mencot) If Siegfried has been cleared by the investigator again, I'm inclined to believe he is loyal. It's still possible that he is the godfather, but most of the scum actions over the course of the week don't support this. Even if he is the godfather, I've run the numbers and it looks like we'll be able to get through every godfather candidate before the scum can outnumber us anyway.

I know you meant it would be 3 town vs. 2 scum. My point is that in that scenario, the town numbers cannot be reduced to three unless there is still a vig around, which you claim there is not. If it is only the scum who kill tonight, the numbers will still be 4 vs. 2.

Ok, I've been following the day closely and my thinking is still that Siegfried is more likely to be a townie than Bobby. As I've said, the scum have been playing messily and they've made quite a few mistakes - this suggests to me that the scum are still out of the loop. Were Siegfried scum, he would have been able to coordinate the town PRs and the scum actions effectively. Instead, we have seen at least one night in which the scum failed to kill. I still don't understand what Archie would have to gain from lying about the messages from Sinclair either. Those messages feel to me like another attempt by the scum to fish for information. Were Siegfried scum, he wouldn't have needed this information. Presumably, he already knew about most of the PRs. A lot of Bobby's argument rides on speculation about the remaining town roles. Combined with the private messages he has sent me, I get the impression Bobby is doing this in an attempt to fish for information and spur any PRs to show their hand. He also sent me this message: The only way it would be 3 v 2 tomorrow is if the scum AND the vig killed a townie tonight. I suppose this could simply be a miscalculation on his part, but it is also possible this was a slip up. Bobby may have taken into account a vig kill despite his repeated claims that no such vig exists. I don't believe there are still three scum remaining in a game this small. Should Bobby be right, we will still have a chance to turn things around tomorrow. Vote: Bobby Benedict (Bob)

Nope, I haven't been silenced. I was under the impression Siegfried could only steal votes from non-voters anyway. I get the feeling the reason Siegfried is still alive is a combination of Octan fear that he'll be protected (I suspect they tried and failed to kill him on at least one occasion) and so that the scum can start raising the question "why is Siegfried still alive?" Siegfried's attack on Stanley didn't seem like a calculated move against a teammate. It felt like a spontaneous mess to me. It only came after I had drawn attention to Stanley and Sinclair's voting habits; before then, it seemed the scum could have gotten away with a Pierce lynch that day quite comfortably. Whether or not he's been converted since then is more ambiguous though. At the moment however, I feel that there are better suspects. My gut still tells me Lloyd is scum, but the past few days have been such landslides that it is difficult to find much recent evidence against him. He has been laying low after coming under the spotlight on Day Three. Bobby and Molly are also up on my list. On the nights they actually did manage a kill, they seem to have targeted the least important roles. This leads me to believe that the scum are not privy to much inside information. The scum contacting Archie, presumably fishing for information, further suggests this. I suppose it's possible that Siegfried is scum himself and has devised an elaborate scheme to undermine his own team and walk into blunders in order to look innocent, but the more simplest and most plausible theory is that the scum are just still in the dark.

This is interesting. A converter would really throw a spanner in the works. I didn't receive a message from Sinclair, and it seems others didn't either. Why would Sinclair target you specifically? And how did you "turn him down"? Were you given a choice to convert?

I assume voting is open at this point. I will Vote: Pierce Davy (Piratedave). After being blocked on a kill-less night, he's definitely someone worth looking into. I'm surprised he wasn't vig-killed last night, in fact. Reading over the rest of his posts I'm getting a scummy vibe, especially after his rather defeatist attitude yesterday. Lloyd Spalding remains my next suspect, for reasons I stated yesterday.

The investigator has presumably already investigated Siegfried and another townie, so it's impossible that they're insane and highly unlikely that they get the opposite result. Vote: Sinclair Viola (Scaevola)

You nominated yourself later on in the day when it was safer, and when everyone else was agreeing that we had no reason to trust anyone else. That seems like a good time for the scum to self-vote and remain under the radar. Vague? I provided plenty of reasons why I thought Nottingham and Palacios were good lynch candidates. I also fail to see how I'm one of your top suspects when by your own admission, I was the first to suggest Figurelli as an impeachment target.

Aside from Rep. Davy, I am most suspicious of Rep. Spalding. As I said yesterday, his behaviour thus far has struck me as odd. From his too innocuous self-nomination on Day One to his arbitrary votes, he has felt rather detached and uninterested in finding scum.

Good to see that we've caught our first scumbag. I will vote: Stanley Figurelli (Stickfig) I've been busy campaigning at the local bar for the past couple of days, but I should be posting normally now.

Now that we're pretty certain Siegfried is not scum, I am interested to look back at the speaker votes from Day One... Siegfried Dixon (Speedy) - 4 (Speedy, Mencot, Brickelodeon, Walter Kovacs) Carol Nottingham (Calanon) - 3 (Calanon, Scaevola, Stickfig) Archie Matthews (Adam) - 2 (Adam, mostlytechnic) "Tiny" Peter Rutherford (TPRU) - 1 (TPRU) J. Leroy King (jluck) - 1 (jluck) Lloyd Spalding (Lego Spy) - 1 (Lego Spy) Addie Tremain (adventurer1) - 1 (adventurer1) Abstained - 5 (Bob, badboytje88, Goliath, JackJonespaw, Piratedave) I can't imagine the scum would have wanted Dixon as the speaker,and they may have tried to avoid this by voting for a less experienced speaker. The votes for Rep. Nottingham have always puzzled me a little, now more so than ever. Obviously, the scum wouldn't want to vote together, but I wouldn't be surprised if either Stanley or Sinclair were scum. I'm more inclined to say Stanley, as the third vote is a little safer than the second, and because his reasoning was simply that he had a "bad feeling" about Rep. Dixon. I believe the 24 hours of silence are now up, so I'll also be curious to hear what Lloyd Spalding has to say today. Again, Lloyd seems more interested in how his vote looks than who it is for. All his votes and unvotes so far have felt completely arbitrary. Reps Davy and Hatley aren't the only people up for discussion today. Why are you acting as if you can only choose between them? It doesn't sound like you're particularly confident about either one of them.

Although Hatley has been a little jumpy and his accusations against Dixon were rather weak, he has at least shown some passion and interest in the day's proceedings. Rep. Palacios on the other hand has been too detached for me, more interested in self-preservation than catching scum. Vote: Jackjonespaw (Jacob Palacios)

What? What's going on? You people are weird. I've read the accusations against Rep. Dixon a few times and I'm still having difficulty finding any substance. You're voting for him because he's not dead and because we have no confirmation of his allegiance yet? Strange that all three accusers were also ones who voted Dixon in as speaker (though Hatley did so after voting closed), yet very little has changed since then. I'm not sure I like Siegfried using the speaker role to get himself more votes though. Unless you're getting a scummy read on someone (and by your own admission, you weren't getting a strong one from Molly), I would suggest you leave your power alone and let democracy run its course.

But we're not going to learn anything from no-lynches. Also, now you seem to be acting as if you knew Carol was going to turn up as a townie. If you were getting a strong town read from Carol, that would have been fine. Instead, you said it's possible she's scum, and it's possible that she isn't. If you have no strong feeling one way or the other, I'm not sure why you'd be so reluctant to vote. Besides, you said it is a "terribly suspicious position to be in", which sounds like you're more worried about how suspicious your vote might look than what is good for the town as a whole. Speaking of suspicious votes... Agreed. It strikes me as an attempt to avoid drawing suspicion for voting for a rival lynch candidate. Addie, I'm not sure why you would leave the lynch in the hands of others just to point out that Laughlin was suspicious.

You said this: Which looks to me like you regret not having pulled out of the running. It sounds like you would have done things differently if you had the chance to go back, which makes no sense since by your own admission, you are the only person you can fully trust in the role of speaker.