Adam

Did you read what Pudding Head said? I find it hard to believe that there would be both a vengeful and a bomb, especially with all the information we have about other town roles. My strong suspicion is that one of you is lying. For the time being, we can test your claim and see who that is. If you actually are a vengeful, then I'm sure Pudding Head will tell you who to take care of when you die. Vote: Tarr Egg-Chaser (Tariq j)

Dear Odin, guys, he's right. All this time we've been focusing on the scummy players, when we should've been doing the opposite. We should lynch the people who are most likely to be town! Starting with the PRs!

What's funny is that I don't even think Cranebeinn's argument was good. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to speculate that the scum might have a role blocker. It's an incredibly common role for a scum team. Furthermore, how were you to know that town actions hadn't gone missing? However, instead of making all of these points to your defense, you say this. You agree with your accuser, then try to spin it to your defense by pointing out a minor contradiction - which is an incredibly scummy kind of post. As it stands, your post reminds me of that time Herman Cain said, "There will probably be others," when he was accused of sexual harassment. It's a statement that looks like a defense at first, then you think about it, and you're like, "Wait, what?" I might be misunderstanding the traitor role, but isn't it kind of moot to speculate over whether or not a dead townie was the traitor? If the traitor was already dead, wouldn't he or she have shown up as scum, because the traitor role is scum-aligned and will normally be investigated as scum, as well? With that in mind, wouldn't it make more sense to look at the dead scum?

I think Pudding Head has fingers and the ability to type with them, doesn't he? In that case, he can answer my question himself. Agreed. There are unfortunately a lot of ways that this could play out - converter or no converter, traitor or no traitor, godfather or no godfather, third party or no third party - and I don't think that we can state with any confidence that one thing or another is true until the unconfirmed players are gone and we're left with either a conclusion or a whole lot of "townies." Pudding Head said that night action results are being interpreted, so I'll wait to hear what he comes back with. In the present absence of damning night results, I would support a lynch of Jafri, but only on the basis of my own suspicions of him, which I have voiced several times during this game.

It can be extremely dangerous to speculate on how the host set up the game, but it's always bothered me that there doesn't appear to be a serial killer of some kind. It's very unusual to play a game these days without some kind of third party. There could be a more passive third party, like a lyncher, unlyncher, or survivor, but I find it hard to believe that they would've been able to fly under the radar for so long, being that we only have around 5 (probably fewer at this point) people unconfirmed. This is a long winded way of saying that I'm a lot more inclined to believe that there's a traitor in this game now. My worst-case speculation is that there's a traitor alive, as well as the godfather. This is a grim suggestion, and someone with knowledge of the town block can correct me if I'm making too many assumptions about its strength, but it seems to me that we have enough confirmed townies alive and few enough unconfirmed players that we can pick off the unconfirmed in order of how scummy they've been acting. If there's a traitor or a non-godfather scum, we'll probably get them, unless the town block has been infiltrated. If we don't, then we know that there's a godfather still in play, and things will get a lot more complicated. Why Jafri in particular? Not necessarily disagreeing. I think he's acted especially scummy since the start of the game, beyond the usual "fly under the radar and not contribute much" strategy. But why does the possibility of a traitor existing make you more inclined to suspect him?

I don't think people are suspicious because you were a strong supporter of a Cranebeinn lynch on the first day. They're suspicious because both you and Jafri voted for Cranebeinn on the second day, after Pudding Head gave the town a compelling reason to not vote for Cranebeinn for the time being. I wouldn't blame you for voting for Cranebeinn during the first half of the second day, he was being suspicious as all megablocks, but you voted for him during the second half of the day, when our attention should've been focused on Jarl. As for your comments about Toki... everyone else who has voted for him has either provided a good reason from the get go or has been on his case for the last two days. You saw that people were voting for him and hopped on the bandwagon, glad that someone else was on the hot seat instead of yourself. We should keep in mind that there could be very many explanations here. It could be that Dar had the kill on nights three and four, and then the kill passed to Toki after Dar's lynch. You've mentioned a couple of the other options in your post. But I completely agree that Ragnvald is a stronger lynch candidate because there's more evidence pointing to him being scum. We didn't catch him with his pants down, but his belt was off and his fly was halfway open.

Can you elaborate on this? I'm not entirely sure what you mean about Jarl using you as a platform to attack Cranebeinn. It looks like it's in vogue to vote for Toki and say that you're open to switching your vote to Ragnvald if "that's the way the lynch is heading." I definitely see where people are coming from with their attacks on Toki, but I personally believe that the combination of night results and "general scumminess" is more damning than just "general scumminess." That's why I'm going to... Vote: Ragnvald the Troll (Ranger of the Forest) By the way Ragnvald, you mentioned that what Toki has said today and yesterday has inspired your vote for him. What exactly has he said today which strikes you as suspicious?

Who was blocked the night before last? Was that also Ragnvald? Two nights of damning block results would make for a particularly confident lynch, but if someone different was blocked the night before last, then that person probably warrants closer inspection as well. I'd be interested to hear what Ragnvald has to say for himself. Pudding Head, are you sure you mean Patrekr? He unfortunately got the ax on the first night.

Why are you encouraging us to not lynch Pudding or the investigator in the event that you flip town? Vote: Dar (Dragonfire)

Thanks!!! Rereading my post, I think I may have been a little melodramatic - it's nothing to worry about, just frustrating work stuff.

Oh well. Looks like the scum pulled a fast one on us by deleting Lodmund's Writeboard. It blows that he flipped town, but by the time we got around to voting, he was almost a policy lynch. He didn't help himself by being close-lipped with information, both when it came to his reasons for unvoting Mist and what he learned from his Writeboard. These "short"lists of people we suspect to be scum are growing rather large. Those players mentioned so far today have been coasting under the radar, which goes to show how much quiet players can hinder the town, especially later in the game. I've been keeping an eye on Jafri since his super scummy post on Day 3, and I wanted to take a moment to look at his post yesterday: What exactly do you mean by "fishy behavior from the scum"? We've killed three scum so far. For the most part, they've been playing like idiots. What don't you like about that?

Due to unforeseen circumstances, I'll be doing a lot of traveling this weekend, so I unfortunately might not be as active as I'd like to be.

Alright everyone, Lodmund is scum. The first time I asked him for a Writeboard link, he sent me the link to his EB conversation with Jarl, which he knew I wouldn't be able to access. Next, he sent me the Writeboard URL with the word "missing" at the end of it. Just now, he's sent me a broken Writeboard link. He's claiming this is the link Jarl gave him, but that's straight-up just not possible. A Writeboard link goes 123.writeboard.com/randomletters, where "randomletters" is exactly what you think it is. A bunch of random letters and numbers. The link Lodmund sent me didn't even have the ".com" in it, and it had an ellipsis in between the numbers. If it's legal, and if anyone wants to see the nonsense link that he sent me, toss me a potato. I've also repeatedly asked Lodmund whether or not Jarl gave him anything else alongside the link. I was trying to get him to reveal the password to his Writeboard. For the uninitiated, a Writeboard has two components, the link to the chatroom itself along with a password to gain access to the chatroom. After prompting, Lodmund said that he'd received nothing besides the link. I'm guessing he didn't know that Jarl had sent Pudding Head and I working links with passwords attached to them. Lodmund, if you're town, which I seriously doubt, then send me the link. The actual link, whether it takes me to a page or not. Send me the password (which I'm guessing you'll make up). Otherwise, everything about this reads stalling scum. A scum who made a desperate attempt to save Mist, his scum partner, and who's been trying to make up for the fact that he doesn't have the Writeboard he claimed he had. Vote: Lodmund (Lord Duvors)

I was saying that Lodmund never had a Writeboard. Pudding Head and I each received unique Writeboards that allowed us to contact the scum team.

Then why didn't you say anything to me? To some extent I can understand not messaging me earlier because you didn't trust me, but when I asked you for the Writeboard, you didn't respond at all. You could've told me that you were having trouble sending the link, that you were having difficulty accessing it, that you thought it was redundant because you'd posted it in public, or even that you didn't trust me enough to send it, but you said nothing at all. I'm growing confident that there never was a Writeboard. Lodmund just tried and failed to send me a link to an EB conversation, which clearly I wouldn't be allowed access to. When did you post your last message in this supposed Writeboard prior to Mencot claiming scum?

When Jarl threw you the potato containing the Writeboard, what did he say? Send me the link and any other information he may have given you. In our conversation, you told me that Jarl confessed to being the scum killer, saying that he killed Patrekr on night one. How did he tell you this, and why?

I've given Lodmund a chance to come clean with me, but he hasn't taken it. After Pudding and I received our Writeboard links, we shared them with each other. TPRU, I don't know if this is a violation of any of the rules about quoting PMs and the like. For what it's worth, we shared the Writeboards with each other before Pudding asked you about whether or not it was OK to post them in the day thread. I have asked Lodmund several times in private to see his Writeboard, and have given him access to my own. If he's a loyal townie, then he has no reason not to give me access to this Writeboard. Even if he suspected I was scum, why wouldn't he give me the link? If I were scum, I would've had access to the Writeboard anyway. No, the only reason I can come up with as to why Lodmund wouldn't give me access to his Writeboard is that there's something in there he doesn't want the town to see.

There's always a small part of me that second-guesses scum claims, worried that they might be desperate townies pulling a sting, but if that's the case you need to reveal the sting at some point to someone. There were what, four hours left in the day? By that point, I think Mist had proved where her allegiances lay, so I still don't fully understand why Lodmund felt confident in unvoting her. Danr, just one post above you, Canute asked some questions about posts you made in the past. Why did you ignore them? Wasn't around to answer this question yesterday. Shortly after Jarl made his confession and petitioned for traitor claims, Lodmund tossed me a potato engraved with words very similar to these: This situation is leaving me unsure. Is it your belief that a traitor really exists? It was after receiving his message that I decided it might be a good plan to falsely claim traitor to the scum. Lodmund told me that he had just done so, I assume at my suggestion, and was waiting for a response. That's around when I threw you a potato. Following that, Lodmund wasn't really transparent with me. He didn't tell me he'd gotten a link to a Writeboard until I specifically prompted him about it. From the moment he sent me that first message, I was a little pinged that he asked me whether or not I thought Jarl's claim was for real. I'm not sure whether or not there is or isn't a traitor in this game, but it felt like he was probing to see whether or not Jarl's claim was a townie sting. If I was a traitor, and I was faced with an opportunity like Jarl's offer, I would want to make damn sure that he was for real before potentially outing myself to a townie.

I'm going to keep going through your arguments to see if I'm missing something, but I really don't see how this makes for a solid argument. I don't understand what's stopping the supposed traitor from posting in the day thread after Jarl's confession. If there is a traitor, I don't think we should be using warped logic like this to try and rule people out. As both Pudding Head and Lodmund mentioned, I also messaged Jarl and claimed to be the traitor. Like the other two, he gave me access to a Writeboard, which I'll paraphrase here. Me: Everything I have to say, I've already said to Jarl. If you have questions, go ahead and ask them. Jarl: I've given all of them access to this Writeboard, so everything should be in order. Scum One: We hear you're trying to pull a sting on us. We're not idiots, you stupid, stupid person! princess consuela...: The extremely female Scum One has issues, I apologize. You're pretty cleaver (her exact words, I'm not sure why they think I'm a butcher's knife) so why should we trust you? Why aren't you giving us more information? Are you able to win without us? I think you can't win without us, so why aren't you telling us more? the BOSS: If you really are the traitor, we'll convert you, but you make it seem like you don't want to be converted! Adam: Who says the scum are the only recruiters? Think about the size of this game. You've lost two of your number in as many days. As strange as it sounds, maybe I stand a better chance with someone else? Someone... like a third party? Scum 3: It's not over 'til it's over. I don't believe what you're saying at all. I think you're just trying to squeeze information out of us. That was it. To explain their comments about me not giving them enough information, I had been playing hard to get when talking with Jarl. I figured that the scum would be more suspicious of my claim if I looked too eager. Lodmund, why did you think it was important to keep this information private? What would have changed if you had presented this tomorrow, rather than today? Why did you hope to achieve by unvoting Mist without explaining yourself? You can't have thought that you would stop her lynch without giving us a good reason to follow your lead and unvote her.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make. Why would people who posted between Jarl's confession and the end of the day be cleared? This is very interesting to read - for me, at least, I'm having a hard time sorting through the WIFOM, which I guess is the point. The scum could be using female pronouns to act like there's a female scum where there isn't one, or they could be trying to trick us into thinking just that. However, I am inclined to agree with your comment about the scum's knowledge (or lack thereof) of the traitor role. It's dangerous to speculate on how the host designed the game, but I can't see TPRU putting in more than one traitor. Mafiascum seems to match up with my understanding of the traitor role - the scum should know whether or not a traitor exists, and exactly how many there are.

If this is some massive joke, or if you're a jester, well played. Vote: Mist (Mencot)

The more things change, the more they stay the same...

Have you forgotten what happened to Jarl after he tried to make a similar point about Tarben? He was lynched. He also turned out to be scum. Combined with what others have said about your attempts to undermine investigation results, I'd say this is worthy of a ping. Hmm... Three pages of posts and this is still the best defense you've been able to come up with. I imagine a lot of discussion today is going to focus on Mist, but I think it's important that we pursue other leads and demand more of the people who have been attempting to fly under the radar. One of those people is Jafri, who delivered one of yesterday's scummiest posts: He said this not long after Pudding Head retracted his own vote for Cranebeinn and told us that it might be worthwhile to keep him around for the moment. Regardless of what you thought about Cranebeinn or Pudding Head at that time, or what you think of them right now (which is also something I'd like to discuss further, see above), it's absolutely suspicious to have voted for Cranebeinn at that moment. It's even more suspicious when you find that Jafri's reasoning was little more than, "I have a scum read." Top it off with the classic, "This is the end of my contributions for the day, but don't worry, James Bond will be back in Thunderball," and you have one scummy post.

You should never wait to defend yourself "just in case." Furthermore, making an argument that Pudding Head is scum is hardly the same as defending yourself. That said, it is disturbing to me that several people were remarkably eager and comfortable hopping on your bandwagon. Reading through the most recent pages in this thread, I'm noticing that a number of people - Cranebeinn, Tarr, and Dar to name a few - placed their votes with little context besides, "He's acting odd; also, let's lynch someone." To use your own language, should you flip town tomorrow, those will be the curtains I peek behind. Oh...

Who are you, Gandalf? You're last few posts have been all "master of ceremonies," if you know what I mean. Generic crap encouraging people to talk and whatnot.