Alright, time to stop being lazy and keep chugging away:
Just to recap from where I left off (this may or may not be relevant, but it certainly stuck out to me), Dsell has cast his vote 5 times, Voltaire has cast his vote 6 times, and CF has cast his vote 3 times.
*****************************
TheMunch:
He has cast his vote
11 times so far this game, on (in order): Ashersky (#310), eHunt (#325), Glooble (#487), Yuma (#523), O (#582), O (#801 - twice in same post), Yuma (#842), eHalcyon (#909), Watno (#1002), eHalcyon (#1282), Jotheonah (#1523).
Unlike the first three people I examined, TheMunch is the first person to cast multiple votes on known town (Glooble, #487; O, #482 & #801). Also notable to me is that despite his plethora of votes all throughout D1, when it came time to get down and dirty (Yuma's 3rd vote on Grujah (which I consider to be the take-off point) was at #1374, and the lynch occurred at #1505), his vote was nowhere to be found. However, don't allow that to fool you into thinking he just wasn't active. He posted at #1377, #1402, #1442, #1450 and #1458.
Into the actual content: I'll start off once more by saying that I did indeed find TheMunch to be on the townie side throughout D1. Part of that feel was that he stood along side me in my desire to heavily scrutinize lurkers over people who write their own gravestone (and are so often town). The other part of that feel was that I understood what he meant when he wanted an 'informational' lynch. Because of those two gut reads however, I think you'll come to understand why I've taken such a turn on my overall stance regarding TheMunch D2:
In TheMunch's second post of the game, #310, he starts out by condemning RVS... and ends by, near as I can tell, RVS's Ashersky:
So maybe I am just incredibly naive but I just dont understand the RVS as a concept. If the goal during the day is for town people to make good decisions and scum to make "bad" ones then having a RVS stage should, in my mind, only be backed by two kinds of people: lazy town and overeager scum. Both of these kinds of players are ones I wouldn't want to see around.
Imma interrupt the meta-reads everyone is giving. How is any of this useful at all?
Talking is good.
I agree with Cayvie here. For the people that are giving meta information, I could care less how players played in previous games. Anyone can change their playstyle at any minute and does not come with any value. But for the people that are giving such meta information, it can give insight into potentially what they care about from other players in other games, giving some kind of insight into their scum/protown leaning. Not sure; dont have anything conclusive yet but talking is better than RSV.
Vote: ashersky
It's not like the two quotes that he contained had anything to do with Ashersky, so I really don't understand how this vote is anything other than RVS. What was the point? -- I'm not saying RVS is bad (it is), but it's part of the game. I understand that. What I don't understand is how someone can condemn it and participate in it... in the very same post!
In his very next post, #325, he changes that Ashersky vote to eHunt:
Vote: ehunt
I have to say I was initially on board with ehunts idea; with such a large number of players I was smitten with the idea of less clutter more content. But as people actually started to refute this as being a bad idea it made me reevaluate my initial thoughts. Maybe its good in theory, bad in practice? Id rather encourage people to give themselves plenty of opportunities (through posting often) to produce inconsistent ideas which can be evaluated by the group. There might be more "junk" to sift through but all in all talking is good.
Now, I can understand voting for eHunt if you think that what he suggested was scummy - but I really don't get that interpretation from what TheMunch said here. What I get is "I thought it was a good idea, until others pointed out that maybe it isn't. I still think it's good in theory, but I'm going to vote eHunt for... ?? ??" Why? Because others thought that what he suggested wasn't a good idea? That isn't a reason to vote for someone.
I'm also going to point out something that's really been standing out to me as we go along. Here is the latest vote-count prior to his vote on eHunt:
Vote Count 1.4
Dsell (3) -- ehunt, Axxle
igbtennis (2) -- ftl, Insomniac
TheMunch (1) -- Jotheonah
Galzria (1) -- ashersky
ashersky (1) -- TheMunch
Not Voting (18) -- Voltgloss, Eevee, Grujah, Glooble, Young Nick, Voltaire, O, Shraeye, Cuzz, Yuma, igbtennis, Morgrim7, eHalcyon, Watno, Captain_Frisk, Galzria, Dsell, Cayvie
With 25 alive it takes 13 to lynch.
This was at post #312 (keep track now): In #316, Cayvie votes for Shraeye. In #318, Eevee votes for Shraeye. In #322, Jotheonah votes eHunt. In #324, Glooble votes Shraeye. In #325, TheMunch votes eHunt. - This stands out to me because as the day goes along I see a LOT of deflection (subtle or not) between TheMunch and Shraeye. Enough so that Shraeye is going to be my next read. In this case, we have TheMunch's very much unexplained vote on eHunt.
In both posts #338, and #394, TheMunch continues to try and push suspicion away from Shraeye:
As a new player I have no clue what actilurking is and if not for people adamantly telling me its a thing I wouldn't have thought it was a thing. Instead of talking about scumslips can we just define the term and move forward?
I'm with whoever said the prolonged discussion of acti-lurking is, in fact, acti-lurking.
100 times this. Shraeye has had content in a lot of his posts and I think its about time people both notice that and comment on it (I'm looking at you Cayvie in posts 335 and 364; you bold the least content filled part of the posts and start this whole tangent. There very well might be others that are guilty for this but it deserves to be noted that people are guilty of this; see: watno.) I'm not trying to tie myself irreparably to Shraeye as I dont really have a good read on him one way or the other, but that doesn't mean there are other things of validity to discuss.
For example, Hey Gooble (in 324) and Watno (in 373), you both mention that you are suspicious of Shraeye. You are both most notable for being suspicious for reasons NOT involving the ridiculous "scumslip". Care to elaborate?
And not that I want to continue silliness involving semantics of "acti-lurking" but this all started with the post by Ashersky. If I understand correctly, Active Lurking (already mentioned but worth reiterating) is the act of making you look active while contributing nothing to the conversation, usually used to avoid topics while avoiding looking like you are avoiding topics. If that is the case, then why is Ashersky actually worried at all about being accused of active lurking. To active lurk there would need to be topics that he would want to avoid, but there weren't any at the time of the post. It just seems silly to me to be worried about being accused of something scummy when that act is physically impossible.
That all being said, my vote is on ehunt and will remain there for the time being. People have pretty much fleshed out why it is worthy to be suspicious of ehunt.
The "scumslip" that he's referring to are Shraeye's post #333 - which you can argue it's validity until the cows come home. At the time, I thought it was an iffy case at best - and I thought nothing of TheMunch defending Shraeye. The problem I'm running into is that rereading, you see these two paired at every single turn. It's not just a one time thing. Still, two people being buddy-buddy isn't in itself scummy. So I'm going to continue on, pointing out the pair, but trying to stay focused on information we know (Town players, scum player). For now, I'll just notate but not quote when a post comes up that pairs the two.
Like in #422, where TheMunch is responding to eHalcyon noticing this very thing (props to you eHal for picking up on this so early).
In post #479, a confirmed town {Glooble}, casts his vote on a now confirmed scum {Grujah}, and in #481, TheMunch responds with:
Ok, I'm back. I will unvote because shraeye doesn't look scummy to me anymore.
Vote: Grujah for showing up, voting on me, and disappearing. Given my history I'm a really easily justified target, probably an excellent candidate for a scum-led day one lynch. Call this OMGUS if you want, but it stood out to me, and not in a good way.
ehunt, just a question of clarification - when you say "once a day", did you mean game day or real life day? Because I think that confusion might be why some people are jumping on you.
What changed? I noticed you said he was suspicious for reasons not the scumslip. I called you out on it and [wanted] to know your reasons. Then without addressing me you changed your vote off shraeye. What changed?
Interestingly, Glooble (prior to that) had been voting for Shraeye for reasons "other than the scumslip" - as TheMunch noted. When provided with those reasons (Post #483), TheMunch followed up in #487 by voting Glooble:
I think "wanted" was autocorrected to "farted". I can't wait to get a smart phone so I can made hilarious errors!
Yup, phone typo. Thanks for responding. I still would have liked to hear all of this much sooner. I think if, when you had voted Shraeye the first time, if you had included this information, maybe we would have been talking about Shraeye's intentions instead of talking about acti-lurking for pages on pages. As such I still think its very suspicious to have changed your vote around as you did with little to no information. On top of that I hold you personally responsible for the last 5 pages of junk, whether or not you read them. 
Vote: Glooble
I'll give ehunt a pass for now. I still dont like how much hes trying to control the game. I still care about the small slip I called him on before, but that is less suspicious than what I feel about Glooble.
His last sentence is interesting because he claims to have called eHunt on a "slip" - but if you recall (or read above here), his vote on eHunt was substanceless. More important than that is the twofold importance of this quote: First, that it's a vote on a confirmed townie (arguably Chain-Saw Defense, seeing as said confirmed townie had just cast his vote on Grujah), and second that he's once again defending Shraeye with the use of his vote - This time voting for someone who had his vote on Shraeye for reasons TheMunch didn't like, and then moved his vote to confirmed scum for reasons TheMunch didn't like. It's a subtle defense of both Grujah and Shraeye.
His very next post is post #523, which, while nothing stands out as scummy to me, did contain a change in vote - again - this time onto Yuma. Now, Yuma certainly isn't confirmed town, but he's much townier in my eyes overall for his efforts D1 in proposing a system that led to a scum lynch. Obviously such efforts at this time had not yet been put forth, but it's worth noting in my book that this vote is here.
#582 contains his next vote, this time on a confirmed town once more:
I have nothing to defend myself against...
Shraeye called you out for not giving your opinion on a list of topics that have come and gone while you were too lonely on your pedestal to participate in conversations that "weren't interesting enough for you." You have plenty to answer for and if you dont see it, I'm on board the Vote: O train too.
And who does he use as a reason to push this vote? Shraeye of course. Again, it's important to remember that through much of this I found these actions to be townie, because he was in essence, supporting many of the same things that I was, even if he went after different people. It's looking back with the knowledge we have now where everything started to really stand out.
What follows from TheMunch is a whole lot of snark, culminating in post #801 (where he votes for O twice and goes a little off the deep-end over O (And trust me TheMunch, I've been there too)), which I wasn't going quote, except AGAIN, the last paragraph of the post stood out to me because he AGAIN references Shraeye and his reads - so here it is (please ignore the snark):
So, hey guys. I dont know if you know this but there are people in this game (me) who haven't participated in other games (still me) and for those people (me again) it can be very difficult to see why those old games affect this one. One main reason: I give zero shits how people played in other games. People can change the way they play. If I had played in previous games, I would exploit all of you by just playing in the way that you guys think I do as town, since apparently thats all I need to do to convince you people that I are town. Seriously guys, you can be better than this. There is plenty to talk about. So lets do that.
To get the ball rolling, I did an entire reread. Surprise surprise, I still find eHunt and Yuma pretty scummy. Vote: O "But wait!" you say, "O is neither eHunt or Yuma." You would all be correct. O is in fact not ehunt and Yuma but I really find him to be a terrible player. I have called him out on it before but I am tired of his holier-than-thou attitude. If you are above contributing to this game, dont play it, and I'll help you with that regard. Vote: O (Protip: we're not friends).
But on subject: ehunt and Yuma. They were the 2 transgressors of what I believe to be my biggest pet peeve: posting something that too strongly tries to implicate yourself as town. eHunt did it first and Yuma second. I commented on both of them when it happened and no one really seemed to care:
If I just blindly type things and one of them gets misperceived as a scumslip, that's really bad for town.
I dont like that you use the word "misperceived." Feels like you are trying too hard to plant that you are town so that when you make a scumslip it would be a mistake to act on it. Subtle, but I dont like it.
But that isn't the point, if that is correct, then I made a mistake in reading her post and now town is going to pay the consequences of it if I get lynched. Sorry.
Yuma was trying to defend a million accusations and let this bad boy slip. I am fresher than a baby's bottom and even I was not impressed by this line. I feel like its way over the top to try to get everyone invested with you not being lynched. You said "hey this is a huge mistake to kill me day 1... you'll be sorry," on the day where more likely than not we are going to kill town anyway and I honestly dont feel you'd be a huge loss. I dont like being told the defense of "i'm too important to town to kill" and I've already called out, I believe, ehunt for doing the same thing. It seems like a drastic overraction and quite quite scummy. You get my Vote: Yuma.
This coupled with what I find to be just sloppy play from both of them, namely very hollow arguments and not-so-subtle topic changes (I dont have direct evidence of these, just the impression I got), makes me really want to keep an eye on them.
Secondly, there has been a lot thats said that has gotten no attention because of Eevee's bombdrop of the cult knowledge. Thats all well and good but Shraeye makes a solid post on watno (who I would agree did not give me the towniest of reads on my reread). Its content-filled post like these that need to be addressed and I am super suspicious of everyone that is participating but not actually addressing content posts and the individuals who those posts call into question (I'm still not letting lurkers off the hook). I'll say it again: I do not consider old games to ever be relevent, throwing around M followed by some roman numeral doesn't make you cool; It makes you narrow minded in the sense that you cant see a world where any one is ever capable of changing the way they act and think. You are embarrassing yourselves and you can do better.
As I noted, the votes on O aside (which is a big aside, seeing as they're on a confirmed town), he is pushing the reads of Shraeye. At this point, I'm *really* beginning to wonder what to make of this connection. This is more than just your average noise. This is a set of two players in TWENTY-FIVE that are constantly showing up relating to one another.
Taking the vote on O into consideration, TheMunch has at this point voted for two townies {O, Glooble}, both of which fell under the "lurker" meta. Suspicious? Not at the time, no. But the fact that he never voted for Grujah (and as I'll get to - even defended him) under the same pretenses does stand out.
In post #842, he once again says the Shraeye wagon shouldn't have been a thing. He then revotes Yuma, but places (of all people!) Grujah in a list of "possible scummy people to look at":
Well this game took a dramatic turn to the not as fun. I will not be posting today (busy day for me ahead) and I will be considering whether or not to continue playing this game. Mafia is supposed to be fun. And this game is becoming increasingly less fun and subsequentially less interesting.
I sincerely apologize if I am the cause of the decrease in fun for you. And for other people. This is not my intention at all. I'm thoroughly enjoying this game, and have meant all my posts in earnest, or in good fun, or a mix of both. No actual anger has driven any of these posts. I hope we can continue to enjoy this game together.
I feel like one thing ZM2 did accomplish (besides MAKING HISTORY) was that I think I understand shraeye a lot better and how he plays. It has made him read townier to me this game.
Why DID the ehunt wagon die? He really did start out the game much edgier and more hostile than I'm used to from him and then eased off it when criticized/voted on. And as much as I approve of using wagons to police good behavior, the fact that he straightened up when the heat hit him doesn't really give him town cred at all. It's what smart scum would do.
I did bring this up, although it almost definitely got lost in all the mess. I had reread, that wasn't a lie, and the people that had given me scummy reads were ehunt, yuma, and watno (at least they were the most egregious offenders). But after reading Galzria's post (really loved it, quite informative), I would really love to hone in on who so far has provided us with the most information that can be used once they flipped. There has been a ton thats gone down day 1 and I would love to circle in on something of value.
So I've seen 4 wagons (of note): Shraeye, ehunt, yuma, O.
Shraeye's wagon shouldn't have been a thing. However there were a few sketchy folks on it that had voted for Shraeye for reasons not his scumslip "I cant believe I got caught." I believe these were Watno, Glooble and Grujah, but I could be mistaken.
The ehunt wagon, I forget who started it (Cayvie?) but I dont like it. I was on it cause I thought ehunt was acting just as scummy as the next. But after the misunderstanding of his one-post-a-day proposal blew over (I'm still not 100% convinced it was a misunderstanding but it really isn't that huge of an issue) everything seemed to die down. I dont know how much information can be gained for ehunt dying but maybe someone else has more insight than me.
The yuma wagon was a mess. Mistakes happen, thats cool. The reason that I got on it was because of how Yuma was defending himself, which was much different than the others that jumped on him for "rolefishing." This didn't get much attention but Yuma got, in my opinion, way too defensive way too fast. People also jumped on him very quickly. Maybe there is still something to be gained from that wagon.
The O wagon, I'll admit doesn't really have a whole lot of basis. O might be O but the reason I've been voting for him and have continued to vote for him (facetiously, its not a post restriction, its just emphasis, maybe a little bit of copycatting of shraeye... I thought he was being amusing, maybe I was the only one) is more to do with the way hes been playing than whether or not I think hes scum. I think this might be very similar from the people that are on the wagon. While I still probably would like to see him dead, I dont think his death is the most valuable (yeah thats how lurking works, you dont say much, not much is said about you so you get away for being an invaluable first day kill, blah blah blah). Unvote
So those wagons aside theres still a few people in the works. Whether or not their deaths bring around lots of juicy morsals for the rest of us D2 is another story, but I'm looking at watno (Shraeye outlines his case numerous times), Axxle (where are you buddy), Glooble, and Grujah (who have both been seen getting scummy reads from a pile of people).
I would love to pick one case, see how much we can extract, then get a lynch. Vote: Yuma
PPE: So Eevee is back on the ehunt. I'm not saying its a bad thing but why ehunt? I got scum reads too but what evidence do you have from the wagon that you would like to see used and/or addressed?
The problem I'm having is that he never, not once, looked at Grujah as scummy, and certainly was as far from casting his vote on Grujah when it mattered as possible!
Post #874 is, I think, perhaps the most hilarious thing I've seen:
Another point on wagon hunting, I propose the following reasoning. Lets say we kill a wagon and that person flips either town or scum. Obviously there are more intricacies with the players power role, but lets keep it simple. So if they flip town, we'd want to re-examine the wagon and look at the people who jumped on very quickly after the wagon formed. If they flip scum, we would be looking for people that defended him.
Open question: what wagons do people feel have both elements to them (people who jumped on quickly after the wagon formed, and a strong defense for them by a small number of people) so that regardless of whether or not they flip town, we can deduce good information?
I'll bold for emphasis...
...
...
Got that? Hey! Guess what?? Grujah flipped scum! We should be looking to see who defended him, right?
^^^ I'll reference the above later.
In #909, TheMunch votes for eHal, but I feel like he was getting into OMGUS by that point. He and eHal had been going back and forth, and I understand the frustrations that come with trying to say stuff and having to defend every word you've said. eHal tunneled me in M-VI (that scum!) and it was really quite frustrating. One thing that really taught me was to take the blinders off (even though he really WAS scum!) - so when I see things like this from new players I have a tendency to dismiss it for what it usually is. A hairpulling frustration vote.
The odd thing is... that he turns around and does the exact same thing to Watno in #1002. It's like Insomniac 2.0! Vote for or disagree with TheMunch and be prepared to be voted for! Really though, I can't consider either of those votes as scummy or not as I know nothing about either of the two people he voted for. But ragevoting is dangerous as town at best, terrible for town at worst, and easily manipulatable as scum.
What DOES stand out about the above two exchanges is that TheMunch sounds like he thinks eHal was town tunneling, whereas Watno was scum tunneling. Here's post #1005:
On this Watno thing... I'm confused about it. I was grilling Munchy pretty hard, but Watno seems way more aggressive. I don't know, I can't really be objective about myself.
Yeah I would say that is the difference between you and him in the last few posts and the reason why I voted for watno. You were grilling me and had reasons to be doing so and hence why I was trying really hard to be clear with you. But watno just seemed like he wanted to catch me make a slip so he could pull the trigger. I dont like that.
It's almost like he forgot he ever voted on eHal over the exact same reasons. I don't know. It just really struck me as strange. If eHal was valid in his grilling while Watno was scummy, what was the vote on eHal all about?
In #1282 he replaces his vote on eHal for what I really think was one of the serious mischaracterizations that TheMunch is guilty of:
I'll Unvote for now, but I still get a vibe off eHalc.
I'll vote: Galzria.
I'll take over for you joth, Vote: eHalc. I'm still getting a vibe from watno, who has been quiet for a while now. I dont want to just jump on eHalc just cause hes being the most active but every time he posts something I get a little more suspicious of his intentions. I have started feeling this way ever since he was against (and is still against, he just reiterated it) the idea of gaining information from lynches. I dont like people that are against gaining information that is helpful to town.
eHal was NEVER against gaining information with the lynch. He was against lynching somebody for the sole reason of "It'll give us information". This vote is the last vote TheMunch makes D1, and is where his vote ends the day. What follows in his next 5 posts before the Thread Locked is notable then for TheMunch NOT voting Grujah, and in some instances defending him:
Post #1402:
I dont want to move my vote for no reason, but I would like to see a lynch happen, if only for personal reasons (I cant be the ONLY person here excited about RTR this weekend and doesn't want to be worried about the lynch votes going through in the final second). I'm going to go back and reread some stuff from Grujah as I didn't necessarily have a read on him; although, I do side with Yuma and Shraeye, if the last few IRL days weren't any evidence, there is no way anyone is getting lynched with our very scattered opinions.
"I don't want to move my vote for no reason" - This alone strikes me as odd considering the number of times that his vote moved throughout D1. He claims that he's willing to move his vote however if it's needed to avoid no-lynch and the he'll go back and "reread" Grujah, who he hasn't had a read on up until this point (even though Grujah was on that early wagon against Shraeye that TheMunch railed against, calling everybody who was on it as being scummy). Once again we find him in agreement with Shraeye.
#1442:
Having looked through I have 2 things to say about Grujah. First, he doesn't really come off to me as scummy in the way hes been talking. That being said, there hasn't been much information about grujah from earlier, aka, this is exactly what ehalc feared when we were discussing lynching for information; everyone is jumping on grujah to get a lynch but there will be nothing gained from it, as some seem to have little reason (see: he is the scummiest of the people that have the most votes that I'd be willing to get on). My vote will stay where it is.
PS I find it interesting that ehalc mentioned that if people just vote for someone to get them to die, we gain no information because everyone has an excuse. Yet ehalc is voting for grujah. I know he voiced different reasons for doing so but I just find it interesting.
PPE: @ashersky I'm gonna claim newbie on this one but, holy cow 25 people is a lot to keep track of and just from a "one less person to keep in my brain" standpoint I dont think I could go today with no lynch. I know people are going to die in the night but my brain cant take it. This shit is hard.
He rereads Grujah, but finds nothing scummy - He notes that Grujah hasn't said much at all (something he was very much in favor of lynching for earlier in the day when it related to O and Glooble) - and claims that lynching him would provide no information since Grujah hasn't taken any stances on anything - which quite simply isn't the case. He then goes on to criticize those who are voting for Grujah for having no justifiable reason and being ok with a wagon that will provide no information. - Which in itself is information, even if Grujah had flipped town -
#1458, his last post of D1:
Ok, that Grujah lynch is really picking up speed. L-4.
The part of me that wants the longest day ever to be over with is fighting with the part of me that thinks Grujah is town and therefore a bad lynch.
I agree with this. Although my read on Grujah isnt town, its nothing.
What was he agree'ing with? That Grujah "is town and therefore a bad lynch"? That he "wants the longest day ever to be over"? He claims not to have a town read on Grujah, but a null read. Yet in #1442 he explicitly said that he didn't find Grujah scummy. So what's his read on Grujah? Changing as the likelihood of lynch draws near? The last handful of posts are defense 101. He doesn't come out swinging in defense of Grujah, but he does go out of his way to try and derail the train. In a town of 25 with 13 needed to lynch, it's surprising he didn't succeed - especially considering we weren't dealing with a real, actual deadline, but a self-imposed one.
Much like Dsell, this just really, really doesn't look good. Certainly he'll argue that he was simply a "misguided townie" and not a "redirecting scum"... And hell, maybe I'd be inclined to believe him except he hasn't. He's come into D2 attacking the people ON the wagon. He's come out with "whoop-de-doo, we lynched scum". He honestly comes out sounding DISAPPOINTED about the results of D1! And that's where red flags really started to go up for me. Because all through D1 I DID have a town read on him.
Remember this quote (#874)?:
Another point on wagon hunting, I propose the following reasoning. Lets say we kill a wagon and that person flips either town or scum. Obviously there are more intricacies with the players power role, but lets keep it simple. So if they flip town, we'd want to re-examine the wagon and look at the people who jumped on very quickly after the wagon formed. If they flip scum, we would be looking for people that defended him.
Open question: what wagons do people feel have both elements to them (people who jumped on quickly after the wagon formed, and a strong defense for them by a small number of people) so that regardless of whether or not they flip town, we can deduce good information?
I told you I'd come back to it. Let's move on into D2. First post from TheMunch, #1523:
I'm inclined to think there was not a whole lot of bussing in that lynch. Obviously not all 13 Grujah voters are clear, but the smart money is probably to start hunting off-wagon.
If there is you and ftl would be at the top of my list... but that needs to be further analyzed.
Joth and ftl were already near the top of my list; i'm not sure about bussing or not, but eevee's role seems to me (and cayvie i guess) to mean that there are multiple scum teams. It absurd for joth to jump out and say "hey guys, definitely no scum on grujah's wagon because that didn't feel like bussing, let's look off-wagon". Yes indeed, look off wagon and completely forget that there could be a whole heap of non-mafia scum on grujah's wagon.
PPE: Cool, and you just gave us our first lead into which off-wagon voters to check, thanks director. Funny that one of the Morgrim-pushers happens to think you're scum. (Protip: that's me)
For another nearly antagonizing post, this actually makes a lot of sense. Seems very sketchy to immediately have everyone not look in depth at the wagon. I dont know if I necessarily think there is something awesome to be pulled from it either, however, that doesn't mean you should immediately tell everyone to "not look at the man behind the curtain" while giving no evidence to why. Vote: Jotheonah
He comes out jumping on the Jotheonah wagon over... Jotheonah suggesting we start by looking at the people off the wagon - and people who would've interacted with a confirmed scum. Something TheMunch said way back when we should do. All I can think and feel is that all of a sudden TheMunch realizes that his D1 play is going to look *really* bad in retrospect, and he wants to start derailing anybody who might dare go back and look through to see this. Not only is this one of the very worst votes I've seen all game, but the reasoning that TheMunch follows with in this post and his next few are simply terrible:
#1540:
I think I was pretty clear why Joth gave me a bad vibe. Its not exactly that he wanted to look off wagon; like I said, I might want to as well. However, to that quickly go out and say it without any supporting evidence is a little scummy to me. Granted it has been a long night, he could have been developing these ideas in his brain for a while and it just gets vomited out because he thinks its obvious after all the time spent thinking about it. I dont know, but if he were to have just at least given a little more of a reason why before directing everyone I'd be cool.
"I might want to as well. However, to that quickly go out and say it without any supporting evidence"...
You want supporting evidence that we should start by focusing off the wagon?
GRUJAH WAS SCUMDone.
#1590:
Having looked through I have 2 things to say about Grujah. First, he doesn't really come off to me as scummy in the way hes been talking. That being said, there hasn't been much information about grujah from earlier, aka, this is exactly what ehalc feared when we were discussing lynching for information; everyone is jumping on grujah to get a lynch but there will be nothing gained from it, as some seem to have little reason (see: he is the scummiest of the people that have the most votes that I'd be willing to get on). My vote will stay where it is.
PS I find it interesting that ehalc mentioned that if people just vote for someone to get them to die, we gain no information because everyone has an excuse. Yet ehalc is voting for grujah. I know he voiced different reasons for doing so but I just find it interesting.
PPE: @ashersky I'm gonna claim newbie on this one but, holy cow 25 people is a lot to keep track of and just from a "one less person to keep in my brain" standpoint I dont think I could go today with no lynch. I know people are going to die in the night but my brain cant take it. This shit is hard.
So, this is the post that Ehalcyon was referencing and I can say I was TOTALLY defending grujah... /sarcasm. Wait, thats not what I was doing at all. I was expressing that I didn't have the scummiest of reads on grujah and I didn't really like any of the reasons people were jumping on him. In fact in my next post, 1458:
Ok, that Grujah lynch is really picking up speed. L-4.
The part of me that wants the longest day ever to be over with is fighting with the part of me that thinks Grujah is town and therefore a bad lynch.
I agree with this. Although my read on Grujah isnt town, its nothing.
I explain that I didn't really have a protown read on Grujah either.
The closest thing to an argument I had to get on the Grujah wagon was the argument that he kept only coming back to defend himself very shortly after he got votes (I forget who said it). However, he was dead before I could check whether or not this is the case (so I never did; I should do that). The thing I'd be looking for is whether or not he actually came to defend himself every time he accumulated some number of votes. The fact that he came back after votes sometime isn't nearly as strong an argument as coming back after votes every time.
But great, we killed scum day 1 and I'm happy for that, but I really dont think there is much to go on (or at least past me did; I intend to reread to get more specific evidence about which I am talking) because as the wagon developed I really didn't feel that people had any strong cases against him and he was jumped on for being "today's lynch". I also had pointed out earlier that one of the first people that grew the wagon did it because "there were a bunch of people at 2 votes and Grujah felt the scummiest". Thats not really good information to pull from and I dont like it.
He categorically states that he was NOT defending Grujah, although I think it's pretty clear that's exactly what he was doing. Furthermore, he claims that he didn't have time to go back and check the case on Grujah (laid out by yours truly, btw Munch) that kept coming back just to defend himself. However, allow me to remind you all:
Yuma's vote #3 on the Grujah came in post #1374 (September 25th, at 11:40 am).
In post #1402 (September 25th, at 4:09 pm), he says he's going to go back and reread Grujah, and in post #1442 (September 25th, 7:59 pm), he says he's done so and seen nothing scummy.
Sure, I didn't lay out the case that Grujah only came back to defend himself until post #1476 (September 26th, 2:10 am) - but TheMunch had JUST REREAD Grujah - yet didn't see this himself?
The Thread Locked, btw, in post #1505 (September 26th, at 9:40 am).
My point is, it's not like there wasn't time, as claimed. The entire wagon took 24 hours to form and lynch, and TheMunch WAS active during that time, and supposedly DID reread Grujah.
Let's put that aside though, and look forward. TheMunch says that maybe he does see value in looking off the wagon, so let's see where he focuses next:
And we have post #1596 where he turns RIGHT BACK to trying to direct attention onto the wagon:
So I wanted to at least compile all of the voting reasons for the Grujah votes. Because ehunt voted so long about on Grujah, I have him listed that he didn't give a reason but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that it was explained earlier, I just didn't bother hunting for it. I didn't quote people, I just copy pasted their responses and put them in quotes below. This was less work for me. Ok here it is:
Glooble Votes Grujah in 479 for "showing up, voting on me, and disappearing."
ehunt Votes Grujah in 1295 without giving a reason.
WAGON START:
1375: (Yuma) "I will change my vote to someone with 2 votes on them to see if we can start getting a consensus, but everyone that has 2 votes I have a town read on except Grujah"
1386: (Galzria) "I agree. He was in one of my top 3, and we really should start looking to consolidate. Since my #1 choice (eHal) seems to be met with equal parts adamant opposition and slight consideration, it really doesn't seem to be a productive choice. So I'll vote where there we might get something going - the fact that it's not on a town-read makes it all the better for me."
1404: (eHal) "I think he has lurked hard, which is really unusual for him. He returns just when it starts to heat up for him, and his posts read scummy. This wagon has a decent chance of lift-off, and I have decent reads on most on the wagon so far (not sure of the vote count though). Chance of lynch success does play a factor here, but Gruj's lurkiness is the major reason. It's not like he has been V/LA -- his post history shows that he has been active in Cosmic Encounter, at least. Why not drop in with some remarks during all of yesterday's drama? Maybe because he is scum and thought it would be safer to let townies argue themselves to a mislynch."
1433: (Eevee) "Grujah's defence doesn't read genuine to me"
1445: (Morgrim) "because he is the most likely person to be lynched"
1479: (ftl) "I didn't realize that about the timing of his posts, that's pretty bad."
1484: (joth) "Galz (argument about post timing) has got me convinced too"
1495: (Axxle) "Yaaaay!" (he really wanted to hammer)
So that is a collection of all the voting reasons for Grujah and it seems really flaky. Yuma starts the wagon because he felt he was the least town of the people with the most votes. Galz abandoned his first choice for a "more likely" target, and this was only when he had 3 votes. At least he said he didn't have a town read. Ehal is the first to actually bring up some points but really is only beating on him for lurkiness. Eevee gets a scum read from Grujah's defense. Morgrim votes because Grujah is likely. Ftl and joth sheeps posting pattern argument. Then axxle hammers.
I'm sorry for not being ecstatic that we lynched scum day 1 with a wagon like this.
Not only that, he simply referenced the actual posts that contain the votes, and NOT the growing case. It's an EXTREMELY flimsy argument/case to use as a basis for anything, and in some instances is just downright wrong. His whole effort here seems to be to A) redirect from off-wagon, and B) paint each person who voted for scum D1 in as weak a light as possible.
Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT saying there can't be, or are not scum on that wagon. But the hyper-focus in which TheMunch has come out firing at the wagon, ignoring his very own post D1 that states we should be looking for those who interacted with Grujah is just completely, completely scummy. He doesn't want to own up to his own position relating to Grujah, he wants to start by discrediting anybody who was involved in getting him lynched, and I just absolutely cannot shake the feeling that he's playing like scum trying not to be cornered.
Dsell was scummy as hell coming off D1. But D2 he's either played a very smooth scum, or as I've read him, town that actually knows he's
fucked up. TheMunch, on review, has also played scummy as hell D1. And yet D2 he's come out trying to bash anybody who did actual productive work D1 - and on top of it, he's completely ignored - or in some cases changed tunes - regarding stances he took D1. He was fine lynching lurkers when the lurkers were town {O, Glooble}, but not when the lurker was scum {Grujah}. He was fine pushing for lynches for "informational purposes", but refuses to look at the lynch we got for information (and lynching scum is quite arguably the single most informational lynch we COULD have gotten).
To harp on (because TheMunch leaves such ample opportunity to), here's post #1603:
@The Munch:
Galz's argument about the posting pattern, that ftl and I sheeped, actually WAS really good. It's the kind of scumhunting we should be doing, and it laid Grujah's MO really bare. At the time I voted, I really was pretty convinced we were hitting scum, despite my town read on Grujah earlier in the day.
I can't really defend myself beyond that; I do think that I myself look pretty bad in terms of the Morg-Grujah wagons, so it seems hypocritical to accuse others of doing on purpose as scum what I stumbled into by accident as town (I guess this is what I get for being a contrarian.) That said, I do think it's a productive avenue to go down.
I agree the posting argument is the best argument that I've seen thusfar. In fact, I mentioned it earlier as a reason that I had almost jumped on the grujah wagon for myself. I think itd be enough for me to at least give some town-cred to whoever commented on his posting pattern or matter of defending. If not town-cred than at least not-on-the-same-scumteam-as-grujah-cred if there are more scumteams.
But I dont really know what you are being defensive about. Also what do you think is a productive avenue to go down?
Allow me to answer your last question:
Another point on wagon hunting, I propose the following reasoning. Lets say we kill a wagon and that person flips either town or scum. Obviously there are more intricacies with the players power role, but lets keep it simple. So if they flip town, we'd want to re-examine the wagon and look at the people who jumped on very quickly after the wagon formed. If they flip scum, we would be looking for people that defended him.
Open question: what wagons do people feel have both elements to them (people who jumped on quickly after the wagon formed, and a strong defense for them by a small number of people) so that regardless of whether or not they flip town, we can deduce good information?
I stopped reading at #1609 for TheMunch, although if you continue you'll once more see him and Shraeye coming back together to make cases and arguments for one another (See the case on Young_Nick, or Shraeye defending TheMunch, or...)
*****************************
In the end here, while I find Dsell very, very scummy, I find TheMunch equally so coming out of D1 (in light of Alignment flips), and I find him a LOT more scummy D2. On the traditional scale of 0 to 100, he's sitting at 85 for me right now. Just way, way off the charts. So I'm going to
Vote: TheMunch as my primary scum read. His play has been erratic, inconsistent, and scummy. The connection that he has with Grujah is scummy enough, and the connection he has with Shraeye (who as I said, will now be my next read) is fascinating to say the least. There is definitely something off about his play, and with O/Glooble dead as a couple (and Shraeye now clarifying for me that his read on TheMunch is not concrete) I no longer have to consider that as a reasonable explanation. I'm very interested in hearing others thoughts on this, but I'm quite comfortable with this being the direction I want my vote to go today. It's on somebody off the wagon. It's on somebody who's defended Grujah. It's on somebody who's voted to lynch town multiple times. It's on somebody I genuinely find to be scummy with his play today, and yesterday, in light of what we now know to be the case.
Author
Topic: Mafia XI: Find Yourself in the Courtyard Masquerade -- GAME OVER, TOWN WINS (Read 316308 times)