Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[yuma]

So coming into the day I was most suspicious of twistedarcher and theorel. At some point I will lay out my suspicions of them a bit more in depth.

I am not happy at all with the vig shooting who they shot. At the end of day I had pretty good town reads on both ash and robz and can't fathom why the vig would shoot either of them. Dumb move vig, dumb move. If you are going to shoot, shot a lurker like chairs or eevee, don't shoot one of our best town players or a claimed 1-shot cop Doc!

DUMB!

fixed that for me...

[Galzria]

Again, I disagree. I think it was a really good shot from the Vig. It does minimal damage, while giving maximum information. Very, very good choice for the Vig. Awesome.

[yuma]

Yipee... one of my strongest town reads is dead and all the information I received out of it was information I was already assuming to be true. WHAT A TRADE!!!

While players that I have very little of a read on because of low posting continue to live on.

[Galzria]

Yipee... one of my strongest town reads is dead and all the information I received out of it was information I was already assuming to be true. WHAT A TRADE!!!

While players that I have very little of a read on because of low posting continue to live on.

That's nice for you Yuma. Big round of applause.

For the rest of us mere mortals however, we're granted with significantly greater information that we now know to absolutely be true, without question.

Yes, it was a great trade.

[mail-mi]

Yipee... one of my strongest town reads is dead and all the information I received out of it was information I was already assuming to be true. WHAT A TRADE!!!

While players that I have very little of a read on because of low posting continue to live on.

That's nice for you Yuma. Big round of applause.

For the rest of us mere mortals however, we're granted with significantly greater information that we now know to absolutely be true, without question.

Yes, it was a great trade.

I'm with galz here. We're now 100 percent on 5 out of 8 (7? 9?) letters.

[yuma]

Yipee... one of my strongest town reads is dead and all the information I received out of it was information I was already assuming to be true. WHAT A TRADE!!!

While players that I have very little of a read on because of low posting continue to live on.

That's nice for you Yuma. Big round of applause.

For the rest of us mere mortals however, we're granted with significantly greater information that we now know to absolutely be true, without question.

Yes, it was a great trade.

Well, yes, if all of you ignoramuses hadn't believed the worst about ashersky and automatically assumed that he must have been trying to pull a fast one on you and seen that his claim was obviously real and sincere then you all could have had the same information as me. Yes, be cautious with claims, but you guys all just went into major panic mode and wanted to lynch someone that was very, very town. Obviously the vig sided with you, because you are the all knowing, IC, on this side of the equation and that is very frustrating.

Big round of applause to you for leading town down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories!

And you know what would have been even better information? Trying to hit someone that had a chance to be scum... chairs, nkirbit, voltaire, eevee, twisted, theorel. Hitting scum gives us info and eliminates scum. The vig shot for information purposes only and for that reason it SUCKED!

[nkirbit]

I don't think anyone actually wanted to lynch Ashersky, Yuma.  Or even thought he was scum.  At least for me, I was just saying it was possible.

And I'm glad that you've narrowed the pool of possible scum down to just 6 players.  Care to enlighten the rest of us?

[nkirbit]

Besides, the vig could have shot Robz.  We just don't know.

[Twistedarcher]

I think it's safe to assume Vig is not 1-shot. 1-shot vig shooting Robz or Ash would be really silly, this seems more like a shot from a full vig.

[nkirbit]

I think it's safe to assume Vig is not 1-shot. 1-shot vig shooting Robz or Ash would be really silly, this seems more like a shot from a full vig.

I agree.

[yuma]

I don't think anyone actually wanted to lynch Ashersky, Yuma.  Or even thought he was scum.  At least for me, I was just saying it was possible.

And I'm glad that you've narrowed the pool of possible scum down to just 6 players.  Care to enlighten the rest of us?

the six players were just examples. I just put down names of people the vig coudl have shot that would ahve been better than ash.

and...this would disagree with you. L-2 is pretty serious, sure one was ash, but still L-2 means people think he is scum.

Vote Count 1.7:
Ashersky (5): Robz888, Galzria, ashersky, voltaire, XerxesPraelor

And you are right. We don't know the vig shot ash, chances are pretty high. But Robz was also a very bad choice I think.

[Eevee]

I think Robz was a very reasonable target for a town vig, if he was the type to believe in shooting night 1.

[nkirbit]

and...this would disagree with you. L-2 is pretty serious, sure one was ash, but still L-2 means people think he is scum.

Vote Count 1.7:
Ashersky (5): Robz888, Galzria, ashersky, voltaire, XerxesPraelor

This is actually an interesting thing to think about... Ash's wagon here.  Let's talk about the votes here.

I don't think any town member yesterday could have realistically voted for Ash with the idea that he's the best lynch.  I just don't.  Even if you don't believe his claim, he's still not the right lynch.

We clearly have some town members here voting for Ash because they were frustrated with his play.  Robz and Galzria amongst them.  Voltaire and Xerxes are the two voters of unknown alignment?

Do we think that scum would look to jump on this wagon, faking frustration (or having actual frustration) with Ash, and hoping the wagon would go through?  I'm actually torn... I think scum want to avoid "obviously bad wagons" that won't go through for town credit, so I'm going to give some towncredit to Xerxes and Voltaire for being on this wagon.  I think it's just more likely that scum avoid the Ashersky situation entirely.

[yuma]

Do we think that scum would look to jump on this wagon, faking frustration (or having actual frustration) with Ash, and hoping the wagon would go through?  I'm actually torn... I think scum want to avoid "obviously bad wagons" that won't go through for town credit, so I'm going to give some towncredit to Xerxes and Voltaire for being on this wagon.  I think it's just more likely that scum avoid the Ashersky situation entirely.

I agree

[Galzria]

I resign the game to Yuma. He's obviously an all knowing God who is right 100% of the time on everything, and his opinions and beliefs are far more valuable than that of the entire town. My vote mirrors his.

Or, wait, no, he's not. He's only looking at the game through his own filter of what he thinks to be true and doesn't give a fuck what anybody else might see. The fact is the majority of the town doesn't have the obviously perfect reads that he does. The play by our Vig helps the majority of the players, even if All Knowing Yuma already had all that information.

The fact is, if we have a full Vig, he knows that MVV is true. Ashersky was claiming that MVVDD-T-x was true. That's a VERY specific setup. From his perspective it's much more likely Ash could've been lying, because he already knew of two extra letters that weren't in the setup. That alone makes Ash's claim more questionable.

And the fact is, Ash was essentially a VT after N1. A vig could've done a lot MORE damage by hitting a different PR (like the real Doctor). Yes, he could've hit scum, but this was a VT trade for near full information for EVERYBODY, not just Yuma.

[yuma]

I resign the game to Yuma. He's obviously an all knowing God who is right 100% of the time on everything, and his opinions and beliefs are far more valuable than that of the entire town. My vote mirrors his.

Or, wait, no, he's not. He's only looking at the game through his own filter of what he thinks to be true and doesn't give a fuck what anybody else might see. The fact is the majority of the town doesn't have the obviously perfect reads that he does. The play by our Vig helps the majority of the players, even if All Knowing Yuma already had all that information.

The fact is, if we have a full Vig, he knows that MVV is true. Ashersky was claiming that MVVDD-T-x was true. That's a VERY specific setup. From his perspective it's much more likely Ash could've been lying, because he already knew of two extra letters that weren't in the setup. That alone makes Ash's claim more questionable.

And the fact is, Ash was essentially a VT after N1. A vig could've done a lot MORE damage by hitting a different PR (like the real Doctor). Yes, he could've hit scum, but this was a VT trade for near full information for EVERYBODY, not just Yuma.

alright, this got out of hand... sorry galz.

This is what I wrote to mcmc and voltgloss a few minutes ago:

I am really not that mad at Galz or the vig, but I am trying to pick a fight with him to see if I can get mafia to latch onto me with suspicion for arguing with the IC. It is a bait, but a pretty simple one. I hope I just don't piss Galz off too much in the process. Cause I actually kinda agree with him, but am not admitting to it in hopes of creating this controversy... and maybe, just maybe scum will push me as being suspicious for it?

If not... it is early enough in the day that this argument isn't a distraction.

I am going to pull the plug on it without giving it a chance to work, because I see I have pissed you off. While it was my intent to get an argument going, I didn't want to make you super mad, but rather give mafia a chance to find me suspicious for it--something I would jump on mafia for doing--but getting you this upset isn't worth it.

So... sorry.

[Galzria]

Yuma, I'm almost certain you're town. I really am, I just want you, and everybody, to look through a lens that isn't just your own. I understand you had reads, and reasons for them. And hey, your reads we're good. But I don't try to be popular as an IC. I try to make sure I consider everything, as unlikely or unpopular as it may be.

I don't LIKE that Ash was killed. I would love to see Mafia dead instead. But I think Ash's death does wonders for most people here, even if it didn't do anything for you.

[yuma]

Yuma, I'm almost certain you're town. I really am, I just want you, and everybody, to look through a lens that isn't just your own. I understand you had reads, and reasons for them. And hey, your reads we're good. But I don't try to be popular as an IC. I try to make sure I consider everything, as unlikely or unpopular as it may be.

I don't LIKE that Ash was killed. I would love to see Mafia dead instead. But I think Ash's death does wonders for most people here, even if it didn't do anything for you.

I know that. Once I saw your response to my initial argument I agreed with you, but continued to disagree with you to see if I could get someone to jump on me for it (long shot maybe, but I have seen it happen before where someone is perceived as scummy for fighting with the IC)... so I continued to play the fool and ass, but maybe a little too hard as it actually got under your skin, which wasn't my intention.

So attempt failed, I agree with you (for the most part)

[nkirbit]

At the moment, the players I'm most interested in lynching are:

Eevee
TA
Theorel
Chairs
Mail-Mi.

At the moment, I'm unsure out of this group.  But this is definitely where I want to focus.

[Galzria]

Yuma, I'm almost certain you're town. I really am, I just want you, and everybody, to look through a lens that isn't just your own. I understand you had reads, and reasons for them. And hey, your reads we're good. But I don't try to be popular as an IC. I try to make sure I consider everything, as unlikely or unpopular as it may be.

I don't LIKE that Ash was killed. I would love to see Mafia dead instead. But I think Ash's death does wonders for most people here, even if it didn't do anything for you.

I know that. Once I saw your response to my initial argument I agreed with you, but continued to disagree with you to see if I could get someone to jump on me for it (long shot maybe, but I have seen it happen before where someone is perceived as scummy for fighting with the IC)... so I continued to play the fool and ass, but maybe a little too hard as it actually got under your skin, which wasn't my intention.

So attempt failed, I agree with you (for the most part)

Yeah... I wasn't riled up by the first reply... the second one bugged me though. Sorry.

That said... I think you're idea was good, and that's a large part of why I stayed so hard on Ash yesterday. I wouldn't have seen him lynched, but I wanted to see who backed me and who didn't. Not that it's a perfect system. Town sheeps IC's all too often... *cough* *cough*...

Still, that's where I would look, plus sudgy (who scum had no reason to protect or avoid).

[yuma]

Yuma, I'm almost certain you're town. I really am, I just want you, and everybody, to look through a lens that isn't just your own. I understand you had reads, and reasons for them. And hey, your reads we're good. But I don't try to be popular as an IC. I try to make sure I consider everything, as unlikely or unpopular as it may be.

I don't LIKE that Ash was killed. I would love to see Mafia dead instead. But I think Ash's death does wonders for most people here, even if it didn't do anything for you.

I know that. Once I saw your response to my initial argument I agreed with you, but continued to disagree with you to see if I could get someone to jump on me for it (long shot maybe, but I have seen it happen before where someone is perceived as scummy for fighting with the IC)... so I continued to play the fool and ass, but maybe a little too hard as it actually got under your skin, which wasn't my intention.

So attempt failed, I agree with you (for the most part)

Yeah... I wasn't riled up by the first reply... the second one bugged me though. Sorry.

That said... I think you're idea was good, and that's a large part of why I stayed so hard on Ash yesterday. I wouldn't have seen him lynched, but I wanted to see who backed me and who didn't. Not that it's a perfect system. Town sheeps IC's all too often... *cough* *cough*...

Still, that's where I would look, plus sudgy (who scum had no reason to protect or avoid).

as I nkiribt and I talked about I don't think it is the people that followed you that are suspicious... that is really only voltaire and xerxes. I don't find them particularily scummy for what they did as their votes were frustration votes for the most part. I think it is the people that were in the middle that are suspicious. That didn't commit on a stance either way. That kinda shied away from the wagon but didn't argue heavily against it.

Theorel I think jumps out the most in regard to this. I think there are others, but a reread will help pin that down.

[theorel]

I'm going to assume infinite-vig, because as others have noted 1-shot vig was unlikely to shoot last night.
Assuming that's true we have MDDVV?T.  So, there's a vig, doctor, and other PR out there.
I was going to say the vig was an IC, because he can shoot counter-claims, but then I remembered that there's a roleblocker.  So, that actually doesn't work in this case.  Vig should probably NOT claim today, because we want him to shoot to restore parity, and a roleblocker can keep that from happening.

I don't see value in speculating about who killed whom.  All it does is help scum narrow down who the vig is.  They know who they killed, they know who the vig killed.  Let's stop noting how surprised we are that one or the other died, because that just tells scum who the likeliest vigs are (accepting town lying for WIFOM, which is always dangerous).

Okay, well, stuff happened yesterday.  As noted, there was an ash wagon that can be looked into (either side of it, staying off or getting on).  I don't see where the view that non-commital stances are scummy comes from.  Scum knew ash was town, and they could very well have argued that point with confidence.  The question really shouldn't be what stance was taken, but how it was taken.

The sudgy wagon is potentially pretty useful to analyze.  Scum thought he would flip town, while town very well might have thought he would flip scum.  There might be some discrepancies to pick up on there.  I think I'll start out looking there tomorrow.

[yuma]

So theorel was obsessed... obsessed with the sudgy lynch. I just reread him and it is about all he talks about. Over and over and over again...

let me show you: (lots of text here, see below for what I have to say, I am including the text to show you how much there is!)

So, there was this thing, where sudgy was found scummy for being kind of ridiculous.  Okay, reread yuma's reasoning, so basically, he's forcing RVS to get out of a bad situation...The fact that ash and sudgy had similar reasoning is kind of funny (i.e. sudgy is trying to play like ash).  I wish people wouldn't try to play like ash...one ash is enough.  I'll keep an eye out.

I just checked out Samurai's and Ninjas.  And winterspartan's lynch-wagon looks like it started on April 14, while game started April 6 (was there an early wagon I missed maybe?)  I'm maybe being misunderstood or misunderstanding.

sudgy went to 4 votes, essentially as the first item to happen coming out of RVS.  (I guess there was the TwistedArcher thing before that)...And we're like 2 days into the game, right?  That just seems quick to hit 4 votes in a 13-player game.  I don't think this wagon is heading towards a lynch, it's too early.  If this started heading towards a lynch, people would probably oppose it (I would...I think there's more info to get out of day1 if we don't lynch the very first player that does anything scummy right away).  I think that's normal though.  I'm wondering if it should be analyzed differently in light of that.

If a wagon builds up quickly towards a lynch, then we look at players that are building it with some suspicion, because it looks like they may be trying to quicken a mislynch.  Mid-day wagons look like this.  They work a lot like end-day wagons, except sometimes you can back off the wagon, see the target as townie, and analyze the wagon as such.
Early-day wagons are a bit of a different beast.  No one is reasonably going to push an early-wagon to a premature day end...I just don't see the majority of a town going along with it (outside of something really apparent). 

So, how might scum be trying to manipulate such a wagon?  Would they vote for it?  Push against it because, hey town should oppose this quick lynch?  Be ambivalent towards it?  Hmm..probably depends on the player.  Pushing against it though seems like a good way to "look townie", really regardless of the alignment of the target.  It's an early wagon, there are probably misunderstandings, and the lynch probably won't go through.  It's maybe not as obvious as the constant town-read scum-guy, but something of a derivative of the same sort.  Now, it's worth noting that it looks like something town would do, because town would do it.  It's not automatic scum-read or anything, just some thoughts on where it seems likely to find scum in this situation.  I'm wondering if that stance might be a good starting place to try to find scum?  I dunno, I'll try to look over it sometime, although I won't probably be around a lot this weekend.

I'll try...here's a summary:
One of the few interaction non-theory type thingies that's happened in this thread is sudgy's wagon.  I wonder if there are any scum interactions to glean from it?  What should I be looking for?
Supposition 1: that wagon was not going to lead directly to a lynch.  (maybe later in the day, but not before more "stuff" happens)
Supposition 2: The "townie" thing to do was oppose it for growing too fast.
Conclusion: The simplest thing for scum to do for town-cred would be to oppose it, and this wouldn't "cost" them anything (if it were a town-lynch...normally opposing a town-lynch has the cost of an increased likelihood of a scum lynch)

Leads to Question: Did anyone oppose it in a way that looked scummy?

Anyways, I'm actually going to go look now...

Hmm...reading back I think I was actually arguing on reasons of xerxes' vote.  i.e. I don't think scum would have pushed this lynch in a scummy fashion, because it wasn't likely to go through.  Which led to conjecture as to what would be a scummy way to act towards it.

Anyways, looking back the following players interacted in some fashion:
TA (first vote)
yuma (second vote, added a couple quotes)
mail-mi: descriptive of the OMGUSRVS stuff.
nkribit: quasi-defense (i.e. states that the reasons for the vote read neutral to him)
ash (third vote, adds the comment that sudgy is copying his meta)
Eevee (fourth vote...frustration + believable scum-narrative)
Xerxes: counter-vote on TA.

Theorel: derailed the conversation (sorry about that; to be fair, I'm also the one that tried to re-rail it)

So, people who opposed the sudgy-wagon directly: nkirbit, Xerxes.
People who opposed the sudgy-wagon indirectly: mail-mi, myself.
People who ignored the sudgy-wagon everyone not mentioned above, initially myself also.

I would argue that nkirbit most closely resembles my proposed scum-narrative.  Xerxes also looks scummy for opposing the wagon AND simultaneously pushing suspicion in a different direction.  OTOH, that could be new-player caused rather than scum-caused.  As a new-player I'm not sure how to read the action...it seems too clumsy for scum-play?  But new-scum might end up being clumsy.  Anyways, it weighs in less for that.

Okay, so re-read nkirbit...
He also: does some probability arguing (I don't understand the "haven't done theater" comment, is it relevant?), pushes ash to claim instead of implying his claim, and points out the huge flaw in follow-the-cop (i.e. ROLEBLOCKER).
That last one is definitely pro-town.  Scum could have waited until a cop unwisely claimed.  They could have jumped on it early for town-cred, but it seems more likely they'd hesitate.

Meh, I'm going to vote: nkirbit anyways, and see what happens (maybe it'll result in my having a vote on nkirbit?  Ha, I made the joke before you could)

Okay, I need to look back over this sudgy thing.

Okay, so here's the sudgy case (and defense) as far as I understand it:
1. sudgy non-RVS voted ash in the middle of his RVS.
DEFENSE: It was for reactions, he didn't really mean the case on ash.
1.a. That doesn't really make sense, because he didn't search out reactions.  Also (added by me) he jumped straight back into RVS when he got the reactions (which was votes on him).  He never pursued any results on his reactions for his bad case.

2. sudgy was trying to be like ash, but said he wasn't.
DEFENSE: misunderstood.  He meant that he didn't mean the case.  (This is sufficiently reasonable to my mind)

3. sudgy disrupted the transition out of RVS with more RVS.  (i.e. the TA votes at this time were non-RVS).
DEFENSE: He did not realize the TA votes were non-RVS.  By which he meant, he just thought back, didn't remember any non-RVS stuff, and went ahead and voted.  (This seems fair to me again, because I didn't remember them myself.  The sudgy-wagon is the first non-RVS activity that I remember...that doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that it wasn't memorable).

4. sudgy is trying to act towny, which is what he would do as scum.  (this is TA's case I think?  This is ridiculous to me, that's also presumably what he'd do as town.  He's pointing out pro-town things, which he has stated is what he would do as town or scum.  This isn't a case, basically at all).
DEFENSE: "sudgy isn't good at defending himself".  (Odd that this is the one he has trouble with.  I mean seriously, someone points out pro-town things and says, "looks scummy for being pro-town"...and that's when he starts having trouble defending himself?)

5. sudgy seems to be forcing a meta-change, which is usually scummy.
DEFENSE: none offered yet, he hasn't posted since the accusation.

1 seems strongest to me.  5 is potentially strong, though I don't have a good feel for sudgy's meta at this time to verify it.  4 is weird, and is what caused me confusion in this whole thing.  The case is super-weak, but he can't defend it.  It felt sooo weak to me, that I couldn't see how it was the basis for this renewed push on sudgy.  Maybe the renewed push has more to do with 2 and 3, and it took him so long to answer those points, that 4 just kind of slipped in?

I'm gonna sleep on this.  I'm going back and forth here.  I can see a slipping town becoming persecuted...I can also see a scum error becoming out-of-control situation.  I'm leaning slipping town, because it seems like it's happened so many times...

In other news, I don't get nkirbit's vote here.  It's a complete switch from everything here is null to a vote with no explanation.

Okay, so it appears that the actual case on sudgy (outside the misunderstanding-contradiction) is that he's making "pro-town statements" while not having "pro-town play".  I can see that.

The wagon though, has to do with him blundering, regardless of his alignment.  He's under the spot-light without town contributions to point to.  There are other players without town contributions to point to (Robz for instance).  I'm not so sure about anything chairs or Voltaire or mail-mi have contributed to scumhunting. either.  So, it's not like sudgy is the only player not to be doing any scum-hunting.  He just happens to be the one in focus.

Arguably, he's being at least a little active while doing that...that's why he's in the spot-light.  But at this point he's pure defense, which is what happens when town gets persecuted (also when scum gets persecuted).  So, I do believe that he's being attacked for blundering into the spotlight.  Whether he's done so as town or scum is uncertain.  Personally, I'm inclined to view him as a little scummy, but not worth any immediate action.

sudgy - I dunno, I'm more convinced he'll be flipping town.  But we're in this weird case of alternatives all being quickly rejected as the sudgy wagon builds up again.  I just don't see sudgy as scummy enough to be the default-lynch.  I mean, I don't think he's super-townie...I dunno.  I'll vote here to ensure a lynch if it's needed, but I just don't get the fervor about it.

Um...probably because it's several thoughts together.
I find nkirbit a little scummy.  His overall play seems "off".  Going from "whole case on sudgy is neutral" to contradiction->vote, to contradiction explained->unvote, it's all neutral again, popping onto xerxes for voting ash, then popping onto sudgy for "panicking", finally sudgy-vote confirmed because he said nkirbit's vote "made sense".

I also disagree with him on a couple of his points regarding sudgy:

I disagree on the panicking thing.  I think town often gets bogged down in defending themselves, while scum is often on the lookout for an alternate lynch.  Any lynch which isn't a scum-mate is good for scum, while town doesn't particularly want to deflect onto another townie.  If there were another wagon out there, I would expect sudgy to be on it, because they have a higher chance of being scum.  But no one's really found a compelling case outside of sudgy (by which I mean one that's caught on) to call sudgy scum for his inability to do so seems wrong.  It's not like he hasn't been voting or giving reads, he's just not finding a compelling case.

The "confirmation" thing I think is misplaced also.  I mean, any reaction to a vote can fit a scum-tell.  "You're voting me for terrible reasons" fits the scum-tell of scum that's caught for what they view as bad reasons.  "You're voting me for good reasons" fits the scum-tell of scum that can't really defend itself, so acknowledges the case in hopes of it disappearing. 

I don't think calling out someone voting for you for good reasons actually fits the "voting for good reasons" scum-tell.  That scum-tell is usually more along the lines of "I acknowledge the overall case against me, I just think it's wrong".  Sudgy is largely in the first "scum-tell" camp.  Calling out one prosecutor to say "you make sense" doesn't achieve the desired result of acknowledging the suspicion against you.

If anything it's just still part of the first scum-tell.  i.e. scum-sudgy views the wagon on him as existing for "bad reasons", but acknowledges that at least one person has gotten a "good reason".  To me it just stops being scummy at that point.  It's not part of a scum-narrative any more, it's part of a reasonable reactions narrative.

As a result, I don't find nkirbit's reasons for voting compelling.  But ultimately, that's not why I'm voting for him.  The reason for my voting is because the line of activity seems off to me...jumpy maybe?  Wanting to be on the wagon, but worried about joining it for the "wrong reason"?  I think that's the gist of it.

So that is a lot. He wrote more text (I would bet, I haven't actually backed this up, but it certainly looks like it) about the sudgy lynch than the players advocating the sudgy lynch and to me it looks like a player who is straddeling the sudgy lynch expecting him to end up town and thus be on the townier side of the wagon. I think of especial interest is how toward the end theorel began to use this idea that sudgy would flip town to be suspicious of nkirbit.

I have been wary of theorel for a while now. I originally thought he might be sudgy's partner.... casually saying good things about the wagon, but never really joining it and ultimately saying that he thought he would flip town. of course that can't be the case anymore. But I do think there is a case to be made on theorel here as mafia expecting sudgy to flip town, slightly encouraging the wagon, over analyzing the "wagon" for scum who he can hand select and find scummy because he differs in reads over sudgy.

yeah.... vote: theorel I want to look more at this, but I feel good about it at this point.

I should mention that theorel was a little more adamant that ashersky was likely town that I remembered, he was pretty adamant, but again... is that scum siding up on the side of someone he knows to be town?

[yuma]

and still feel good after theorel's first post of today.

[nkirbit]

Vote: Theorel.

I like it.