##CALLGM WD is not set to be modkilled because he voted and unvoted, correct?

Well, being sick really bites, but excuses aside I'm just not feeling AS into it this time around, mostly because apart from a joke of mine being attacked, I didn't have much direct interaction to go off of, but let's see what I can do to piece things together.

Maniac proposed a false dichotomy between himself and krellin, which strikes me as scummy, but risky. Then he drops that to vote for Chaqa as what he calls his "last action today". Since it's innocents who tend to show the most volatile behavior, I'm getting the same sort of feeling from him as he displayed last game. He even put forward another terrible process suggestion. Now, whether that's him giving himself cover for lizard-like actions, I don't know. He seems smart enough to do so, but I'm not willing to vote for him today. (Human)

ghug: Aside from his early and previously explained absence, has been very involved in discussion. For once he's not immediately reading me as scummy, which can only be a good thing, but apart from that his behavior seems to match with that of previous games where he was innocent. Also, he's egged krellin on to posting again, and unless krellin flips lizard, I can hardly read that as a scummy action. The one thing that gives me slight pause about him is in his reads list how he tells everyone how to react to how he read them. There's something about that that just feels off to me. Still, one weird thing aside, he seems as human as they come. (Human)

bo_sox: After engaging me for an obvious joke, he turned on krellin, and hasn't left that attack since. Despite posting a reads list (I think) he has continued to seek out "contradictions" of krellin repeatedly, yet despite pointing out, time and again how krellin seems scummy to him, isn't voting for him. And as krellin himself pointed out, seems way too sure of himself for someone who opened up playing the noob card. Almost like he's got insider information and is trying to push for an innocent lynch without being directly tied to it. (Lizard)

Chaqa: Ever since he posted more than his joke, I can't help but feel like he's been playing the back lines. Even while I had my vote on him as a furthering of that joke, his silence regarding it made me wonder. Of course, it's not like I could say with any confidence that his lack of followthrough was suspect and say my joke vote on him was suddenly serious, and I pulled it off because it was more than possible that he had simply been unable to play as much today as he would've wanted to, just like me. Yet, he's been posting in a way I'm having trouble comprehending, offering barely anything of his own, and tossing out more pithy one-liners than seems right. His latest call for a vote on Maniac just doesn't sit well with me, though I have yet to see his response to Maniac's vote on him. (Minor-Lizard pending X-posts)

guak: He was in the middle of things for a little while, but he didn't leave very much of an impression on me thusfar. (Null)

ILN: Seems to me like he's trying to figure things out among a crew of suspicious veterans, and he doesn't seem like he's doing so with any insider information. (Human)

Squigs: Seems to be playing this more seriously than last time, as though he's got more at stake than a regular human. Could be indicative of anything from evolving playstyle to any non-vanilla role. His preface to his reads post seemed a bit unnecessary too. (Minor-Lizard)

krellin: Honestly, seems to me like krellin is being krellin more than he's being indicative of any specific alignment. He is STILL pushing the point of not lynching in day 1, which I don't think is reasonable, but it's also made him an easy target for scum to jump on. That seems like a play krellin would love to make. But he's also advocating sub-par strategy, imo, and is being unduly stubborn toward specific players. (Minor-Human)

WD: Has a cold, plays too many video games, reads too many books, and needs to post more so people can read him. Knows he's missed a bunch of people in this reads list, but can only offer NULL on the rest at the moment. Also should be around until phase change. (NULL)

I'm somewhat convinced, ##VOTE Squiggs. Defensiveness is the biggest red flag for me there. I'll certainly feel much better about semck if squiggs did flip mafia.

Oh sorry. He should still probably vote.

RE: ghug on Squigs, All of that does little to convince me one way or the other on Squigs, since my read is that he's playing differently from last time because he's got a different role; I'm not sure that that is lizard, but it's a risk I'd rather not take on day 1 if we can help it. In following with my reads, I'm going to ##VOTE bo_sox so I'm not in danger of getting modkilled while I'm here, and continue to look at the other suspects until time runs out.

@ Krellin - actually I voted for you for very clear reasons, that's twice now you've accused me of doing it for no reason. Both times quite clearly I pointed it out to you.

However if I can't get the case started for Krellin, I'm willing to move to Squigs mostly based on Ghug's analysis

Well, Chaqa hasn't reacted to anything yet, so I can't get an evolving read there, but I'm going back over the thread to fill in the holes of my list right now.

I am probably cross posting with a whole bunch of people, but here is my response to when ghug posted that people he read negatively should try to convince him otherwise.

The first thing that I did was go back through what has been posted and copied it into a google doc. It is a lengthy list of criticisms, but a lot of it was people saying, Squigs is innocent and acting like last game, and then they said that they re-read and that I do look suspicious and give the same reasoning that the first people gave. If you want me to post the list I can, but like I said, it is pretty long, and some stuff is repetitive.

Anyway, the main arguments brought against me, and the first people to post that criticism are as follows:

1) WardenDresden criticized me for jumping on his “joke vote” early.
2) Guak says that I am concerned with figuring out town power roles.
3) Maniac pointed out that my style of play is different and that I am “haystacking”
4) Ghug points out that I am trying to please others, and then rehashes the above arguments against me. He follows it up with a vote
5) Then ghug points out that I put a defensive preface to my reads
6) Semck says that I was incredibly defensive on page 2

All other posts regarding me were a rehash of the above arguments. Now time to explain why I did the above.

1) Here is my post that WD did not like:

“Chaqa is just doing something to stir the pot up and see who bites. Speaking of which... WD why are you voting Chaqa?? Do you really think that he is probable scum? Please dont do what Eden did last game and just throw your vote from person to person until it sticks. Your vote on Chaqa doesnt show independent thinking, it just shows that you are willing to vote for the favorite. This certainly seems worrisome.”

WD asks why I was jumping on that of all things, and I initially wasnt really jumping on him, just expressing some concern, because up until then, there was not a whole lot to talk about, and this was finally something that worried me. I feel like WD was blowing this out of proportion more than I was, and was coming across as defensive. As he talked about it more and more, I became increasingly more concerned about what he did, and I continued to explain my concern. I decided that I was going to play this game more aggressive than last game, and this was my first chance to do so.

2) I feel like this whole town power role thing has been blown out of proportion. Even guak, the guy who initially brought it up has said that he thinks people are taking it too seriously.
Here is my post that has some people “really, really concerned”:

“So either Chaqa is A) A vanilla townie mad that he got vanilla again and wants to die or B) Scum that is trying to play himself off as a vanilla. There is no reason for a power role to do this, because it only draws attention to yourself and doesnt help the town in any way.
I am initially reading this as Chaqa being mad that he got vanilla townie, but who knows?? If Chaqa continues to just be dead weight, we can basically treat him as a lurker right??
Which brings me to my next point: What to do with lurkers?? Lynch them early?? Tell the Vig to kill them?? Pressure vote them?? I personally think that you should vote them off early / have the vig kill them. You are going to have to do something about them eventually, and it would be best to do it early when you have the least amount of info. I do realize that it gives the mafia an easy vote though, so maybe Vig should kill them. But then the vig would be wasting their only two shots early. But if they get killed early, then they wont get to use their shots anyway. Thoughts??”

The reason that I talked about him not being a power role was because I wanted to outline all of the options. When PE came out as SK last game, a lot of people were advocating a lot of different things, and I think it helped to establish all of the possibilities and work from there. I was simply trying to establish whether Chaqa was telling the truth or not. I wanted to make sure that we had covered all of the possibilities.

3) First of all, what exactly is haystacking?? I am guessing that haystacking is posting a lot without posting much content, and if you look at my content, I actually think that I had done more scumhunting than most people at that point. Most people have been talking about procedural stuff, which IMO is the biggest way that you can haystack, and I have been actively stating that I hate talking about procedural stuff in-depth. Just state your opinion with a short explanation.

I admit that my style this game has been different. Last game I was heavily criticized for two things. First, people were saying that townies should not be reserved, and should not be afraid to die. Last game I was. This game I have been as aggressive as possible in order to get as many reactions as I can. I feel like it has worked, as a lot of discussion has formed around me. Unfortunately, it is negative. The second thing is that I was too concerned with self-image this game. I dont think that will ever change, as I am naturally a self-conscious person. If I get lynched because of these two things, I dont care, because I dont regret playing the way I have played, and I dont think that I can/would change it if I played again.

4) I kinda already addressed number 4 above. I will always try to please others. It is in my nature. Kinda like how it is in Krellin’s nature to make everyone else mad.

5) As soon as I hit post on my reads, I realized how scummy my preface sounded. Again, I think that was tied to my self-consciousness, and that I will always do dumb things like that. In this case, people were pointing out my aggressive play, and I wanted to differentiate my calm, organized reads from my aggressive, chaotic, spontaneous posts.

6) Let’s revisit page two to see how defensive I was.

Uclabb - “I hate this whole dismissing day 1 discussion thing”

Me - “I am not dismissing discussion on day 1 at all, on the contrary. I am trying to start discussion. I am just frustrated because I am eager to start the game with all of it's crazy voting, bandwagons, 50 page rereads, and role reveals, and on day 1, you start with nothing. Near the end of day 1, we actually do have things happening (at least we did last game) so you are able to get semi-accurate scum reads on certain people, but right now, there is almost nothing to go off and I am restless to play.”

Uclabb - “How are you trying to start discussion?”

Me - “1st post - asked for a suggestion on how to proceed in a better way
2nd post - called Chaqa out on just saying agreed
3rd post - gave my opinion on WIFOM
4th post - gave my opinion on analyzing too much and pressuring people
5th post - expressed frustration at slow pace of game

I feel as though my first four posts were not fluff posts, and actually have things that you can talk about and discuss. Other than you, Uclabb, I think that I have posted the most. I nowhere said that I did start discussion, because no one has really responded to what I have said, but I have been posting things that can be discussed and should be discussed.”

Uclabb and I then talk about role reveals. It was pretty uneventful.

I then say - “Uclabb, I feel like your whole WIFOM discussion thing is a post in which you created new information without having to respond to anything. Maybe I am understanding what you are saying wrong, but I feel like you fall under your own scum-tell category.”

I realize my mistake and follow it up with this, right after posting, without anyone else posting in between - “I think I did read that wrong, looking at it again. Can you clarify whether you think mafia have a hard time creating new things at the beginning, and therefore anyone who creates something new is not mafia, OR whether you think that it is hard for mafia to respond to things, so they decide to make up new stuff to talk about in an attempt to look like they are doing something.”

Uclabb and I cross-posted a couple times, but I finally realize what he is trying to say, and we end up agreeing to disagree.

I think that some of the “defensiveness” that people are reading might be my frustration with the fact that there was no scumhunting that could be done then. I was eager to play, and so I was trying to be aggressive towards the inconsistency that I thought I had found with uclabb. After I realized that I had made a mistake, I stated that I did, and we resolved things. I think that this is very similar to when YJ and Uclabb got in a fight in M3. Maybe Uclabb just needs to be clearer when he states things. Or maybe I need to read more carefully.

@WD - welcome back and sorry you've been sick. Can you see how your argument on Krellin (he's being more Krellin than Krellin) is just a smoke screen - its not really a defence

So, I'm going to go shower and then come back and check the status. I'm really concerned about the possibility of a tie right now, although squigs has pulled slightly ahead now. Second on my scum list after Squigs, or maybe really tied with him now, is Chaqa. He's played a very bizarre game. I could also vote for ILN but would rather save that because he's new. I see no point in voting for krellin.

I do still think Squigs's play is just SUPER different from last time. People are saying he was defensive last time too. Maybe, but he was also Mr. Super Town. Tons of reads, arguments, good points, etc. He just seems very different, and much *more* defensive to me. See y'all in ten.

@Squigs - Ok, for me that's a good defensive post. I'm not willing to vote you today - will you join me on a Krellin lynch?

*sigh* Just saw squigs's post. I don't know. I still feel weird about him. As I say, I'm leaving my vote there unless there's a major bandwagon for Chaqa in ten.

@Semck - definitely not switching to Chaqa, don't see it. Why do you not see a possibility of voting Krellin?

##Call GM - Am I right there's about 45mins to deadline?

@pj: 1 hour and 45 min remain.

WD, you're welcome to vote for whomever, but a vote against me at this point is pretty useless. I'll respond to your claims later on but right now I firmly believe that the focus should be on preventing a tie vote and making it as far from a tie as possible before someone tries to pull off a last second trick.

Glad to see you're around, though.

Let me respond to what ghug just posted really quick.

Criticism A: "Where do I show interest in figuring out who the power roles are??"
Suddenly gets really defensive.

I ask a simple questions because I honestly dont know what he is referring to. Is that being defensive??

Criticism B: Doesn't offer significant insight on anyone else. Ignores my points against him, only questioning the Ulysses quote.

By now I hope I have not ignored your points.

I want to point out a frustration I have right now. I ask a question about guak’s reads and I get criticized for being too defensive. Then I dont say anything about ghug’s reads, because I am worried that I will be too defensive if I do. I get criticized for not saying anything.

I post 1 question - criticized for being too defensive.
I dont post - criticized for not saying anything

Wow - how do I please ghug? I feel like he is trying really hard to make a case against me no matter what I post.

Lets keep going:

Criticism C: Jumps on Warden for jokes, encourages people not to use their votes as tools.

I am criticized for being too aggressive.

Criticism D: He claims aggressiveness that hasn't been there, and is already worried about what people will think of his hedged reads.

So now I am not being aggressive?? What?? And wouldn’t you be worried about what others think if YOU got criticized no matter what you post??

This is ridiculous. I dont care what ghug posts anymore, because I have just tried to address it, and I realize that at this point I will probably be criticized for all of the remaining posts I post. I will address anyone else’s criticism’s though, so feel free to post.

Time to scum hunt, I have wasted enough time defending myself already.

@Warden: I didn't react to your vote much because by the time I was caught up you had already unvoted and explained yourself. I have it marked down in my word doc (Warden voting for me? Odd.) is all the mention of it I made.

I'm not one to get caught up on every little post. I go more by my general feel.

You guys are right, I am much more defensive than last game. But last game I didnt come under any criticism until the day I died. And I wasnt around to post anything when you guys did criticize me. This is new territory for me, and I freaking hate it, because I want to play this game, and a day 1 death makes my summer very boring for the next week.

Don't worry Squigs, I'm not voting for you, I don't see you as scum.

To be honest, I find Squigs's defense somewhat convincing. I just don't see a very good target to switch onto.

Krellin is my second scum-read, and in case I dont have a chance to switch my vote before the deadline, ##VOTE Krellin.

I think I have to go in 45 mins, and isnt the deadline in an hour and a half?? Anyway, I need to put together some sort of argument I guess so I am going to hurry and do that.

I would love a vote update.

One will come along shortly, I was hopin to be able to wait till the top of the hour, but I may have to do it sooner than that.

Day 1 Vote Count Update 5

krellin (4): pjmansfield99, uclabb, ILN, Squiggs44
Squigs44 (4): ghug, semck83, bo_sox48, y2kjbk
ILN (1):guak
Maniac(1): Chaqa
Ghug(1): krellin
Chaqa(1): Maniac
bo_sox_84(1): WardenDresden

Not voting (1) captainmeme (set to mod killed/replaced)
Currently NO ONE is set to be lynched!

1 hour and 15 minutes remain.

@Squigs, When you responded to guak, I read a tone of urgency and worry. When you responded to me, you acknowledged that I had posted something, but your only response was an accusation of drug abuse. You jumped on people for making jokes, which was admittedly aggressive, but it was misplaced and unsubstantiated aggression, and then you encouraged people not to cast votes, which is the opposite of aggression. The only actual attacks you've made on people were the ones related to the Chaqa jokes and the long criticism of ILN which ended with a concession that everything you were attacking could just be noobishness, yet you paint yourself as aggressive and use that to justify your hedged reads. I don't see either of these issues as me trying to make anything you do look scummy, but we can leave it up to other people to decide that.

If you can make a convincing case against someone else, I'd love to hear it. I don't think the case against you is exceptionally strong, and I would be willing to switch to a better target if one were to arise.

I'm off. I've cooled to the Chaqa case. I agree the power roles thing was blown out of proportion, and I'm sorry. But I don't see a good reason to kill krellin either. So I guess I'm encouraging people to move onto Chaqa, for all the reasons discussed by Maniac; but I'm staying where I am. Take care, don't let there be a tie.

(Squigs, obviously, is still scummy enough that I wouldn't DISCOURAGE voting for him if it won't create a tie).

@semck: vote Maniac, he's 100% guaranteed scum.

@Chaqa when I'm asking for a reaction, I mean to Maniac's vote for you as well as the arguments against you, which I don't think you adequately answered. Have you been lying low for a non-scummy reason? Your confidence that Maniac is scum feels more like a defensive retaliatory gesture than something you should be pressing because you have a case. Neither of you seem to be in immediate danger.