How's this for a WALLOFTEXT?
These are the things which have stood out to me so far:
Page 1 (mostly silliness but a little more):
a) The second random vote (from Charter) was a duplicate vote. -I guess I find it odd to put 2 votes on someone right from the get go. Also, Isaid so at the time; even if it's a random vote; the custom is to give some silly explanation for it. Is this a scum-tell? Not necessarily. It's just wierd.
b) Green Crayons agrees with me and takes it a step further with a vote. -We were still clearly in the random voting stage, so this seems pretty pre-mature, and slightly OMGUS, to me.
c) Raider's asks GC if b) was a "real vote." -I think that's a fair question.
Page 2 (Wait...is this still random stage?):
a) Green Crayons claims that his vote on charter was OMGUS-(right?)
b) Qwints FOS's salempc for not contributing whilst asking for contributions -(maybe salempc was trying to 'raise a flag' himself?)
c) I, personally, was still in silly mode so I voted on Qwints' FOS.
d) Charter says he's happy with his vote on GC. Happy with an off-the-bat random vote? Here's where things start to feel iffy for me. I also don't know Charter's reasoning for saying he'd be fine with a wagon on me -(although I suspect it's just chuckling from a previous game...?)
e) Charter then adds a third to his list of people he'd like to see pressured. -Anyone NOT on that list, charter?
f) Green Crayons "gets the ball rolling" with a vote on me, I assume to fulfil Charter's "I'd lynch porkens" statement. -Is this an attempt to displace attention or votes?
g) Charter implies that GC is actually scum. -how could you possibly know that?!
h) Salempc noobs around, qwints calls him on it, and salem makes a content post...kinda. -(but as sudo says, it's hard to come up with content on page 2 most of the time)
Page 3 (Enter Sandman...err...Stef):
a) Sudo says he wants more pressure on salem, and votes. -this seems contradictiory to what he already said about there not being much content to talk about.
b) Raider says he doesn't want to see salempc's wagon go to a lynch. -That's some distancing right there.
c) Pacman says that things seem confusing, and he's not sure what to think or do.
d) Stef spams (argument ~might~ be made that this was still random stage).
e) Pacman comes back and immediately votes Stef. So, in C, Pacman sounds like he wants to analyze what is going on, but as soon as there is an easy target (stef) he jumps on it immediatly.
f) Crywolf accuses Stef of being VI.
g) Raider makes a contentless post (are you useful...?).
h) Crywolf again brings up the idea that Stef is VI.
Page 4 (The good time are owvah!!!):
a) Salem makes another useless post. (these have to stop soon, right?)
b) and another (...guess not)
c) Sudo calls Steff a moron and asks if the discussion is leading anywhere...but doesn't offer anything to help lead it anywhere himself.
d) Crywolf /ignores Steff.
e) Stef unvotes, declaires the random stage over.
f) Charter flag-waves his wagon on GC.
g) Moratorium declairs the random stage over (thank you)
h) Crywolf says that lynching the V.I. would be playing into the scum's hands. I think there is a huge difference between "ignoring" someone and "not lynching" them. I'm also suprised that crywolf is so weary of the V.I. day one from actions in the, albeit extended, random phase. I could see this as some kind of round-about way of defending Stef.
i) GC makes the first real, for reals, post. Main Points: I have bad reasoning, my vote wasn't "random" enough, tries to draw a line from raider to charter.
j) Charter presents his "case" on GC, going so far as to call him "obvious scum." My PROBLEM with this "case" is that none of it was brought up by charter before someone asked for it.
k) GC rebutts - hence comes the first real conversation of the game.
Page 5 (???):
a) Salem, again, doesn't have anything to contribute except to say he has nothing to contribute. Top it off with some OMGUS on qwints.
b) Crywolf says he doesn't like bloated posts. Well...he'll probably never read this then: Crywolf; Are you just being beligerant for the sake of it or are you trying to muddle the game intentionally?
c) GC presents a defense against Charter's case.
d) Charter Rebutts as only charter can.
e) GC presents a refined case against charter.
f) I don't like this next post (115) much at all. First of all, qwints injects a TON of WIFOM into the conversation really really unnecessarily. Essentially "charter is too scummy to be scum" doesn't hold a lot of water with me. Then, qwints contradicts himself by voting for Charter after all. This post seems to 'cover all the bases.' In one brief post: "I don't think charter is scum," "I'm voting for Charter."
g) Sudo 'defends(?)' Charter by explaining how to count scum in a 12 person game. -hiding in plain sight?
h) Charter freaks out. (you made it 5 pages this time!)
Okay, so I know that was horrible. Here're my conclusions:
1. The biggest and best aspect of the Charter case, for me, hasn't been mentioned yet; He has never changed his vote. You simply can not expect anyone to believe that you still have confidence in your random, day 1, post 2 vote. You have been "confident" about it since early in page 2, and no matter what else has gone on, you've dragged it along like a beloved dolly.
2. Some people in this game need far more attention.
a) Raider - Has been kind of skimming under the radar (I know he's away till friday), but also has been guilty of some suspected distancing (day 2; b).
b) Salempc - Not a single thing to contribute. Posting but saying nothing. In fact, the only noteworthy item was OMGUS against qwints.
c) Sudo - Even his random vote was unhelpful (for the mod)
But, I'm not voting for any of these right now. My choice is...