In post 136, milkshake wrote:
Sword of Omen's vote was the L-1. I feel like it takes commitment to place the L-1 vote. Ghostlin's, however, was the 3rd vote on the wagon. The third/fourth vote seems like the easiest time to hop on the bandwagon for free. Ghostlin didn't admit that he was just hopping on board, though, instead he looked for a reason to justify his vote. Looking at the reason that he provided (post #88), I feel like the reason came after the decision to vote. (1)
I have a second reason that I suspect Ghostlin. It's nothing too strong, but post #27
Define 'harm'. Three possibilities exist.
You could be an actual VT. In which case, you're telling the truth, no harm no foul. Although we're not massclaiming Day 1, or even all the VTs claiming Day 1.
You could be a PR that wants to claim VT to hide what you're doing. This, in and of itself isn't harmful to town.
You could be a scum, claiming VT in a bid to deflect suspicion on yourself. In which case this could be a gambit, and harmful to Town.
Again I feel like the decision to make this post came before the post itself. In other words, Ghostlin decided he should present some analysis, but only for the sake of presenting analysis, not for the sake of finding scum. If you look at the post, it doesn't help find scum.
I'll back this up with a vote this time.
VOTE: Ghostlin
1) What? You don't actually rebut anything I said when I voted you, but the "fact" the decision to vote was made before the reason. I put "fact" in quotes because I had read the thread, determined the reasons to vote you, and posted and voted you. This entire argument, you see boils down to a bullshit schoolyard argument:
"You manufactured the reasons to be on my wagon before the vote."
"No, I didn't."
"Yes, you did."
"No, I didn't."
...ad infinitum
Which in and of itself would be a fine suspicion at this juncture (being early in the game)
except you never rebut the actual reason I voted you.
In fact the reason I'm suspicious of Sword is that
a large chunk of his reasoning reads suspiciously close to mine.
I'm not saying he can't use the same reasoning for voting, but it looks like a 'me too' vote (which scum can do easier than town).
Also, you're entire reason for Sword being town is WIFOM. It's possible scum Sword is aware of the L-1 affect and did it look more townie, if it takes 'commitment', he wants to look committed in an effort to be more town.
Also, you talk about the third and fourth person on a wagon, but you don't talk about why you do/don't suspect them and then vote/mention just me. Nice.
2) Wow. We're really going to do this, going back to post #27. Alright, I'll play.
I wasn't scum hunting there per se--but questioning Matt on his motivations. He asked me what the harm was in claiming VT. I gave him that reasoning you quoted above. Two of those reasons were indeed harmless--even if he's lying to town, if he's got
a town PR
, the WIFOM alone might be able to get scum off his scent since he claimed VT in thread. Now, if he's too much of a bother, they'll shoot him anyway, but you take that risk in this game.
If he's VT, then there's really nothing gained or lost there.
If he's scum however, he wants to
hide
the fact that he's scum, and the claim has the same WIFOM in reverse. Also, VT's can at the same time be the most active and inactive players.
So, I was questioning to get Matt's motivations for doing so at that juncture.
I am ignoring the 'manufactured post' argument since I already answered it.
So let me ask this: who's on your scum list besides me?
