Mafiascum.net

Will post on Friday.

SSBF: if you're interested, the link to Mini 926 is here. ISO Raivann and make up your own mind. He kind of imploded at the end of Day Two, but I don't think he was anywhere near this bad. And in an MD thread, Wickedjestr (however it's spelled) said Raivann was obvscum when they'd been scumbuddies.

MacavityLock wrote:I'm not particularly enamored of the Raiv wagon.

MacavityLock, you've played with Raivann before. Do you think this behaviour is characteristic for him?

LynchMePls, I've learned the hard way to avoid blatantly defending a player (because someone always accuses me of buddying or makes a trumped-up case linking me to the target of my defence). I won't pull a SSBF and do a quote-by-quote rebuttal of your case before Axelrod, CMAR, and Richard defend themselves.

But to be honest, I think that your Richard-Axelrod-CMAR case is very contrived. It gives me the impression that you picked and chose the evidence to fit your theory. This is the kind of case that makes me suspect the person who wrote it.

The Richard-CMAR connection in particular is extremely unlikely. Their early fight looked pretty heated, and you seem to have forgotten that Richard voted CMAR back. And you realize at the time Axelrod voted Hayker, not only had the Richard wagon been derailed, but the Kleedrac, SSBF, and CMAR wagons all had more votes on them than Hayker? So it's silly to use Axelrod voting Hayker as evidence he was diverting the wagon away from Richard. And why don't you have a problem with unvoting Richard the instant they saw his claim?

Seriously, you're pushing a Richard lynch purely because you're so sure that you've found his scumbuddies based on such weak evidence? I think you could use similar evidence to link any player in the game to Richard.

(I'll be honest and say that I have a gut town read on Axelrod from his most recent posts. And for the five zillionth time, Richard's claim will be easily provable or disprovable when we massclaim. At this point, I'd be okay with a CMAR lynch purely because of the softclaim and horrible kissing up to Axelrod, but I'd rather look in other directions.)

I should have unvoted dana earlier.
I never should have unvoted Richard either
You're right Mina, maybe it's not too late especially after lynchmepls just made the best case in the game so far on him.
I don't know Kleedracks alignment I know alot of others found him scummy and were asking for moar Kleedrac votes. My main point for thinking he was town was proven wrong.So I was following or going along. Another way to look at it is with all these players there has to some kind of consensus and teamwork.

I see a Richard/ Mina connection.

You to choose now to crawl out of the woodworks. I still haven't responded to Rivka (because she ignored that I point-blank said I WANT EXPLICIT DETAILS ON WHY HER CASE ON BENMAGE IS BETTER THAN I DOUBT IT's, because it should be very obvious where I'm heading with this line of inquiry). Or done that bandwagon analysis Percy's been pestering me about. Or explained from like weeks ago what I meant by SSBF "parroting" vezopiraka. I have to wake up in five hours.

Raivann wrote:Unvote, Vote:Richard
I should have unvoted dana earlier.
I never should have unvoted Richard either

Why shouldn't you have unvoted them? Because you're getting heat for it, or because {insert townish reason here}?

You're right Mina, maybe it's not too late especially after lynchmepls just made the best case in the game so far on him.

Are you saying LynchMePls' case is the best of the game because you agree with the Axelrod and CMAR connections? His case was based more on links than on Richard's behaviour (although he brought up a couple of decent points--e.g., the weird "Raivann knows who Ser Loras is" comment).

AND YOU NEVER EXPLAINED JUST WHY YOU FOUND RICHARD SCUMMY IN THE FIRST PLACE, DAMMIT!

Raivann wrote:I don't know Kleedracks alignment I know alot of others found him scummy and were asking for moar Kleedrac votes. My main point for thinking he was town was proven wrong.So I was following or going along. Another way to look at it is with all these players there has to some kind of consensus and teamwork.

My problem is that "consensus-building" is an easy way to avoid taking responsibility for your own choices. And the timing of your compromise was wrong. We were nowhere near the lynch deadline, and you're a replacement. You should be catching up on the game, not jumping onto the first wagon you see.

FoS:Mina I see a Richard/ Mina connection.

To be entirely honest, if I were reading this game from an outside POV, I'd buy a Richard/Mina connection more than a Richard/Axelrod or Richard/CMAR connection. Unlike Axelrod and CMAR, I didn't take a firm stand on Richard earlier on. That's why I think the links LynchMePls found in his case are so contrived.

(Mind you, I always look linked to group suspects. I've realized just now that I have a phobia of jumping onto popular wagons. This holds regardless of my alignment. If everyone suspects one player, I have to be contrary and suspect someone else. I feel like a sheep unless I'm one of the first three on a wagon. As a result, I think I've been subconsciously biased against the anti-Kleedrac surge. At least I fill a niche in the town.)

Hmm...

Raivann, here's a homework assignment for you. Choose four players, and write at least three sentences per player explaining why you suspect each one. So far, I feel your scumhunting hasn't been very thorough.

Mina wrote:LynchMePls, I've learned the hard way to avoid blatantly defending a player (because

I look like an idiot when that player flips scum

someone always accuses me of buddying or makes a trumped-up case linking me to the target of my defence). I won't pull a SSBF and do a quote-by-quote rebuttal of your case before Axelrod, CMAR, and Richard defend themselves.

But to be honest, I think that your Richard-Axelrod-CMAR case is very contrived. It gives me the impression that you picked and chose the evidence to fit your theory. This is the kind of case that makes me suspect the person who wrote it.

First off, you say you'll let them defend themselves, but then you still go on to post a lot in there defense anyways. That seems odd. That being said, I don't have tunnel vision, and I'm perfectly happy to be refuted if that is what the evidence points to. I did a reread, and I noticed odd behavior, so I followed it to where it lead, and it gave me this case. If people think I'm wrong, that's fine, I don't have a problem with that. To call my case scummy is laughable. Why would I go through that effort, particularly when I've been pushing a Kleedrac wagon for like a week? The answer is obvious, I did a reread and I saw something interesting.

The Richard-CMAR connection in particular is extremely unlikely. Their early fight looked pretty heated, and you seem to have forgotten that Richard voted CMAR back. And you realize at the time Axelrod voted Hayker, not only had the Richard wagon been derailed, but the Kleedrac, SSBF, and CMAR wagons all had more votes on them than Hayker? So it's silly to use Axelrod voting Hayker as evidence he was diverting the wagon away from Richard. And why don't you have a problem with

Drippereth

unvoting Richard the instant they saw his claim?

If I'm correct, CMAR was bussing his partner day 1. This might be an explanation for the heated reaction from Richard, he might have been genuinely pissed. Dripp unvoted as well, but that's not the point. The point isn't that CMAR unvoted, after all, I did as well. Its the timing of it! Look at the time stamps, it's literally two minutes apart. That is not an exaggeration, it is LITERALLY two minutes apart. How can you see someone's claim, click the quote button, and post the unvote in two minutes, let alone even consider if you believe the claim. It was WAY too rushed, particularly in light of his attack on Richard. I again point out that at the time CMAR made his case, there was little sign that it would turn into a full on lynch. Once it began to grow to large size, he pretty much vanished until his miraculously fast unvote.

As for you point that the wagon had already derailed when Axelrod voted, that may be true, but it still doesn't refute all of the defensiveness from Axelrod to Richard and vice-versa.

Seriously, you're pushing a Richard lynch purely because you're so sure that you've found his scumbuddies based on such weak evidence? I think you could use similar evidence to link any player in the game to Richard.

I didn't find "similar" evidence linking anyone else, I posted exactly what I found. If you think it's far-fetched, or you disbelieve it, that is certainly your choice. But don't distort my position by claiming I could "use similar evidence to link any player in the game to Richard". I haven't done that, and that is a strawman argument.

(I'll be honest and say that I have a gut town read on Axelrod from his most recent posts. And for the five zillionth time, Richard's claim will be easily provable or disprovable when we massclaim. At this point, I'd be okay with a CMAR lynch purely because of the softclaim and horrible kissing up to Axelrod, but I'd rather look in other directions.)

How can you say Axelrod seems town? Seriously, ISO him, it's really easy just do a "Sort By: Author" and he is right there on page 1 (after Animorph). I'd love to hear what makes you think he is town. Cause as far as my ISO read of him went, he is VERY scummy looking. I'll point back to my case for specifics. He basically does no scum hunting the whole game, votes Cow for terrible reason, parrot's Percy for his only case that even looks remotely good, then goes into active lurker mode. What about that exactly gives you a town read?

Am I "convinced" that I'm right? Of course not. I am however putting my information out there. I observed very odd behavior between the three of them, and I built the case on it. I will say this, if all three of them are town I'll eat my hat.

danakillsu wrote:

Mikujin wrote:I fail to see how making a case out on Raivann should be interpreted as "bashing" him. Care to explain?

Did you read the context in which I said that? I was saying that you were bashing him for messing up on what I said. I will stick with that statement, though it may not mean the same thing to you that it means to me. I meant that you were calling him scummy for something that wasn't scummy in my book, and doing it with gusto.

Alright, that makes more sense now. For some reason, I always jump right to the conclusion that "bashing" implies a personal attack of character. No harm, no foul.

Actually, your response is coming off as pretty townish. And...that's kind of a good point about how you didn't need to unvote Kleedrac. (Mind you, now I'm concocting an elaborate Kleedrac-LynchMePls scumteam theory. At first, you didn't get the case on Kleedrac, right? But then you saw which way the winds were blowing, so you did a sudden turnaround and voted him, until you saw reluctance to lynch him and decided to make a last-ditch effort to save him with a huge case....someone please stop my overactive imagination.)

Maybe I just don't gel with your reasoning. I have the same problem with Unsight. Also, call me hypocritical, because I have another conspiracy theory brewing, but I don't like people voting solely on links before a single flip, particularly when the links are weak.

See, me nitpicking over why I don't think Richard and CMAR are scumbuddies is white noise that distracts from scumhunting. Here, I'll make this two posts. The first is pretty much irrelevant to anyone who isn't you. The second is of general interest to everyone, because it discusses my actual reads.

First off, you say you'll let them defend themselves, but then you still go on to post a lot in there defense anyways. That seems odd.

To be honest, the second and third paragraphs kind of grew and grew as I was writing that post...but hey, I resisted the urge to quote every single line and refute it. For me, that's restraint.

As for you point that the wagon had already derailed when Axelrod voted, that may be true, but it still doesn't refute all of the defensiveness from Axelrod to Richard and vice-versa.

FWIW, I actually thought those were the strongest links you'd spotted in your case. But I was trying to show where I thought you were twisting the facts, not do a point-by-point analysis of every argument.

If I'm correct, CMAR was bussing his partner day 1. This might be an explanation for the heated reaction from Richard, he might have been genuinely pissed.

You'd be better off arguing that CMAR and Richard are both scum, but on different teams. When there is genuine hostility between two players whose votes are on each other for most of the day while they're both in danger of a lynch, usually it's safe to assume the obvious. You are making WAY too many assumptions by saying that Richard is pissed off because of CMAR's bussing (which at that point hadn't got serious).

Dripp unvoted as well, but that's not the point. The point isn't that CMAR unvoted, after all, I did as well. Its the timing of it! Look at the time stamps, it's literally two minutes apart. That is not an exaggeration, it is LITERALLY two minutes apart. How can you see someone's claim, click the quote button, and post the unvote in two minutes, let alone even consider if you believe the claim. It was WAY too rushed, particularly in light of his attack on Richard.

Oh, really? Please explain to me how the instantaneous change between this and this is any different. Clearly, Dripp changed their mind in the between demanding a claim and saying "I believe the claim." And you yourself said Dripp was attacking Richard harder than CMAR was.

I again point out that at the time CMAR made his case, there was little sign that it would turn into a full on lynch. Once it began to grow to large size, he pretty much vanished until his miraculously fast unvote.

Damn it, you're making me say the thing I didn't want to say in CMAR's defence. That being, CMAR was lurking and not really attacking at that point. Since he was AWOL, obviously he wasn't pushing Richard. He wasn't around to push . In fact, when he pops up again, this is all he has to say.

By the way, glad to see the Richard wagon is taking off. Pillars of the evil king's castle are finally falling 2day.

If anything, he's scum glad his mislynch wagon took off without him having to get his hands dirty.

How can you say Axelrod seems town? Seriously, ISO him, it's really easy just do a "Sort By: Author" and he is right there on page 1 (after Animorph). I'd love to hear what makes you think he is town. Cause as far as my ISO read of him went, he is VERY scummy looking. I'll point back to my case for specifics. He basically does no scum hunting the whole game, votes Cow for terrible reason, parrot's Percy for his only case that even looks remotely good, then goes into active lurker mode. What about that exactly gives you a town read?

In all honesty, it's mainly gut. Admittedly, his activity hasn't been great. But this post analyzing the Kleedrac vs. Raivann wagons sounded extremely genuine. He comes across as though he's sincerely struggling to figure out people's motivations, not just trying to manufacture a case. I suppose he be scum trying to keeping himself open to join either mob, but the execution works for me.

Funny you mention his interaction with Cow. I actually thought that although Cow has done a lot of things that look townish this game, he came off badly in his interaction with Axelrod. I mean, I took Axel's vote as a fairly casual pressure vote, but Cow's first post was really overdefensive:

Cow wrote:boy that makes me feel welcome. I'm going to point out that newbies often replace out when they're under pressure because they don't know what else to do. I mean, he's Townsperson. Plus, he said he was too busy to play, so I'm calling party foul on this vote, because he didn't disappear, he replaced out.

Why the need for the long justification?

Also, there's been something I've been meaning to call Cow on for a long time. I think Axel's post ranting against Drippereth's playstyle was a nulltell. Regardless of his alignment, his frustration was clearly genuine. I can understand Drippereth calling it IIoA, because it's true and because Drippereth had a reason to be biased. This post, on the other hand, bugs me. Seriously, "this feels off"? On the contrary, I thought regardless of Axel's alignment, it was pretty obvious that his annoyance was genuine. Cow, by "off," are you saying that Axelrod seems insincere? And considering this was right after Drippereth moved Axel to her scumlist, the timing of his FOS seemed very opportunistic.

And the following, in particular, is the kind of thing scum say when they see someone under suspicion and try to join in with their own unique point, but end up talking out of their ass:

Even though it annoys you, is it scummy? if not, deal with it. This feels just like a way to ignore a player.

FoS: Axelrod

The last sentence is what really bugs me. Cow, what do you think the scum motivation is, anyway, for trying to "ignore a player" by saying they find their playstyle annoying? If you'd complained that it was filler instead of scumhunting, fine. But I cannot believe that you genuinely think someone is likely to be scum for that.

Mina, read my posts. I dont have a case on benmage because i dont really find him big scummy read, plus he isnt posting enough to have some kind of solid case. The worst that could be said is active lurking and\or mysterious vote on drippy.

Here is my post answering you

A:If i thought a player is scum, then another player that i think is scumy attacking him isnt in any way a redeeming factor for that player in a game of this size. Right now im thinking benmage is town though. Not sure where you came up with the rest of the stuff in your post

Mina wrote:Funny you mention his interaction with Cow. I actually thought that although Cow has done a lot of things that look townish this game, he came off badly in his interaction with Axelrod. I mean, I took Axel's vote as a fairly casual pressure vote, but Cow's first post was really overdefensive:

Cow wrote:boy that makes me feel welcome. I'm going to point out that newbies often replace out when they're under pressure because they don't know what else to do. I mean, he's Townsperson. Plus, he said he was too busy to play, so I'm calling party foul on this vote, because he didn't disappear, he replaced out.

Why the need for the long justification?

overdefensiveness is a misnomer. Why should I keep from using every reason I have to defend myself? I don't think calling people on overdefensiveness is a good idea, because it's so subjective and can be claimed on anything. It's a good way for scum to tunnel on someone, from what I've found, claiming overdefensive when they're defending themselves from someone's case. And you call that long? It's three sentences, not like I wrote a novel.

And the following, in particular, is the kind of thing scum say when they see someone under suspicion and try to join in with their own unique point, but end up talking out of their ass:

Even though it annoys you, is it scummy? if not, deal with it. This feels just like a way to ignore a player.

FoS: Axelrod

The last sentence is what really bugs me. Cow, what do you think the scum motivation is, anyway, for trying to "ignore a player" by saying they find their playstyle annoying? If you'd complained that it was filler instead of scumhunting, fine. But I cannot believe that you genuinely think someone is likely to be scum for that.

"ignore a player" wasn't the best wording of what I meant there. Discredit is probably better. I was trying to go for "get the town to ignore" rather than just him. There's pretty obvious reasons why scum would want to do that.

Totally inadequate justification of any of his stances, basically admits he voted Kleedrac because other people told him to and doesn't appear to have substance behind any of his opinions.

And we're back!

I have just skimmed the new stuff and see someone has made an actual case against me - even if it's almost 100% a case by way of association with people who's alignments are unknown. Still, I'll respond to it shortly. My first instinct is that the casemaker himself (LynchMePls) comes across as reasonably genuine, and it actually makes me lean more town on him.

And Mina is like my new most favorate person. Really strong leaning town now. Not just that she's defending me (though I admit that helps), but she's writing really passionately, which is just hard to fake as scum.

The only other player I probably feel stronger about their towniness atm is MacCavity. Everything he says is pretty much right on the money. And his current vote is on one of my sleeper suspects (MagnaofIllusion) on who I was considering building my first serious case before the move.



Back in a bit.

Mina wrote:Actually, your response is coming off as pretty townish. And...that's kind of a good point about how you didn't need to unvote Kleedrac. (Mind you, now I'm concocting an elaborate Kleedrac-LynchMePls scumteam theory. At first, you didn't get the case on Kleedrac, right? But then you saw which way the winds were blowing, so you did a sudden turnaround and voted him, until you saw reluctance to lynch him and decided to make a last-ditch effort to save him with a huge case....someone please stop my overactive imagination.)

I asked what the case was, because he was just a lurker. He then made a scummy post in response to the pressure he was getting. I made a very good response to his scummy post, asked him questions, and voted him. If you think that makes me look scummy, then I don't even know what to say.

Maybe I just don't gel with your reasoning. I have the same problem with Unsight. Also, call me hypocritical, because I have another conspiracy theory brewing, but I don't like people voting solely on links before a single flip, particularly when the links are weak.

It's not solely on links. Can't we all admit that Richard has played scummy today? Hell he was at L-1 and forced to claim, that didn't come about from no scummy play. Furthermore, ever since his claim, he has done absolutely nothing to change my read on him. He does no scum hunting. The most generous play you could call scum hunting was his attack on dana, and that looked more like mud slinging to distract from his wagon than actually scum hunting. This is why when I say I suspect a Richard/CMAR/Axelrod scum team that I propose we lynch Richard. He is by far the scummiest of the three. I'm perfectly willing to admit that one of those three could just be me seeing a connection that isn't really there, but after my reread, IMO Richard needs to die, and I think Axelrod or CMAR should be right behind him when he flips scum.

You'd be better off arguing that CMAR and Richard are both scum, but on different teams. When there is genuine hostility between two players whose votes are on each other for most of the day while they're both in danger of a lynch, usually it's safe to assume the obvious. You are making WAY too many assumptions by saying that Richard is pissed off because of CMAR's bussing (which at that point hadn't got serious).

That is certainly a possibility, it just isn't the impression I got after my reread. I don't claim that my theory is full-proof the clear unquestionable truth. They could be scum on opposite teams. There play though is really scummy.

Oh, really? Please explain to me how the instantaneous change between this and this is any different. Clearly, Dripp changed their mind in the

one minute

between demanding a claim and saying "I believe the claim." And you yourself said Dripp was attacking Richard harder than CMAR was.

I'll let Dripp answer for themselves on this one, but to me that looked like the two heads of the hydra simul posting. Hence the "ninja'd" comment. I think one of them was dubious and the other bought the claim. Also to note that while their two posts were a minute apart, they weren't TWO MINUTES after the claim like CMARs was.



Honestly, am I the only one who thinks its scummy for CMAR to make a case, vanish when it picks up steam (except for a short "I'm glad this is continuing" post) and then IMMMEDIATELY unvote after a claim? It is so bizarre. The time stamps are two minutes apart. Lets suppose that CMAR was sitting at his computer, staring at the game and hitting F5 as fast as he could, so he sees the claim the moment it is published (something that doesn't make sense given his lurking at that point in time). Lets also assume that it was published at the very beginning of the minute it has time stamped. That means CMAR sees the claim, lets say it takes him 5-10 seconds to process what he has read. He then clicks the quote button to respond. Once the browser loads the response its been 15 or so seconds since it was posted. He then types his reponse (we'll be generous and say this takes 10 seconds). That means he had 120 seconds - 25 seconds to read the claim and write his reply gives 95 seconds (lets call it a minute and a half) to actually think about his response.

So, in 95 seconds CMAR comes to the conclusion to believe the claim of a player who has been incredibly scummy, and HE HIMSELF built the initial case on in a game where we have already discussed that the scum have fake claims!?!?!? The concept is so laughable. There has GOT to be an exlanation for this, and CMAR's complete silence on the issue is very damning. This is why I believe they are on a scum team together.

CMAR wrote:By the way, glad to see the Richard wagon is taking off. Pillars of the evil king's castle are finally falling 2day.

Thanks for dredging this gem of a post up, it only illustrates my point. He posts that he is glad the wagon is taking off and "Pillars of the evil king's castle are finaly falling". So, he is glad the wagon is building steam, he is convinced he is scum, but he unvotes instantly after the claim. And what was the claim? ONE OF THE FIVE KINGS!!!! Isn't one of the five kings (particularly one that might be viewed as "good" by some readers) certainly a possible fake claim for a scum leader? Wouldn't that in and of itself make you pause? I know it did for me when I read the claim.

There is just way to much scum going on here for there to not be a connection. And I think the best lynch to unravel the whole thing is Richard. He has by far been scummiest player of the day, he has done absolutely nothing useful for the town since his claim stalled his wagon, and even if he IS telling the truth, we'll still get the vig kill. That concludes my case, people can make of it what they will, but I don't think I'll be moving my vote. Richard is obv scum and he needs to die.

Oh, and if there is a Day vig out there, hitting Richard would be uber. Just saying.

Axelrod wrote:I have just skimmed the new stuff and see someone has made an actual case against me - even if it's almost 100% a case by way of association with people who's alignments are unknown. Still, I'll respond to it shortly. My first instinct is that the casemaker himself (LynchMePls) comes across as reasonably genuine, and it actually makes me lean more town on him.

It's not just association Axelrod. Your play hasn't been very town like in my opinion. Your case on Cow/Dr.Modem was weak and came out of nowhere, you've spent most of your time commenting on proper raising without scum hunting, and you went into hyper lurk mode after your "rant". I'll grant that my case that you are on a scum team with Richard is merely from association, but you've been pretty scummy this game.

LynchMePls wrote:In other news, my case a few posts back seems to be getting entirely ignored. This makes me a sad panda.

Connection cases bore me on Day 1. Let's get some flips, and then get back to me.

That said, the deal with CMAR unvoting immediately after the claim is suspicious, and you're not the only one who noted that.

Mina wrote:

MacavityLock wrote:I'm not particularly enamored of the Raiv wagon.

MacavityLock, you've played with Raivann before. Do you think this behaviour is characteristic for him?

Played with him only the once, but yeah, his current play does kind of remind me of his Day 3 (?) implosion that got him lynched in AGoT mini. I don't think his play is the most helpful for town, but I think I see some town tells there, and so to my mind there are better suspects.

BTW why is there a player Julienvonwolfe not voting to lynch, is that player actually in the game? I couldnt find a single post of theirs in ISO

EBWOP: NM, I found it

MacavityLock wrote:Connection cases bore me on Day 1. Let's get some flips, and then get back to me.

Ok. Richard first.

I'll take CMAR to I guess, although I'd really like to hear his explanation for his unvote, it was scum-tastic.

Raivann wrote:

Unvote, Vote:Richard

I should have unvoted dana earlier.
I never should have unvoted Richard either
You're right Mina, maybe it's not too late especially after lynchmepls just made the best case in the game so far on him.
I don't know Kleedracks alignment I know alot of others found him scummy and were asking for moar Kleedrac votes. My main point for thinking he was town was proven wrong.So I was following or going along. Another way to look at it is with all these players there has to some kind of consensus and teamwork.

FoS:Mina

I see a Richard/ Mina connection.

You do realize that you are both voting and raising Richard right? Is this raise leftover from who you replaced or did the mod make a mistake?

Axelrod wrote: Not just that she's defending me (though I admit that helps), but she's writing really passionately, which is just hard to fake as scum.

I understand the second part a bit, but why does defending you make you think she's town? That always makes me uncomfortable.

My initial reaction to Raivann is that his flip flop is not as bad as people make it. I mean these posts in particular:

Raivann wrote: Call me a sucker, but I believe Kleedrac here. He seems to be genuinely pissed.

Raivann wrote:

unvote, Vote: Kleedrac

choo choo!. Someone made a good point about yeah he was pissed but that could just as easily come from scum

IMO, there is no inherent contradiction. If he had left it at this and given some reasons for why he finds Kleedrac suspicious I'd have accepted it. Instead, he says stuff like this:

Raivann wrote:

Smash Bros wrote: I find this post scummy. Because people doesn't agree with your view on RichardGHP"s claim, you basically decided to bandwagon, which is bull because it basically said you're refusing to support your top lynch candidate in favor of a lesser scummy, but more popular lynch candidate.

FoS: Raivann

Yup, that's basically what I'm doing
Let's see if we cant finish this game before 2011.
What do you find scummy about it?

Raivann wrote: I would rather we lynch Richard, but it doesn't seem to be going that way, so I hopped on popular wagon. Do I believe we have better chance of hiting scum with Richard lynch? Yes. But I'll go with the flow D1.

He's literally saying he wants to go with the flow. That's what scum want to do, not town. Very anti-town.

Mina wrote:

SSBF wrote:Has anyone played with him? If so, is this play style normal?

Not in the slightest. In the GoT mini, he made an effort to scumhunt, reread the thread and looked beyond the surface, pressured people, and came off as fairly genuine. His play was a little erratic, particularly right before his lynch on D2 (which also might have been alcohol-induced), but nowhere close to this bad. He certainly wasn't jumping on easy bandwagons and flip-flopping on suspects. I might be biased because I was scum in that game, though. Maybe you should ask Percy, Locke Lamora, or MacavityLock, since they suspected him in the mini.

This coupled with the above is enough to make Raivann a prime suspect. Assuming Kleedrac gets replaced with someone reasonable I could get behind a Raivann lynch, but I still think Kleedrac is scummier.



As I was reading the thread I noticed Benmage was posting a lot of smaller posts about things that were in my opinion not essential to finding scum. That's something I like to look for in a scum: trying to look active while contributing little. It can of course just be how some people like to post, and after briefly looking at Benmage in other games that may be the case here. In addition, his response is not unreasonable (apart from the personal insults at least). I'm neutral on him right now, although I'm still waiting for the mystery case on Drippereth.

For the record, I have a little experience on this site on an alt, but mostly I joined this game because I loved the books. Not that I think this is important or that I intend to use inexperience as a crutch, but since people keep bringing it up there it is.

Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote:

xvart wrote:Does I doubt It's recent poor argument change your opinion of him from only slightly suspicious to more suspicious or is your opinion of him the same?

My opinion on him is currently the same as before. I've already looked at his response to me at least twice.

Nothing to say? Not even to these?

I doubt it wrote:

Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote:Just want to make this clear to everyone. I am not defending Benmage, I am just trying to find faults with I doubt it's case on Benmage.

Why would you even say this? You're simultaneously defending him and distancing yourself from him. If either one of you flips scum, I bet the other one is too.

I doubt it wrote:What kind of a defense is "it didn't get in the way of scumhunting that much" anyway? This sounds like a bit more than just pointing out the flaws in my case.

I still think that's more than pointing out the flaws in my case.

I also agree with the point MacavityLock raised about SSBF needlessly defending himself from being accused of parroting. That's two different instances of being overly defensive, the one in the quote above and the one about the parroting. Why are you being so defensive SSBF?

I agree with LynchMePls that CMAR's instaneous unvote is strange and we need to hear from him. I'm going to have to look into the rest of the case when I have a bit more time.