Mini 2284: The Thing Anonymous [Day 2]

[Windows~]

If we do everyThing well and lim someThing correctly every day then noThing can stop us. We have to be ready for anyThing but someone seems to be suspiciously ready...

VOTE: MacReady

[Windows~]

I dislike Palmer and Clark(? I think) calling Copper out as being defensive. It seems to me more often a line scum use to dismiss town explaining themselves where if town stay silent then scum would say they have no defence... so it seems like a rhetorical argument rather than a valid point.

In and of itself that can also come from town who are assuming their target is scum rather than trying to convince others of it. But in Palmer's case this also rang suspicious to me: post 111 (not just that Palmer is okay with a wagon on a townread (123 I think explained that part okay) but the way he dismisses all his reads " I don't think any of my ideas are going to be >rand right now" which is like, yeah no shit, we're barely out of RVS. I don't think town feel the need to undermine their own posts in that way.

And while the explanation for the wagon stuff
post 123 in itself was okay I felt the second part of that post seemed to deliberately misunderstand Fuchs' point.


I'm also not convinced a town Blair posts his code so confidently especially with giving the answer to the first code. That to me feels more likely scum trying to appear to be town. Where's the "shit if town go with this and scum crack the code then this move will lose the game for town" sense of caution? Also I kinda feel someone genuinely trying it as town would more likely have checked the rules to confirm if it's okay or not.

VOTE: Blair

There are a few more things I want to comment on, will do after work.

[Windows~]

Responses to a couple of things, plus follow up to my earlier post:

Palmer:

In and of itself that can also come from town who are assuming their target is scum rather than trying to convince others of it. But in Palmer's case this also rang suspicious to me: post 111 (not just that Palmer is okay with a wagon on a townread (123 I think explained that part okay) but the way he dismisses all his reads " I don't think any of my ideas are going to be >rand right now" which is like, yeah no shit, we're barely out of RVS. I don't think town feel the need to undermine their own posts in that way.

The reason why I undermined my own reads was because I felt that, if I

don't

specifically spell that part out, someone is going to be a smartass and say "You claim you don't have a better target than Clark and are fine with his wagon, but you are voting Copper? Contradiction much?" and that would've been annoying.

Why would that be annoying? Because it draws attention to you?

How are Garry's and Norris' tones different than Windows'?

I legit found this post hilarious.


Blair:

I'm also not convinced a town Blair posts his code so confidently especially with giving the answer to the first code. That to me feels more likely scum trying to appear to be town.

what does this even mean

I was of the impression you were posting your code plan as a serious suggestion and the way you went about it plus the fact you did at all both didn't feel to me like something a townie was likely to do.

In a later post you said I missed the point, can you clarify what you meant by that? Was your code suggestion not a serious one?

VOTE: unvote

---
The minor other points I mentioned earlier were some mild concerns over Garry-McReady intereactions on page 3 or so.
Because Garry's 54 felt a bit like shifting the goalposts and 55 is fencesitting a bit. And I wondered about the timing of McReady voicing his townread of Garry in 57. However, I haven't felt pinged by either's posts since so I'm willing to write this one off as paranoia.

Now on to more interesting stuff:

[Windows~]

I'm tentatively willing to admit I was wrong about Blair, but still keen for Blair to clarify their intent with that code post.

I don't scumread anyone outside of Childs, Copper, Palmer and Nauls.

A few thoughts:

On Norris:

Norris has a playstyle which irks me and which seems likely to stir up more heat than light but which I've also found more likely to come from town, at least in the games I've played in. The copycat exchanges recently also give me that vibe. I want to find him scummy but I don't.

On Copper:

This seems a straight up contradiction?

Elaborate.

Gut and sheeping Lars.

Also this kind of trolling is really scummy imo.

Is it just gut and sheeping? or is Norris being really scummy?

On Clark vs Childs:

post 52 came across as a genuine explanation. 58 rang true too. And the new Clark is making a decent first impression.

Meanwhile I didn't like this post from Childs as this felt a bit like plagiarism of other people's criticisms of Clark. It's not bad to agree with others but it is a bit suspicious to pass it off as your own idea in lieu of actual scum hunting:

I was thinking about going for a Cooper vote but decided to pressure Clark, so far it doesn't seem like

he is willing to put something on the table

Could also be light distancing from Copper? "I was going to vote Copper but instead I'm voting someone else."

In addition, 50 and 74 from Childs are an interesting pairing for me - in 50 he calls Copper out as defensive but in 74 he's defensive himself. In fact I feel like that is a scumtell (projection, or something of that sort). I don't buy Childs' claim in 80 that 74 was a joke.

On Nauls:

In 155 Nauls calls out 74 as defensive, but from earlier discussion I would assume Nauls has noted that a charge of defensiveness in isolation isn't seen as a strong point. So at a stretch I think this could be a spot of distancing from Nauls if Childs is scum.

This post from Nauls feels possibly deliberately fencesitting on Clark.

I'm still conflicted on Clark, there are definitely odd things with his posting, but I also get the same general vibes I've gotten from awkward townies before. I'll probably need to look deeper into it. Not really leaning strongly any way there atm.

165 and 166 from Nauls also seem like projection - he calls 116
a possible chainsaw defence but isn't that what 165 could be - a defence of Palmer by attacking the person criticising Palmer?

The projection suspicions are arguably more tentatives so my reads at the moment go:

Other people
Blair
Nauls, Childs
Copper, Palmer

Pedit: ehh... maybe Palmer is a townie I'm just not on the same wavelength as.

VOTE: Copper

[Windows~]

I can see "Norris" dying and replacing someone in the roster as his strategy for this behavior, I didn't vote him right after that act because wey had'nt heard from Clark

On the flip side if he's town he's a pretty easy target for scum to assimilate. Alternate between snarky posts and copying other people's posts and no one would know the difference.

[Windows~]

Windows, do you have any thoughts on Lars?

I gave him a free pass for a bit because I enjoy playing with funny people and his entrance was quality:

I haven't seen it either. I heard it's based on the hit game Among Us.

VOTE: Windows

Also since then he seems to read me as town so clearly he is town himself.

(For clarity, that's not a reason I read him as town, but nor do I think he's going out of his way to try to pocket me.)

I read him as town for posts like
post 169 and post 196 which both seem like genuine attempts to solve.

And while I disagree with his view of Norris's behaviour in
post 258 I do feel like Lars believes what he's saying here.

199 is the only post that seems like it could be made from informed minority perspective:

I do agree with that. I think if Norris is town then that vote looks pretty bad. I'm giving it a pass for now because I don't think Norris is town.

But that single post doesn't outweigh the other posts mentioned, so I lean town on Lars.

[Windows~]

165 and 166 from Nauls also seem like projection - he calls 116
a possible chainsaw defence but isn't that what 165 could be - a defence of Palmer by attacking the person criticising Palmer?

This is nonsensical to me. I disagreed with an argument someone made calling someone else scum, therefore it’s odd for me to theorize on a potential chainsaw defense??
and this is all implying that I’m scrutinizing my own posts for possible negative interpretations of them, which I happen not to be doing because yknow, I’m a townie.
I’m seriously confused as to how this is an actual point being made.

I'm not implying scum are scrutinising their posts (though they may be). My theory is more like:
1. Scum are somewhat aware of dubious things they're doing
2. That awareness means they're more likely to notice townies doing the same dubious things
3. Therefore someone calling out someone else for a dubious behaviour they're also engaging in is more likely to be scum than if they weren't doing the same thing

I suppose it could be boiled down to 'hypocrisy is scummy'.

In terms of your post it was specifically this line which felt like a subtle attack on the person attacking Palmer:

Maybe you're scum or maybe you just have a different outlook than them on the game, if it's the latter then I urge you to reconsider.

---

I agree with Lars calling out Palmer's response to my earlier post. Not just for sheeping but also this claim I was looking for a gotcha on Copper:

Also, the "this is a contradiction from Copper!" is a horrible point in 242. It feels like desperately trying to fish out a gotcha

Copper went from "mostly a gutread" to "this kind of behaviour is really scummy" in literally 2 minutes, you don't see a contradiction there?

Cooper tries to justify this but I don't buy it:

I had not quite finished my backread when responding to Bennings, Norris started getting really trolly on page 8 which I didn't read during the "sheeping" comment, the "trolling" comment came after I read everything.

You finished the backread in the 2 minutes between those posts?

And the "we're not even on page 10" sounds like you were caught up:

Opportunistic how? It's mostly a gutread but we're not even on page 10.

"I forgot to mention the scumminess of the posting style" is an explanation I could have bought but "I was still rereading" I don't think fits with that timeline.

[Windows~]

Also since then he seems to read me as town so clearly he is town himself.

(For clarity, that's not a reason I read him as town, but nor do I think he's going out of his way to try to pocket me.)

Why did you feel the need to strikethrough and clarify?

The strikethrough was for humorous effect.
I was going to leave it as that. But then I remembered some people took my opening post too seriously so I thought I should clarify my position here.

[Windows~]

I don't know how I feel about the fact that Windows just listed the posts of Lars that I consider the worst from him, and then called them genuine attempts to solve.

And something about Windows' joke-reason to townread Lars feels really forced, though I guess I might be conf-biasing here.

You said Lars shouldn't be pushing Norris early but should basically just let him be. I don't see why scum are more likely to push Norris in the way Lars did than town though? Especially in an anonymous game where meta doesn't factor into it?

[Windows~]

You finished the backread in the 2 minutes between those posts?

I don't see a problem, no? Norris' trolling is on the same page as Bennings' question. It doesn't take a lot of time to read Norris' trolling and feel it's scummy and want to comment on it. Those sort of things happen to me as town a lot, so I can see it coming from a town perspective.

I feel like if that were the case either the earlier post or the later one would be phrased differently. Like the second post might have begun "and since then" as an additional reason to stick with the vote rather than "also" which connects it back as a justification for the original vote.

[Windows~]

[p=13544901#p13544901]post 281[/url], Windows~"]You finished the backread in the 2 minutes between those posts?

I don't see a problem, no? Norris' trolling is on the same page as Bennings' question. It doesn't take a lot of time to read Norris' trolling and feel it's scummy and want to comment on it. Those sort of things happen to me as town a lot, so I can see it coming from a town perspective.[/quote]

I feel like if that were the case either the earlier post or the later one would be phrased differently. Like the second post might have begun "and since then" as an additional reason to stick with the vote rather than "also" which connects it back as a justification for the original vote.[/quote]
This feels like further nitpicking into obscurity. The post seems fine to me, even in the context of "additional reason to stick with the vote".[/quote]

I'm keen to hear other people's views on this. Palmer thinks I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, I think it's really not plausible for Copper's explanation to shift the way it did if genuine. Where do other's stand?

[Windows~]

Sorry about the messed up quotes but you get the idea

[Windows~]

Or maybe these are three town wagons and the things don't give two shits about pushing town wagons when there's no threat for them. But I dunno.

I think there will always be more resistance on a scum wagon because the bussing incentives don't exist in this game - you can't really get towncred in a game where scum can jump into townread slots. So there's no incentive to bus your teammates to look good because looking good isn't useful.

On the flip side there IS incentive to hard defend your teammates for shitty reasons because associatives don't help as much when you can just jump out of your own body if your teammate gets flipped - you don't have to worry about looking bad

I'd say this is only partially true because I think it might be harder for Things to get away with assimilating undetected than you're assuming here. But I like that you're considering how the game dynamics affect scum motivation, that post feels towny to me.

[Windows~]

Windows stonks go down because really that was just grasping at straws.

And like, as the person that he is suspecting, I get that the natural reaction to what feels like a bad push on you is this, there is just the question of why would he even need to be grasping at straws as scum to push you here.

At the time there was no wagon higher then 4 votes, and there were 3 total wagons with 3-4 votes.

With 3 different medium sized wagons, and 0 near-critical wagons, it is hard to imagine that scum!Windows was in a position where he was so desperate to get you miseliminated that he felt the need to be "grasping at straws." Just makes a lot more sense to me that it is a townie who is genuinely thinks that you are scum.

If scum sees what they think is a contradiction or a potential gotcha on a townie, they won’t think “ehhh actually there’s no urgency so I just won’t call this out”, they’ll still call it out. The current gamestate is pretty meaningless, scum will almost always call out something that will push their agenda.
Also I’m pretty sure Fuchs just straight up knows that Copper is a townie here

The 'grasping at straws' comment reads to me like whatever the tell is for when scum feel like they've been caught for the wrong reasons.

Copper's other posts since then don't give me reason to move my vote elsewhere:

Honestly I’m not the biggest fan of the votes that have piled onto Norris, but Norris also hasn’t given me any reason to feel any better about them than before.

Yeah I'm getting LHF vibes

Doesn't seem like genuine LHF town and more like scum trolling to look like LHF. Subtle difference.

Just restating their "Norris's trolling is scummy" point.

Or maybe these are three town wagons and the things don't give two shits about pushing town wagons when there's no threat for them. But I dunno.

Possible but I'm like 95% sure there is at least one scum between those 3 wagons. imo it's Norris.

Including their own wagon in the count, I don't know how to read that. Compared to "I'm 95% sure there's scum in one of the other two wagons". I'm trying not to be tunnelled here but gut feel is this feels off from how a towny would say it. Also maybe there's an element of "look I'm agreeing to people choosing among the three of us" which to my mind means if Copper is scum both Norris and Clark are likely town since I think if Copper were buddied with either of them it would be more tempting to agree with the "maybe all three are town" angle.

I think windows is town for this post

ebwop

Put my comment in the middle of the quote lol

Elaborate.

"Elaborate" isn't bad in itself but it's like, a lazy way to contribute. If Copper's other posts recently offered more then this wouldn't seem suspicious but it feels to me like scum skating by without doing much.

[Windows~]

Like it was pretty clear in my post, the reason I don’t want Clark voted isn’t because of you, it’s because we could get fucked over pretty hard, especially considering the game’s most important mechanic.

Something else that at least needs to be taken into consideration, is that this game may involve power roles. So if someone is run up to E-1 and claims a useful power role then that is extra temptation for scum to quickhammer.
I wonder if we should declare intent to vote, if someone is E-2, and if they are E-2 with two people declaring intent then they claim?

[Windows~]

Something I noticed while rereading Copper's iso (ironically to see if I actually am being over-suspicious):

Elaborate.

Gut and sheeping

Lars

.

OK Norris is scummy, scummier than Garry.
VOTE: Norris

Can these actually be explained? They don't actually mean anything to me right now.

Garry = tone, Nauls and Lars seem to be trying pretty hard to solve even this early and that's +town imo, Windows mostly on tone, Norris on tone and sheeping my townread

Nauls

.

Prediction: if Copper is a Thing, Lars and Nauls are both town.

[Windows~]

I don't think Clark is scum. Off-the-hip gut read.

Looking back at your iso, the last time you said anything about clark's alignment was this back on page 4

Interesting. A Copper-Clark scumteam would explain why it's been hard to get traction with the Copper wagon if scum have been hoping to shift things onto Norris earlier and/or myself more recently.

I had a good first impression of the new Clark's posts right after replacing in but agree that she's not really done anything since.

Though, that's a caveat for me: would someone replace into a scum-read slot and do this little to shake attention elsewhere? It seems a little surprising?

Though then again I guess it would be a little surprising regardless of their alignment. Just surprising passivity to replace in and basically potter around but NAI I guess.

At any rate, I agree Clark should claim.

[Windows~]

Hmm. Reminder to self to post the thought I just had, once it can safely be posted without potentially helping scum.

[Windows~]

Nauls and Fuchs TvT 90%.

I found something I agree with Cooper about!

[Windows~]

Hi friends!

Just letting you know that y'all should be tracking posting times from various folks.

Now, granted! Won't help for everyone since people like me talk for like 16 hours per day, buuuuuut, you should be tracking both the TIMES they post and what day of the WEEK they post AT those times. (For instance I can post 12 hours apart on some different days but the days that're 12 pm are usually always the same and the days that're 12 am are usually always the same, as an example.)

If someone's posting time changes overnight, probably scum!

Tbh I think the mechanic while fascinating won't actually be used by the scum for exactly that reason; too easy to get caught because this isn't the same rl environment of an epicmafia 'guiser.

Still tho, worth checking out just in case some scum's stupid enough to try.

Anyway, reading now!

If they were stupid enough to try they aren't going to be stupid enough to try now you've pointed it out... I don't see the town motivation for posting this now rather than say sometime in D2.

[Windows~]

If they were stupid enough to try they aren't going to be stupid enough to try now you've pointed it out... I don't see the town motivation for posting this now rather than say sometime in D2.

it limits scum options because now they have to think about this

similar to how nauls (i think it was nauls) commented about not voting on E-2 limits scum options, which I think was a much townier way of the whole "i don't want to put someone to E-1" train of thought than what fuchs did originally

Telling everyone not to vote on E-2 avoids us falling into a scum trap where they can quickhammer with lower costs than usual.

Telling everyone to check timestamps avoids scum falling into a town trap where they post at their usual times and we catch them because of it.

Both take away options from scum, I agree, but the first takes away a good option for scum and the second takes away a bad option for scum.

also to follow up on this, why would scum even write this in the thread, then? feels nitpicky to say it's not town motivated but not see that it's also very difficult for it to be scum motivated?

I see it as potentially a "look I'm helping us to make good plans as town" sort of thing. Easy way to try to appear helpful.

---

In other news I'm doubtful of Clark's claim (on p-edit I see Bennings said what I was going to, that claiming a decent PR and going silent after doesn't feel like it comes from town.

And I'm not keen to delay to test it given she could assimilate away if scum (making bolder fakeclaims less risky). Plus, testing the claim would also involve outing another PR. That all sounds like extra motive for scum to fake claim a role like this.

There's also the risk of a gambit where scum-someone confirms being jailkept by Clark to confirm scum-Clark.

So yeah, I feel ready to vote Clark, but I do want to give Norris, Lars, Garry and Copper a chance to comment first though.

[Windows~]

Wow lots has happened.

I don't see why Childs thinks their role confirms Clark as town but I feel like scum fakeclaiming to help their buddy actually would be less likely to say that rather than just propose their plan for testing Clark's role. Like it seems like pushing their luck too boldly?

So while it's not impossible they're buddies, to me Childs-Clark is T-S or T-T. But as I mentioned before I think the JK claim was just a scummy attempt to fish for town PRs. And oh look it worked.

If I were town JK and someone had just outed themselves to help save me I feel like I'd be reacting a little differently here than Clark has. She's not even trying to push a different lim today. Just seems too passive for town in this situation.

In addition I also think it likely if Clark really were town that scum would've fake counter-claimed. So for me lack of counter claim to a strong PR claim also points to Clark scum.

VOTE: Clark

(I also agree with Fuchs and MacReady that this proposed test is too unreliable in this game setup in any case. And that will likely be the case with other plans in future so other PRs should think twice before claiming in future.)

[Windows~]

VOTE: Unvote

Sorry thought Norris had posted. We should ideally get his thoughts on record also before ending the day.

[Windows~]

If successful assimilation is as hard as you make it sound - "nigh impossible" - doesn't that mean the JK plus vig combo is at best "borderline balanced" in this game also?

[Windows~]

If we lim Clark, Clark flips jk, then Childs gets nked or assimilated and is vigi... what do we do?

I don't particularly believe Clark's claim but I'm kind of scared of that scenario where we enter day 2 down 8v3 down 2 prs.

But I guess holding back from a good lim because of a JK claim from someone about to be hammered is giving scum a free pass to fakeclaim as they wish. So maybe we just lim Clark and cross our fingers.

I agree in this setup vig is definitely more double edged but excitedly over-estimating its utility is a towntell I think? The drunk on power, "I'm a great scum hunter and now I can take down my suspects at my whim!" sort of vibe.

[Windows~]

@Copper, you were saying you don't scumread Clark before she claimed. Is that still the case now?

[Windows~]

I think that you might be right.
I'm starting to feel like Copper is improving in my reads.

VOTE: Clark

[Windows~]

Huh. Didn't mean to quote that post

[Windows~]

If I do write a super cool diary entry tomorrow plz kill me

[Windows~]

faking a guilty is one of those things i would love to do in this game because you can always abandon your slot after the fact. I also felt kind of susp of Palmer on day one to begin with - I think there is a good chance the convo between Palmer and Clark at beginning of day was badly done scum theatre

I hope Childs is town because Palmer needs shooting after I flip town.
For those who aren't me (I know I'm town) is it likely town cop investigates someone who is under suspicion from D1 and therefore a reasonable possibility of assimilating away? Compared with getting an inno on someone more likely to still be themselves today?

[Windows~]

I'm VT by the way. Sorry Palmer if you were trying to fish for another town PR with this gambit.

[Windows~]

On one hand, day 1 I town read windows and scum read palmer.

On the other hand, this seems like a really dumb play for scum palmer to make unless we are saying the scum team was exactly Lars+Palmer, and Lars scum was confident in their ability to impersonate Childs.

But even then, Windows does not feel like the go to target to fake a guilty on given how scum read he was Day 1.

They're just trying to rush a guilty through I think? In the knowledge Childs won't kill Palmer because Lars is Childs.

And actually taking out the vig by assimilating into them makes sense if they think they can rush the guilty through before Lars has to try too hard to pretend to be Childs.

It means after one of them is limmed tomorrow they're 6v1 on D4. That's not great, but consider that if one of them got limmed today they'd be 8v1 tomorrow. Or 7v1 if we directed the vig shot to kill one of them

[Windows~]

faking a guilty is one of those things i would love to do in this game because you can always abandon your slot after the fact. I also felt kind of susp of Palmer on day one to begin with - I think there is a good chance the convo between Palmer and Clark at beginning of day was badly done scum theatre

I hope Childs is town because Palmer needs shooting after I flip town.
For those who aren't me (I know I'm town) is it likely town cop investigates someone who is under suspicion from D1 and therefore a reasonable possibility of assimilating away? Compared with getting an inno on someone more likely to still be themselves today?

I'm VT by the way. Sorry Palmer if you were trying to fish for another town PR with this gambit.

Why did neither of these come with a Palmer vote?

I just saw all this and was scrambling to get my thoughts posted before I got limmed since I saw people throwing votes on me already.

I doubt I survive today, because I don't think it would be smart play from the rest of town - if the guilty was on someone other than me I'd be in favour of limming them first and Palmer second. Even if it's a scum gambit it's not one that gets them very far, so it's like giving up material to simplify into a won endgame in chess.

But yeah VOTE: Palmer obviously

[Windows~]

It's the only thing that makes sense to me.
Otherwise it just seems even worse of a gambit if Palmer gets shot tonight.

[Windows~]

Also for those of you who believe Palmer how do you explain the nightkill? It would be pretty dumb of me to kill Lars since he was townreading me. Definitely more so than some others

[Windows~]

This is only true, if were are judging from the POV of knowing your alignment.

I mean, fair.

But like.

I have a vig shot, and I wasn't assimilated.

I know I was wrong on D1, but ironically that I WAS wrong is probably all the proof you need that I

started

town. You can technically argue that I was trying to save Clarke with my own claim but like--I literally claimed a confirmable role. I'm still alive today. That means I, as scum, would be forced to "prove" it at some point, and eventually, be unable to.

Are you saying you being alive today is proof you're town?

[Windows~]

This post also does not make me feel better about childs

It should; I literally fucking claimed flavor for my role that I didn't claim at all D1.

My vig is a flamethrower.

Point me to where I said that D1 because I'm pretty damn sure I didn't say what my flavor was D1.

How does you throwing in flavour today make it any more likely you're town? Scum!you can lie about flavour and who's going to disprove it?

[Windows~]

Assuming unreliable cops are too bastard to be in this setup it's definitely 50-50 between me and Palmer.
Palmer Childs is a possible scumteam but me Childs isn't as likely.
Childs is town if Palmer is town.

Trying my best to be objective here: it's best for us to lim Palmer first. Because then if Palmer is scum we've killed scum. Whereas if Palmer is town Childs is town and can vig me. Either way, one more scum is dead by D3.
Whereas if we lim me first and Palmer is scum with Childs, we go into D3 without any more scum dead.

[Windows~]

Also for those of you who believe Palmer how do you explain the nightkill? It would be pretty dumb of me to kill Lars since he was townreading me. Definitely more so than some others

Why do you think Lars died?

People who believe Palmer is town believe I'm scum. So I'm assuming they believe Lars was killed because if I were scum with Lars I'd have been more likely to assimilate than Lars.

[Windows~]

Assuming unreliable cops are too bastard to be in this setup it's definitely 50-50 between me and Palmer.
Palmer Childs is a possible scumteam but me Childs isn't as likely.
Childs is town if Palmer is town.

Trying my best to be objective here: it's best for us to lim Palmer first. Because then if Palmer is scum we've killed scum. Whereas if Palmer is town Childs is town and can vig me. Either way, one more scum is dead by D3.
Whereas if we lim me first and Palmer is scum with Childs, we go into D3 without any more scum dead.

This feels like you copy and pasted my argument, reworded it, and forgot to credit me.

Plagiarism is a crime Windows.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

(Yes I'm aware you said much the same earlier but I feel like that was several pages ago and I wanted to re-state the situation. I know I'm not scum with Childs so I don't want us to risk the less optimal route where a Palmer-Childs team can sneak by for longer.)

[Windows~]

Why do you, Windows, think Lars died?
Given that from your POV that you're town

Honestly my brain today has been caught up in the "why did scum!Palmer fakeclaim with a fake guilty on me?" puzzle so I haven't thought as much about the "Why did Lars die?" puzzle.
Off the top of my head, in maybe this order:

Scum thought Lars might be a power role and/or
Scum didn't like his reads and/or
Scum wanted to avoid protective targets and/or
Scum wanted to make town drown in confusion and wifom and/or
The assimilation power sounded so cool Lars just couldn't resist trying it out and/or
Scum didn't like Lars's avatar

[Windows~]

Assimilation does not grant a thing access to the previous player's role information or night actions. Any private messages sent to or from the previous occupant would be wiped.

Palmer seems so sure, yet is so wrong. It makes no sense to me.

Honestly I feel like petapan might have slipped an unreliable cop in here. It would only barely be bastard given this theme and setup. I want to believe Childs and Palmer are scumbuddies but I just don't.

VOTE: Copper who's dipped out of the whole of today and was my scumread yesterday.

[Windows~]

Not sure why that post got quoted there but hey ho.

[Windows~]

It's wild to me that you're going with 'unreliable town cop' Palmer over 'scum Palmer'

To be fair it's a choice between "unreliable town cop Palmer" and "scum Palmer plus scum Childs". And aside from Palmer's claim on me I see them both as town.

[Windows~]

Miller seems even more bastardly than unreliable cop?

But having a full sane cop in this game seems hard to balance though.

Anyhow no point dragging the day out now that we're pretty sure Childs wasn't assimilated.

VOTE: Windows

Childs if you're town please vig Palmer tonight, my townflip will prove Palmer's scum.

[Windows~]

This day has been super interesting as a reaction test but it is now time for me to reveal the proof that Palmer's claim to have a guilty is a lie. I was hoping not to have to out my role but,

I am a

0.5-shot rolecop

The flavour gist of my power role is that, as my character is a radio operator I can send and receive information so I can find out about other players, but because our reception is so poor I can only make out every second letter of the message I receive.

(This is in contrast to the television aerials who got married - their wedding was nice enough, but their reception was fantastic!
(Apparently for their honeymoon they went across the Channel.
(Married life didn't suit them though, they got into a fight in a bar, about whether VHF or UHF is better. They were both band.
(Now they've split up - she's kept the house, he's gone to live with his Aunt Anna.
(She makes him his favourite sandwiches - tuner.
(I heard he's now dating a satellite receiver. He says she's quite a dish.))))))

Anyhow, last night I investigated Palmer and got back the following result:

*h*n*

This proves that Palmer is either a Thing, or a Phony, or a river (either the Rhone or the Rhine). Possibly even a Thong. But definitely not a one shot cop, or I would have received *n*s*o*c*p. Or o*e*h*t*o* depending which ear I was listening with at the time.

So, time to vote out Palmer.

VOTE: Palmer