RIP Golden. That was painful to watch. We lost a huge asset today, both role and player. I voiced my opinion late into Night 1 that I thought it seemed very unlike your mafia game, despite having to inevitably still put you in the "very slight mafia" category, and would have very likely fought to go a different direction today. Going into the Day, I would have almost certainly argued to vote Long Con, since I've been feeling OK enough about Metalmarsh and Russtifinko. However, Long Con really produced today, and Russtifinko did not, so... in the end, I would have gone with Russtifinko, although he is far from my top suspect by any means, assuming there was no tie. Otherwise, I suppose I would have voted for Metalmarsh, though I wouldn't have wanted to at all. Golden, perhaps you can take comfort in that your death was very much like politics, with the masses selecting what they saw as the lesser of various terrible options. Or maybe not. :P Nonetheless, I'm really going to miss your insight.
I was
very disheartened when I saw that Nite Owl II (most likely), or Nite Owl I (less likely), or Moloch (????) used the ability to shrink the poll options to four today. IMO, it was an incredibly poor move, especially coming off of the lynch of a talkative mafia on D1, where analyzing all players today would have been optimal. I also do not think the four players selected were chosen well, and I think that all four very well could be civilians. Oh well.
I very strongly suggest we analyze players' interactions with Sloonei going into D3, but I realize that it is difficult when phases are only 24 hours, and obviously everyone has RL, and the thread has been talkative. Believe it or not, I'm busy myself.
I'm more than willing to be analyzed and subjected to questioning, since I understand there are those of you who find my actions questionable. I can understand why. Nonetheless, I want to respond to those posts and require some further explanation, since I don't fully understand the accusations.
I will thus first focus on discussion with Long Con and G-Man, the two players who seemed to throw around heat in my direction toDay. I will then respond to a few posts made by others, then provide an updated rainbow list with my accompanied thoughts.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Discussion with Long Con
Alright,
Long Con, I have just a few questions for you. It's refreshing to see you active this Day period. Missed having you on Day 1.
Long Con wrote:Scotty wrote:LC, since you've caught up a bit, do you have any suspicions on anyone?
Yes, I suspect Bass, Lorab, Elohcin, and Golden. They're my top four right now, but I'm only caught up to when you asked this question. Maybe later in this post I'll change for some reason. Read on and see!
Are those players you listed here still your top four suspicions? Well, top three since Golden is now gone...
Can you elaborate upon those suspicions? I'm not entirely clear on your thoughts.
Long Con wrote:So, I will have to go to work in a short time, and won't be back until after the lynch is up. Here's my Rainbow list for today's lynch: Golden, Russtifinko, Metalmarsh, Long Con. Sorry, Golden, but the limited options... you're my only suspicion of the four candidates.
*vote Golden*
Here is your Rainbow List of the four on the poll. Do you feel comfortable making such a list for more or all of the players? I'm intrigued where your thoughts lie across the board.
You also said:
G-Man wrote:DharmaHelper wrote:MP wrote:Speaking of DharmaHelper, can you elaborate on any of the reads you have made just yet, or are you still forming them? I've noted what you've said thus far, but I'm a bit unclear on whom you're considering for your vote at the moment.
I am not sure what to think of Scotty, personally. Something about him is giving me pings, but I don't feel comfortable right now voting for him, since it's 100% a gut read and I'd have a hard time building a case around it.
The crowd you asked about originally (Llama, DDL, G-Man, etc) have my eye as well, and I'd maybe put a vote in there. I still haven't gotten to the sloonei thing yet, so I don't know too much about that. Timmer's self vote is frustrating but I feel like there's enough discussion to put a vote somewhere else.
My read on you is kind of odd. You are way too agreeable and friendly, for one thing, like you're afraid to ruffle feathers and you want to get on everyone's good side. Your massive posts also skeeve me out. You are reminding me of me, when I'm bad and I want to take the leadership role in the thread.
Intriguing observation. Especially considering MP's absolving himself from voting Sloonei and then tacking a mid-to-late vote on Scotty to bring him within one vote of Sloonei and tied with Niju.
Agreed on this one, MP is on my suspicion list as well. Fantastic Day 1 lynch, to see such close margins and still get a baddie![/quote]
What exactly is it you suspect me for? I can guess what you agree with here, but I am not entirely sure what you find of my behavior that is suspect, and what you would want me to respond to.
Are there any specific concerns or questions you wish for me to address?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Discussion with G-Man
Now for
G-Man. First, I want to say that I very much look forward to your Day 1 and Day 2 vote analysis. I think that's a great idea. I miss your technicolor lists already.
I want to ask
everyone: Am I the only one that got a hostile vibe from some of G-Man's posts today, notably the ones directed towards me? I can't discern whether it's because G-Man dislikes the way I play or whether he is being manipulative or if he is just feeling salty for whatever other reason and it's leaking through into his diction.
G-Man, I had to chop up your posts since I didn't want to spoiler them in bulk, since they were large. Hope that's OK.
G-Man wrote:Hey hey, back from the campground. Still catching up but I'm on Page 12, where the vote deadline looms eminent. Very interesting to read through. Here are some thoughts and observations:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Scotty wrote:I'm still combing through 5 more pages to respond to, and I will, but for now, I'm voting Ehlo. Someone asked if DDL seemed "comfortable" and I don't really know what that means in respect to DDL because no one was really suspecting him. But ehlo's recent response seems comfortable and jokey, and it's standing out to me right now.
I also do not find anything Sloonei doing in this game different than the last game. Granted, I don't know if he was civ in that game, but it also doesn't ping me.
Can you explain why you think this makes her mafia?
Can you answer my question, when you get a chance, about whether Metalmarsh's behavior being unhelpful makes him mafia or not? You've made quite a few comments saying that regarding him, but made no issuance of whether you suspected him or not, or anything like that.
Your questions to Scotty are lose-lose questions. Perhaps he simply finds MM's unhelpful behavior frustrating. You seem to be asking him to make a judgement call on MM based off of one aspect of his play. That's an unfair question. You can be frustrated with someone's behavior while still feeling neutral about them. I'm going to keep an eye out for other poor questions from MP.
How are they lose-lose questions? I was asking for clarification. I did not understand why Scotty kept going on about Metalmarsh's behavior being "unhelpful" if he wasn't going to commit to a read on Metalmarsh. Likewise, I didn't understand his suspicion of Elo at all, and still don't, and it felt like to me he was inconsistent and going after an easy target. So I asked for clarification as to how his observations made Elo suspect/mafia, not just odd or ironic.
How is my question regarding MM "unfair"?
Sure, of course, someone can be frustrated while feeling neutral, but that's why I asked Scotty -- he seemed to really keep harping on MM being unhelpful, and I didn't understand how Scotty was viewing MM.
It's almost like you're angry at me here for asking questions, trying to have Scotty explain his views. Scotty spent most of Day 1 not committing to civilian or mafia reads, so I was trying to get him to do so, or at least, explain why he had no such reads.
G-Man wrote:Hey hey, back from the campground. Still catching up but I'm on Page 12, where the vote deadline looms eminent. Very interesting to read through. Here are some thoughts and observations:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Bass_the_Clever wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:Bass_the_Clever wrote:I'm going to go ahead and vote Scotty. His buddying up to MP pinged me at first. MP pointed out that Scotty has been part of the discussion with out throwing out any of his own suspects. He also made a big deal about me voting late in B.O.B and he has yet to vote so I found that odd.
What do you think of his Elo vote, now that he has voted?
I really don't understand why he would vote that way when he said he was looking at people who weren't posting. Elo has posted more the LC so why not vote LC.
I agree. I think you're onto something, Bass.
I think Scotty's Elo vote seems disingenuous. I actually am leaning toward casting my vote there.
His vote is super weak reasoning to me, like he had to come up with SOME reason to justify a vote:
Scotty wrote:I'm still combing through 5 more pages to respond to, and I will, but for now, I'm voting Ehlo. Someone asked if DDL seemed "comfortable" and I don't really know what that means in respect to DDL because no one was really suspecting him. But ehlo's recent response seems comfortable and jokey, and it's standing out to me right now.
I also do not find anything Sloonei doing in this game different than the last game. Granted, I don't know if he was civ in that game, but it also doesn't ping me.
Hence why I asked him to elaborate
here.
He doesn't even say why "comfortable and jokey" from Elo makes her likely to be a member of the mafia. He says it's "standing out", but again, how does that mean he is casting his vote for someone that he thinks is bad?
Even further, he makes no mention of Elo being a low poster as the reason for his vote, which I find odd, since he called her out for being a low poster, and
here he emphasizes he is focusing on no shows.
Combine that with the fact that he kept harping on MM being "unhelpful", which is something I've done in past games as a mafia to try to take advantage of his unconventional playstyle, yet refusing to issue an issue of suspicion on him, and I'm really starting to suspect Scotty.
I'm starting to worry about you, MP. This sudden "a-ha" moment on Scotty feels forced and flimsy. I feel like I understood what Scotty was trying to say about Elo's demeanor. Either you're overthinking things far too much or you're trying to manufacture a case against Scotty.
Forced and flimsy? How so?
You understood? Can you elaborate then? Because I still don't understand the point he was trying to make. Maybe you can elucidate the matter for me then.
Why is my behavior explained by only those two scenarios? Which scenario do you think is more likely? Because, as you continue posting throughout the Day, it seems you more and more heavily imply the latter, as if you already knew the answer to your own set of two scenarios.
G-Man wrote:Page 13:
Russtifinko wrote:
There's a case on Scotty? I think I missed it. Anyone with a reminder or link to the case?
MP, your policy of underlining names to direct things to people is super helpful, btw.
I found the "case" on Scotty to be weak (at least MP's justification for voting Scotty). I'll have to go back and look for any potential buddying up to MP though.
You find my thoughts on Scotty to be weak. That's more than fair. What other thoughts did you find weak on Day 1? Any?
Did you ever go back and look for the buddying? If so, what did you find?
G-Man wrote:
MP criticized a few people who voted Sloonei because something felt off about him and they could not put it into words to MP's liking. Two of those people have experience playing with Sloonei in the past I believe (Dragon and espers), so I find MP's criticism to be weak. We put forth reasons for why he did not suspect Sloonei without it feeling like a defense- I would think an experienced player like MP would know how to do that effectively. As of right now, I suspect MP of being Sloonei's teammate. He ran with early suspicion but indirectly defended Sloonei with posts explaining why his suspicion of Sloonei broke down. He went into detail and going into detail is a sneaky way to be persuasive without being obvious about it. I'm watching you, bro.
Quotes, ASAP, please. Where did I criticize people?
I'm more than willing to admit that I wasn't able to pull the trigger on my suspicion of Sloonei. That much should be clear.
I always go into detail as much as I can about anything I do. It's called transparency. You know me well.
Am I your top pick for a teammate of Sloonei? If so, why? If not, who is?
G-Man wrote:Scotty wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:I agree. I think you're onto something, Bass.
I think Scotty's Elo vote seems disingenuous. I actually am leaning toward casting my vote there.
His vote is super weak reasoning to me, like he had to come up with SOME reason to justify a vote:
Scotty wrote:I'm still combing through 5 more pages to respond to, and I will, but for now, I'm voting Ehlo. Someone asked if DDL seemed "comfortable" and I don't really know what that means in respect to DDL because no one was really suspecting him. But ehlo's recent response seems comfortable and jokey, and it's standing out to me right now.
I also do not find anything Sloonei doing in this game different than the last game. Granted, I don't know if he was civ in that game, but it also doesn't ping me.
Hence why I asked him to elaborate
here.
He doesn't even say why "comfortable and jokey" from Elo makes her likely to be a member of the mafia. He says it's "standing out", but again, how does that mean he is casting his vote for someone that he thinks is bad?
Even further, he makes no mention of Elo being a low poster as the reason for his vote, which I find odd, since he called her out for being a low poster, and
here he emphasizes he is focusing on no shows.
Combine that with the fact that he kept harping on MM being "unhelpful", which is something I've done in past games as a mafia to try to take advantage of his unconventional playstyle, yet refusing to issue an issue of suspicion on him, and I'm really starting to suspect Scotty.
Here's the skivvy. Bass said I was buddying up with MP early on for giving an agreement on day 1 philosophies. Then I went to work. While I was away, Bass asked me why I haven't voted yet (that was weird btw). I got back at 8, didn't realize the poll ended at 9, so I tried to read through the 6 pages I missed, still answering now, though had to throw my strongest suspicion out early before the poll ended.
"he makes no mention of Elo being a low poster as the reason for his vote, which I find odd, since he called her out for being a low poster," I thought I did do that, by pointing out Elo's hypocritical rhetoric of being a low poster.
MP, you had all day to take a position on someone, you had your pretty rainbow lists, and yet in the last 30 minutes when I didn't have enough time to explain myself, you jump on this logic? THAT is suspicious.
"Combine that with the fact that he kept harping on MM being "unhelpful", which is something I've done in past games as a mafia to try to take advantage of his unconventional playstyle"
I don't know what his conventional playstyle is. How can I take advantage of that? MM is a conundrum. At a gut read, I don't trust him because he STILL hasn't answered why he even mentioned that he got something from Day 0 PMs, and he's still playing that vague playstyle that COULD be good or COULD be bad.
linki;
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Scotty, don't sweat it. I can empathize. I'm sorry I voted for you today suddenly (well, only if you're mafia, but either way I hate voting someone out of nowhere on Day 1), but I wasn't feeling too confident in any of my reads, and your vote pinged me pretty bad. I really look forward to hearing what you have to contribute later on, if you do survive.
Then why did you do it. Out of all the cases, you chose to vote for me because you suddenly had a realization in the last few minutes? My case for Elo is far more substantiated with my viewpoints on Day 1 than your case for me
I feel like this post by Scotty is pretty solid.
Why?
G-Man wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:Scotty wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:Nice picture, Llama!
Scotty, my bad, didn't realize you were unfamiliar with the terminology. OMGUS and NO U are essentially the same. OMGUS stands for "Oh My God You Suck", which was popularized in the greater mafia community, whereas NO U tended to be what was always used in my mafia history. It refers to when you respond to a case against you by turning around and suspecting the player that accused you, and is generally seen to be a desperate or suspicious tactic, particularly if the content of the rebuttal is suspect.
Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.
I'm turning on you in the past few minutes because of the manner of which you voted me. I'm not suspecting/OMGUS/NO U for Bass, because he's been actively attempting to come after me, which I think is a notable civ move. It's the wrong civ move, because I think his argument centered around "buddying" around you is rather weak (though it is Day 1. Everything's gonna be bloody weak). You've been waffling on GMan all day, and I guess were willing to latch onto whoever seemed the most tunneled. THAT seems like mafia behavior, tbh.
Ah, have to respond to this first, then I'm gone.
You know what seems like mafia behavior?
Spending all of Day 1 waiting. Waiting to see if anyone would no show. Not issuing a single affirmative opinion about any other player, despite posting considerably. Then voting for Elo, over an even lower poster, because of a "jokey" post and apparently because she ironically is one of the lower posters in the thread despite wanting to vote out low posters. Never explaining how that makes her mafia. Never explaining your thought process with transparency. Never answering my questions. Never explaining if you think Metalmarsh's behavior as "unhelpful" makes him either civilian or mafia. You still refuse to do that. Then you turn on me at the last minute merely because I caught onto your incredibly weak vote and explained all of this as to why I suspect you?
I didn't "latch" onto anything. If you think you were the most tunneled player on Day 1, you are severely mistaken.
I definitely think you're bad.
You know what else seems like mafia behavior? Turning your verbosity into a bully pulpit to demand responses from people who have lives and then using a lack of response to multiple questions as evidence to justify a vote. Not answering a question isn't always indicative of alignment. You should know better. I feel like I understood where Scotty was coming from but you required every detail to be spelled out for you in no uncertain terms. And if it isn't, well then that just shows how "bad" he is, right? Just because you like to write a book every six or seven posts doesn't mean you can expect the same out of everyone else. You set the bar so high when grilling someone that it is impossible for you to be satisfied. I feel like that is normal for you but this time it feels different and I'm going to keep calling you out on it every time I see it occur.
Until I find evidence to the contrary, I definitely think you're bad.
You think I'm bullying people? That is not my intention.
Where did I say that answering a question is always indicative of alignment? You're reading into my words.
You did! That's great. It's unfortunate you couldn't say so during Day 1. I cast my vote in the best way that I could. I was more than willing to reexamine Scotty today, hopefully with as little tunneling as possible, but he died overnight.
I did require him to elaborate, yes, because I felt he was fabricating his thoughts.
It is not impossible for me to be satisfied. Nonetheless, I'll keep what you have to say here into consideration when I ask questions.
What is normal for me? How is this different? Can you use more specific adjectives? Calling me out on what?
This post reads like you just find issue with my playing style and posting frequency more so than anything. I apologize you don't like my posts this game, but I'm only trying to baddie hunt.
As I asked Long Con, can you explain what exactly is it you suspect me for?
Are there any specific concerns or questions you wish for me to address?
Lastly, I want to apologize if you feel that I've been counterproductive this game, but I have been trying to reinvent my style for the past few months. I have always been a high poster, but after seeing game after game of my civilian play tunneling players aggressively, and having much going on in my life anymore, I was feeling very burned out on mafia. Jay talked me into playing a game (Peanuts) on RYM and that game singlehandedly reignited my passion in mafia, since I came into contact with town-collaboration and had BTSC with Jay in that game, and I saw many of the ways he approached the game were much better versions of what I always wanted to make my civilian game. Consequently, my playstyle is still very much my own, and I can't help but get super into the game, because I have an obsessive personality and I love mafia. I also have a tendency to aggressively tunnel, and I have a very hard time shaking tunnel vision, but it's an issue I fully recognize and I'm trying to actively deal with, since in the past 5 years it has led to very mixed, bordering on consistently poor results. So I mean it when I say I take your comments to heart, and I hope I can continue to improve going forward, with yours and others' commentary.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) Responses to Others' Posts
timmer, when you get the chance, can you elaborate on these two posts?
timmer wrote:Quickly reading through the four lynchees before my guests wake up. Read Long Con. I see nothing wrong with his posts at all.
timmer wrote:Russ was a quick read. I see nothing wrong in his posts at all.
So I will vote Golden, I don't see any reason not to and it's now or never for my vote today.
What do you mean by "nothing wrong"? Do you have Long Con and Russtifinko as civilian reads or neutral reads? How confident are you? What is it that made you not find fault with their post histories?
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:@Golden
This isn't black and white. I may think you are my biggest suspect, and that you are the best one among the four I have to pick from, but I'd be foolish to be 100% sure if you are mafia. And if you're gonna accuse me, I have to defend myself. If I'm right and you're mafia, then no problem, I'm safe. But if I'm wrong, I'd better start defusing the bomb you're trying to plant on me.
And the reason I voted earlier is that I always do that. I hate voting late, because I know I'll look bad because of it regardless of whether I lynch civ or bad. I'd rather vote earlier and risk my neck, and show I put my vote where my mouth is.
, can you elaborate on your assertion here and provide evidence? You say you always "do that", as in vote early. I find it difficult to recall from the couple of games I've played with you. I want to see proof!
Also, you say you "may think" Golden is your biggest suspect. Was he or wasn't he?
What are your suspects? Would you be willing and able to give me a Rainbow List?
LoRab wrote:I actually think of Golden as being more careful a player as a civ than as a baddie--I love having civie golden on my side. I'm not sure I'm seeing that.
MM went along with sloonei, so that doesn't look great. Russtifinko I have no idea. LC I already said before I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for the moment because he's asking good questions and bringing things up others aren't--but I have an eye on him.
I could vote MM to create a tie, just for fun. Maybe I'll see where the vote is when we get close.
I don't like this whole choice of 4 thing. Especially not this early. Meh.
, can you explain and/or substantiate this? I'm not sure what you mean by Golden being more "careful" as a civilian.
Golden wrote:And I think llama may have been the comedian. It's why he went all supatown.
, I was thinking Llama was the Comedian as well. I hope so.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4) Updated Rainbow List
MP's Rainbow List - Night 2 (~24 Hours Remaining)
Changed the colors up a bit to make it look more like a rainbow!
I also removed the "No read or unsure", so that I HAD to commit to at least some read for every player.
This is how I am currently feeling about everyone in the game:
MovingPictures07 wrote:TASTE THE RAINBOW
nijuukyugou
Long Con
Bass_the_Clever
Metalmarsh89
Elohcin
Ricochet
Cookie
DharmaHelper
Dragon D. Luffy
LoRab
Russtifinko
timmer
espers
G-Man
For reference:
Very strong civilian read
Strong civilian read
Moderate civilian read
Slight civilian read
Very slight civilian read
Very slight mafia read
Slight mafia read
Moderate mafia read
Strong mafia read
Very strong mafia read
:
- My list is a bit lospided. I have an array of very slight to strong town reads, yet a bunch of very slight and slight mafia reads... which I suppose makes sense, but leaves me feeling more strong about various town feels than about my suspect feels, which is a bit problematic when voting to lynch out suspicious players, rather than voting to save strong town reads. Sigh.
- nijuukyugou is my new top read, and I'm willing to take a strong stand. She seems consistently genuine, her hesitance to pile onto Golden today bodes well, and her vote from D1 still stands out as very strong. That said, I hope to see even more baddie hunting from her. And I still am going to continue to examine and question her intentions as much as everyone else, if not even more so, but right now I have to admit that she looks better than all the rest of you.
- I
really liked Long Con's increased activity today. Going into today, I viewed him with skepticism since he missed the Day 1 vote, and he hadn't been able to get into the game. He seemed genuine in baddie hunting today, though I hope to hear even more from him going forward.
- Bass remains about the same, based on my gut interpretation of his baddie hunting carried over at end of Night 1, whereas Metalmarsh is now on par with him, despite having to leave early into Day 2, and self-voting, since he seems genuinely concerned with helping the town, despite his vague and intentionally mysterious demeanor. I actually think Metalmarsh would not have self-voted if he were in the position of being only 1 of 2 members left on the mafia team. Of course, these two reads are both "gut"-based, and should be reaffirmed by a thorough examination of their posts.
- Elohcin remains at very slight civilian read, I feel as though I thought about her less than the rest of players today... need to look at her posts ISO going into Day 3. She could decrease due to interactions from Sloonei, which I recall looking pretty bad. Otherwise, she seemed genuine to me, and unlike her baddie or even SK self (Economics), so she's one of my toughest reads.
- Ricochet has remained the same despite a lack of D2 activity (which he did warn us about, but I inevitably have to take it into consideration), based on the strength of earlier contributions, but I want to see what he's thinking.
- Dragon D. Luffy drops from slight civilian read all the way to very slight mafia read due to his Golden vote today, and the fact that he did little other baddie hunting (I realize others didn't either, but he posted
plenty). I'm taking Golden's advice heavily into account and think he should be analyzed heavily going into the new Day period. Nonetheless, I am a bit hesitant to commit to more than a very slight mafia read at this time, since there have been more instances where I thought he seemed similar to Economics DDL versus Guess Who? DDL. I need to ISO his posts and mull over why it is I feel that way.
- I feel about the same about Russtifinko, I suppose, but inevitably have to drop him to very slight mafia read. I'm wondering what else he's thinking, hopefully this will catch his attention. He (due to RL, as he stated), wasn't able to contribute much today, and thus there isn't much to really base any thoughts off of just yet, although it isn't as though he hasn't contributed his thoughts when he's been able. That's fine. I have to say, I was a bit surprised to see the general consensus civilian reads from some on Russtifinko. I mean, I don't really feel bad about him, but it seems at least half of the thread found that there's nothing suspicious with him. Why is this?
- Still can't really make heads or tails of Cookie, LoRab, and timmer -- these have been the hardest players to read so far for me. Does anyone have any thoughts on them that they wish to share that they haven't already? I inevitably dropped Cookie and timmer because of their 'early' Golden votes. I understand if they had to vote early because of RL, but nonetheless, with a civilian Golden flip, their votes look worse. I also dropped LoRab, since I can't make heads or tails of her AT ALL, and it's a bit worrisome. I really have no clue what to think of her behavior toward the end of the lynch.
- I've dropped DharmaHelper from very slight civilian read to very slight mafia read because I have not seen enough baddie hunting and suspect elaboration from him.
- Unfortunately, I don't feel I made any progress with my two most pronounced mafia reads today. They are both still only "slight" mafia reads.
--- I suppose I feel the same about espers. His vote from D1 still seems like a teammate bussing possibility, but it's hard to tell. He had a good plan with analyzing interactions with Sloonei, but hasn't delivered (which I understand, it is very time consuming, it's not like anyone else has really delivered on that front either). He missed the D2 vote and contributed practically nothing, so I don't know what to make of that. I wish he would post more of his thoughts. I have a hard time really suspecting him though, other than for his Day 1 vote, and for posting in the low/medium range.
--- I suppose I feel the same about G-Man. I am enjoying G-Man's activity, even though he made many posts against me today and they bothered me at first, but I wish he would increase baddie hunt, and I echo DDL's comment that his "catch up" seemed very mafia coolkid-like. I do understand G-Man's desire to comment on these matters, but I feel his commentary was lacking a bit with regards to suspects, other than his posts against me. Regarding his posts on me, I'm having trouble discerning whether they are coming from a place of general frustration and suspicion, or whether he is hoping to set up my lynch in an opportunistic fashion, which would be a bold move. Further interaction with G-Man will be necessary to determine this. Nonetheless, he's still "slight", especially since I recognize he takes a slow attempt to the game, and his careful consideration of Golden today warrants mention.
Alright, folks, there it is. Sorry, I know it's a lot, but I've been crafting all of my thoughts throughout the day off and on in between working on various tasks.
Not sure how my contributions will be for Night 2 and Day 3. Very likely I won't be able to contribute nearly up to what I have so far. I've been sacrificing much time to do so. Lol. I'll see what I can do. Still have to meet that Monday deadline and I have other work to accomplish. Wedding is in 3 weeks, which is amazing, but it means I have to finish a bunch of PhD work before I leave for Ohio.
Losing posts happens, and it is important to drop it like it's hot, and just let it go. 
I will be back later.
