[END] Talking Heads Mafia (RYM #90)

[Ricochet]

Yes.

[Bullzeye]

I think this is more likely: Brian is a townie who was tasked with catching up in this monstrous thread, in the aftermath of the drama generated between Golden and I. In his earnest attempt to figure out what to make of that, he made a mental/observational error by associating Golden with the anti-LC crowd (of which I was a part) and and then tinfoiled about the possibility of a JJJ/Golden scum team.

I honestly think the mafia/not-mafia portion of reading Brian can be decided with solid clarity based on this single point. I would encourage everyone to review what I've said here and state your perspective on the matter.

~~~

I'm going to stop there for now. I'll continue the review later if I deem it necessary. I'd like to hear people's takes on the pink-highlighted point first.

I have read your post and find it acceptable. You don't seem to get as far as the points on BCornett that have given me reason to suspect him - them being that I feel he was strongly trying to buddy up to Golden in the aftermath of him being confirmed civ. I'm biased since I'm one of the two people I noticed him being claiming strong suspicions of right after Golden said something against them (I'd have to look up who the other was, I just remember there was someone). I also think it's noteworthy that he said he'd show me why he'd put me down as so suspicious and prove it wasn't because of Golden, but never actually did this and has left me alone entirely since Golden died.

I don't think it's fair to say I am not saying anything else russ. I have pointed out a possible other connection, to BR but I'd rather make sure she is bad first. I also asked about the golden/Bullz thing. It doesn't even seem like you are reading my posts to know what you are talking about.

I'd explain the Golden thing but it'd be one side of an argument and Golden can't give his own any more. Someone should explain it to you from a neutral perspective. From my point of view, I disagreed with Golden's tactics and attitude, and he overreacted to what I was saying, making me out to have some kind of nefarious plan to discredit his every opinion and even claiming I'd said things I hadn't.

Total waste, espers. You could have at least tried to bait a kill.

In your experience, do baddies (or SKs or even civ ninjas) ever bother killing low posters who aren't even participating at this stage of a game?

Likely 6 mafia left and definitely 1 SK. 15 vs 6 vs 1, I believe, which is dire.

Can't afford any more bullsuit. One easy way to ensure cooperation is to state who we don't have any interest in lynching on Day 6. Process of elimination based on consensus, modified individually as necessary based on who everyone trusts and doesn't trust.

Who I don't have an interest in lynching? That's going to be a short list. Let's see:

Bullzeye
Elo
Splints maybe?
JJJ
Matt F but maybe not Matt F at all
MM
Fuzz
Rico
Roxy

I will not be voting for any of these people today, but someone's name not being here doesn't mean I am likely to vote for them. I have excluded both my suspects and people I feel neutral about. Names here are names of those I think are definitely/possibly/likely to be civs. This is why I don't make rainbow lists or whatever the cool kids are calling them nowadays. I suck at them.

HOSTS - If the Mafia or Serial Killer is prevented from making a kill for whatever reason, do you still show their kill attempt in the Night Post? If the Mafia or Serial Killer simply don't make an attempt, do you completely ignore them in the Night Post?

Thank you

MATT F - What did you hope to gain from asking me to infodump?

I would like to see a bit more analysis on motel room and Choutas. Those two have been remarkably subdued and also remarkably teflon. Also Roxy, who I recall was getting quite a bit of interest early game has gone dark (understandably) and as a result has had all suspicion taken off her. Bullzeye also seems to have done similar.

So far I've not seen any suspicion on me that I've considered worth taking seriously tbh. That isn't why I "went dark". Just had a busy weekend.

I'll be playing catch up tomorrow I have over 30 pages to read. I have quickly looked over the results of the day lynch and the night results. I also saw the huge Iso of me. I'll be commenting on all of this here in about 8 hours.

In the mean time JJJ

You are scum, evidence shall be presented shortly! Prepare yourself!

I've seen you say similar to that last line before and nothing ever came of it...

[MacDougall]

-- intermediary thoughts on how the history makes you look
-- conclusion

But these parts are the parts that are just not correct representations of said history is all. It's your opinion though so knock yourself out.

[Ricochet]

Reads are not representations of history, they're interpretations of history. I am reading into what you did and finding it good or bad, consistent or otherwise, etc.

What Mafia class am I attending, suddenly suspicions and reads are classified as "it's, like, your opinion man" and that's that?

I'll rephrase the summary of my content on you, for clarity.

I've written:
a) facts about your gameplay, taken directly from your post history
b) reads on how your gameplay looks to me, at various stages of your gameplay (aka in this case my suspicions)
c) a conclusion of my reads (aka, in this case, that I find you to be bad)

The b) and c) are discernible in that content, they're not mixed or hidden in some mumble jumble or anything, so I don't see the problem to pick them and address them.

You want to go on record that everything I suspect you for is just my opinion? That's fine. Can't say it changes things, however.

[MacDougall]

Reads are not representations of history, they're interpretations of history. I am reading into what you did and finding it good or bad, consistent or otherwise, etc.

What Mafia class am I attending, suddenly suspicions and reads are classified as "it's, like, your opinion man" and that's that?

I'll rephrase the summary of my content on you, for clarity.

I've written:
a) facts about your gameplay, taken directly from your post history
b) reads on how your gameplay looks to me, at various stages of your gameplay (aka in this case my suspicions)
c) a conclusion of my reads (aka, in this case, that I find you to be bad)

The b) and c) are discernible in that content, they're not mixed or hidden in some mumble jumble or anything, so I don't see the problem to pick them and address them.

You want to go on record that everything I suspect you for is just my opinion? That's fine. Can't say it changes things, however.

No, your conclusions and interpretations are yours. Your expressions of what occurred are inarguable. I can't argue with how you choose to interpret what you see dude.

[Ricochet]

You don't have to argue with how I chose to interpret. Argue with what I interpreted. Defend yourself.

[MacDougall]

You don't have to argue with how I chose to interpret. Argue with what I interpreted. Defend yourself.

You say that me and LC's interactions make me look scummy. I think they don't...

I made a light gut read on him very early. It was clearly right. Maybe he was phoning it in because of the other games he's running or whatever. I doubt he'd get himself bussed on day 2. That'd be a dick move for a guy with cred around here. As a scum teammate for me to do that to him at the point of the game would be ... well if someone did that to me I wouldn't be impressed.

As for the Flowers thing. I thought I made a pretty valid point about that role being dangerous. Look what happened to Devin from vote manipulation roles. The argument that LC tried to make has been proven invalid later in the game anyway because that happened to Devin and we've nothing to glean from it. Had LC been able to act on a wagon with his role, there are too many other roles at play that could have been responsible for us to satisfactorily conclude he was on said wagon anyway. So I've made a reasonable point in the thread and got the scum player to bite.

LC probably had a poor outing because of other reasons. To give him the benefit of the doubt and to say that he got himself bussed is the same kind of bullshit that almost stopped him getting lynched in the first place.

I never voted on LC's wagon. So to say I bussed him is wrong there anyway. My interactions with him were crucial to getting him lynched but if the argument is that he was bussed and I was part of it, it's flawed. My vote was elsewhere the whole time. I won't deny that. I had a bigger scum read elsewhere. LC's reaction to me is more what I believe makes me look town, than anything I particularly did.

At that point if I had have kept supertowning with all the town reads on me I'd have been night killed by now. It's okay for people to have scum reads on me now because it's a defense mechanism. I still don't think I'll get lynched because there are more than enough players here who know exactly what and why I am playing this way.

Now if you think anything else I've done is scummy, well I can't argue with you there because ever since I've been playing as scummy as fuck.

[Choutas]

Rejoice people for I have come

5 pages to read. After my lunch all in due time.

[Ricochet]

Apologies in advance, I'mma split this up into several pieces again.

You say that me and LC's interactions make me look scummy. I think they don't...

I made a light gut read on him very early. It was clearly right. Maybe he was phoning it in because of the other games he's running or whatever. I doubt he'd get himself bussed on day 2. That'd be a dick move for a guy with cred around here. As a scum teammate for me to do that to him at the point of the game would be ... well if someone did that to me I wouldn't be impressed.

Well, you say it was a gut read now, but thing is, at least for me, it stood out as a very confident scum alarm bell, with strong words describing how his move on bea might look suspect; it's what gave me a initial confidence boost in you not once, but twice, that you had a good call. But corroborating it now with the other evidence, and with the concept that LC himself was very strategic with those scum moves, it makes me think at least a few of his teammates might have jumped on him right away, to make themselves look good. This is no doubt my interpretation of things, but considering the rest, I think it sticks.

"Clearly right", huh? Yeah, in hindsight, you were always very keen to point out how right you were. [Also, hey Epi, did I do the adverb gambit right? Did I? ...no? ]

I can't comment oh how LC would regard getting bussed, the way he cares for his street cred and such. But give me your insight on this train of thought: LC no doubt tried to save himself on D2. Unless Epi will be revealed as bad, he will have had no teammates trying to save him by voting b24. So where are the six of them, then? Have they all spreaded elsewhere? (Which, incidentally, you qualify for) Has none of them considered, at a time when the LC lynch was brewing or growing, to do the buss move? It's not so much about hurting LC's feeling, it's about the well being of the team in the future.

Side-note: can I not, at least in principle, be startled that none of the four people who challenged LC the most, from the get go, voted for him on that Day? You claim you're town and that I'm misrepresenting your "light gut read" and switch to other directions from back then. Fine. Give me your thoughts on sig, motel room and JJJ, from the perspective of them having done the exact same thing.

As for the Flowers thing. I thought I made a pretty valid point about that role being dangerous. Look what happened to Devin from vote manipulation roles. The argument that LC tried to make has been proven invalid later in the game anyway because that happened to Devin and we've nothing to glean from it. Had LC been able to act on a wagon with his role, there are too many other roles at play that could have been responsible for us to satisfactorily conclude he was on said wagon anyway. So I've made a reasonable point in the thread and got the scum player to bite.

Your discussion with LC over Flowers certainly looks good on paper, but my problem is deeper. LC talked about Flowers as Flowers himself. Furthermore, for a while at least during D2, he was oddly hissing at you and motel room talking about what would Flowers do or not do. Again, he did this as Flowers himself. Of course, one can assume he tried to mildly paint on the both of you, just like he painted hard on bea and other such maneuvers. But in corroboration with other stuff and with LC, again, being mindful in his moves and probably in the mafia's team best odds to not get exposed, I am actively wondering if his outburst on you (and/or motel) doesn't look more like shielding and camouflage, rather than spraypainting on further civs.

LC probably had a poor outing because of other reasons. To give him the benefit of the doubt and to say that he got himself bussed is the same kind of bullshit that almost stopped him getting lynched in the first place.

I assure you I will look into his BOTDers as well.

I never voted on LC's wagon. So to say I bussed him is wrong there anyway. My interactions with him were crucial to getting him lynched but if the argument is that he was bussed and I was part of it, it's flawed. My vote was elsewhere the whole time. I won't deny that. I had a bigger scum read elsewhere. LC's reaction to me is more what I believe makes me look town, than anything I particularly did.

Yes, you never bussed LC by directly voting him, but your verbal and insistent antagonism with him (to which he also happened to reply with mild counter-attacks) can qualify, if you are teammates, as distancing and keeping him in potential buss zone, with the effect that you'll come out looking very good in the picture afterwards.

You never pulling the switch on him is exactly what bothers me. As the LC lynch started brewing and growing on D2, you yourself became increasingly louder in saying that you approve of this lynch, that the meta arguments on him reek, only to afterwards wag the finger at the BOTDers and meta'ers. AND also hunt them.

You voting elsewhere is exactly what bothers me and I furthermore do no believe you always went for your "bigger scum reads".

D1 your "big scum read" was Diiny, then you switched to a lurker hunt.
D2 your "big scum read" was, I assume, Llama. Here you stuck with it, but also whilst cheerleading LC's lynch from the sidelines. Also, where has your Llama "big scum read" gone since?
D3 your "big scum reads" were Roxy, together with FZ, Epi and Sorsha. Where has your Roxy "big scum read" gone since? You ended up waffling between Sorsha and Golden.
D4 you did simple math and retroactively kept your "big scum read" on Sorsha.
D5 you were out of retroactive votes (you defended Devin previously, so no good going there) so you started building new paths.

At that point if I had have kept supertowning with all the town reads on me I'd have been night killed by now. It's okay for people to have scum reads on me now because it's a defense mechanism. I still don't think I'll get lynched because there are more than enough players here who know exactly what and why I am playing this way.

I assure you that you have not been supertowning, at least not in my books. You "gave us" LC only in writing and have mislynched two civs since, whilst also heavily promoting the "LC teammates are his defenders" which has given us very poor results.

Your D1 activity was waffles, at least in voting and sussing. Your biggest scum reads (Diiny and LC) evaporated afterwards.
Your D2 was voting on a tertiary wagon and supporting the LC lynch from the sidelines. 200 credpoints cash-in afterwards.
Your D3-D4 hunting was heavily dependant on the "LC teammates must be his defenders" mentality, which is exactly what I'm disputing that it works, after so many mislynches, hence making me look at those who pushed it.

Now if you think anything else I've done is scummy, well I can't argue with you there because ever since I've been playing as scummy as fuck.

Unfortunately, as I pointed to Strawhenge, I see signs of actual baddie behaviour, which only enhances my suspicions on you. Stuff like:

supporting a removal lynch on seaside for liability grounds
supporting a Sorsha lynch for gathering precious info even after a possible civ flip from her; remind me, btw, did you ever tell us what info we got out of Sorsha flipping civ?
calling for D5 hunt to be SK-centered
getting increasingly defensive, dismissive and dissing in reaction to suspicions on you; incidentally, I still don't believe Matt figured you out with his SK theory (because it doesn't hold up; oh, and because you are mafia), but I am seeing much clearer now how you could have been phased by that jump on you nonetheless and nervous you'd get clipped, as a mafia member

[RadicalFuzz]

I speak to you all as someone who plays via mobile occasionally.

For the love of god use spoilers. Open your phone to this page and imagine Rico's post being quoted ten times, in addition to actual new content under it that would then get quoted and replied to in turn. I can't imagine a world where not wanting to wade through all of that constantly is considered scum-exclusive behavior.

Mac I see what you're putting down. Don't know what it means, but I see it.

Wilgy I have no idea what role Epi is or whether or not he was able to kill last night. This applies to everyone in the thread, the exceptions being myself and J3. I have an educated guess on what role J3 is.

Being on nearly everyone's "not lynching today" lists is disconcerting. Someone make a case for me being scum, if you'd kindly.

J3 I apologize for the misplaced argument.

[Marmot]

I would like to see a bit more analysis on motel room and Choutas. Those two have been remarkably subdued and also remarkably teflon. Also Roxy, who I recall was getting quite a bit of interest early game has gone dark (understandably) and as a result has had all suspicion taken off her. Bullzeye also seems to have done similar.

What about Jay?

If Epignosis is the serial killer, his scumhunting is probably going to be sincere at this point. What do you think about his points?

[Marmot]

When I want maturity lessons, Russ, I will get them from someone who isn't such a hypocrite. Your posts are so contradictory it would be funny if I wasn't so angry.

I've asked to be modkilled. Shit like this isn't fun to read and not worth my time. Vote russ[/u] you may say I am crying about how others aren't playing the game right but I've never said anything if the sort just that I don't like being ignored and it's rude to completely ignore replacements. Cause it is. You on the other hand have made it out that I'm not playing right by not posting more or mentioning every other player. i haven't attacked every player who has suspected me. I'm pretty sure I suspected BR first before she even mentioned me. Remember I was "making a mountain out of a molehill" about her Roxy comments. Keep defending BR though. Hopefully more of your teammates follow your bad play and you can lead us to them.

I don't think your suspicion of BR was out of line. I don't understand why Russ is coming after you for your content either.

You do you fingersplints. Until Russti puts a vote on you, I don't see why his comments should be heeded at all.

I'm wondering why I put him on my don't-lynch list now.

[Marmot]

My friend Rico. Can I call you Rico? Rico baby, I genuinely just can't be bothered reading your second huge MacDougallcentric post and I took the opportunity to amuse myself with some comedy posts rather than give myself an aneurysm and get myself all worked up reading it. I expect others will just skim it or not read it and put their vote on me though. Especially the actual scum (and Epignosis and Matt for sure will come in here and put their votes on me) Did I genuinely offend you? The way you quoted bullshit there makes me feel like that might have hurt your feelings. Rico, friend, confidante, I'm not here to harm, maim or offend. I'm here to catch scum.

Now, what time is it where you are? Beer time here. Care to talk this over, over a frosty cold beer?

*The actual scum won't read it.

*MacDougall did not read it

*soft hints of MacDougall knowing the Ricochet is town in this post.

[Marmot]

MacDougall

[Marmot]

How did missing your night kill make you feel?

Mac, how sure of this are you?

Floyd, Fuzz, or Matt, did epi miss a night kill?

I don't have a clue, but I will say, last night's events (or rather non events) didn't make me feel any better about MacD.

Wilgy - What are your thoughts on Floyd, Bullzeye, and Strawhenge? If you've made a recent post about them, you can direct me there.

Linki - Floyd I am playing a game of Mafia, and I have the right to interrogate anyone, as you have the right to do the same. Now then, please answer my first question that you originally answered "No comment", please answer why you've voted for the players you've voted for during the Day phases, please tell me your opinion of the player "Strawhenge".

How does last night's events tell you anything about MacDougall?

I'll be playing catch up tomorrow I have over 30 pages to read. I have quickly looked over the results of the day lynch and the night results. I also saw the huge Iso of me. I'll be commenting on all of this here in about 8 hours.

In the mean time JJJ

You are scum, evidence shall be presented shortly! Prepare yourself!

Hi Brian!

[Marmot]

Being on nearly everyone's "not lynching today" lists is disconcerting. Someone make a case for me being scum, if you'd kindly.

No thanks.

[Epignosis]

Total waste, espers. You could have at least tried to bait a kill.

In your experience, do baddies (or SKs or even civ ninjas) ever bother killing low posters who aren't even participating at this stage of a game?

I've seen it happen one time: In Frisky Dingo, S~V~S deliberately killed off low participants.

[RadicalFuzz]

MM I thought you were my friend.

[Marmot]

MM I thought you were my friend.

But if I was going to set more time aside to make a case/ISO on a player, I wouldn't pick someone I don't want to lynch.

If I have time later today/tomorrow, maybe I will. Maybe.

[Tangrowth]

HOSTS - If the Mafia or Serial Killer is prevented from making a kill for whatever reason, do you still show their kill attempt in the Night Post? If the Mafia or Serial Killer simply don't make an attempt, do you completely ignore them in the Night Post?

Thank you

Yes to both questions.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I get those names from the people who voted for Ricochet on day 3? the one with the poll about who long con team mate. Whichever day that was.
These are the people who voted for him

JaggedJimmyJay, Rbzmncaeaei, Diiny, Golden, seaside, espers

Now RBZ and Golden have been killed.
I know i'm not scum.
Which leaves JJJ, Diiny and Espers.

I don't quite understand the rationale here. Your suspects, according to this, stem out of my D3 wagon, although you also contributed to that wagon, by clearly thinking I am bad. How can you simply exclude yourself from this, via simple civ claim, and treat the others suspicious for a lynch that you also endorsed?

This is the only problem or thing you are going to raise over this? of course if someone else was going to follow this theory (which no one seems to care about tbh ) then i should be included. but why should i include myself when i know that i am town? this seems like such a knit picking thing to have a problem with. The way you word it too, 'my D3 wagon'. I obviously made a mistake in voting for him. i've made many mistakes in this game. but what you are trying to twist here ain't one.

This post you have quoted with my name in it does not belong to me. If you are judging me by the content of this post, stop immediately, turn your test face down, and place your pencil on at the front of the desk.

i don't think everyone in that three scum or acting extremely scummy as such. just due to my own research and piecing things together, i think it is highly likely that one of the three is scum. but how you have been acting now towards it. I do have a strong scum read on you

I don't understand your theory. Why about the Ricochet bandwagon makes either Diiny or me scum? Moreover, I can't be expected to offer a response other than an exasperated roll of the eyes when you literally have to twist your theory into three knots just to make it work against me in your own head.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I'll be playing catch up tomorrow I have over 30 pages to read. I have quickly looked over the results of the day lynch and the night results. I also saw the huge Iso of me. I'll be commenting on all of this here in about 8 hours.

In the mean time JJJ

You are scum, evidence shall be presented shortly! Prepare yourself!

Great, wonderful. Shower me in your evidence.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Wow, a few of you really liked quoting my big post in its entirety all over again. I'm not opposed to snipping that down to the parts you want to talk about, you know? Or, if not, just put it in a url link.

Don't you have a townread on MacDougall, Jay? Why is he not on that list?

This is not a revealing response to your question.

I don't understand this response. What's not revealing to MM's question? Why would you not put in a "don't lynch" list a strong townread - that you strongly defended to the point of others having to prove to you the opposite - such as the one you had on MacDougall?

It was a response specifically meant not to be understood. I was running Mac through the Pocket Test by pretending my town read on him had vanished into thin air (suggesting inside information) to gauge his behavior in response. I don't think he responded poorly.

When Marsh asked me what I was doing, I refused to answer him because that would have defeated the purpose of the exercise.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Also, you seem to have attributed a post of mine (the one about D3 wagon on me) to JJJ.

really?

What the hell, Seaside?

Rico pointed out the same mistake that I just pointed out, you acknowledged that you saw it right here, and have since said nothing? You misattributed a post to me and then used that post as a component of calling me scum -- and voting for me. Answer to that shit.

[Bullzeye]

JJJ, since you may have missed it, what do you think to my opinion that Bcornett was at one point trying to buddy up to Golden once he'd been outed?

And since I'm asking questions, Matt F, what did you hope to accomplish by asking me to infodump?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I think this is more likely: Brian is a townie who was tasked with catching up in this monstrous thread, in the aftermath of the drama generated between Golden and I. In his earnest attempt to figure out what to make of that, he made a mental/observational error by associating Golden with the anti-LC crowd (of which I was a part) and and then tinfoiled about the possibility of a JJJ/Golden scum team.

I honestly think the mafia/not-mafia portion of reading Brian can be decided with solid clarity based on this single point. I would encourage everyone to review what I've said here and state your perspective on the matter.

~~~

I'm going to stop there for now. I'll continue the review later if I deem it necessary. I'd like to hear people's takes on the pink-highlighted point first.

I have read your post and find it acceptable. You don't seem to get as far as the points on BCornett that have given me reason to suspect him - them being that I feel he was strongly trying to buddy up to Golden in the aftermath of him being confirmed civ. I'm biased since I'm one of the two people I noticed him being claiming strong suspicions of right after Golden said something against them (I'd have to look up who the other was, I just remember there was someone). I also think it's noteworthy that he said he'd show me why he'd put me down as so suspicious and prove it wasn't because of Golden, but never actually did this and has left me alone entirely since Golden died.

Do you find the most important, pink highlighted portion acceptable though? That's what I'm trying so hard to get feedback on. I think it's pretty solid evidence that bcornett24 is town, or at least not mafia.

I think that's an important thing and nobody has given me feedback on that point yet save for Strawhenge (who didn't quite address this critical issue either).

[JaggedJimmyJay]

JJJ, since you may have missed it, what do you think to my opinion that Bcornett was at one point trying to buddy up to Golden once he'd been outed?

I think it's most likely that bcornett simply agreed with Golden about you during that phase of the game and meant to build a case -- but forgot and/or became focused elsewhere. This is really a point he should answer to though.

Like I said, I think there's a very good reason to think he is not mafia, I just need someone to tell me why I'm wrong.

[Bullzeye]

I think this is more likely: Brian is a townie who was tasked with catching up in this monstrous thread, in the aftermath of the drama generated between Golden and I. In his earnest attempt to figure out what to make of that, he made a mental/observational error by associating Golden with the anti-LC crowd (of which I was a part) and and then tinfoiled about the possibility of a JJJ/Golden scum team.

I honestly think the mafia/not-mafia portion of reading Brian can be decided with solid clarity based on this single point. I would encourage everyone to review what I've said here and state your perspective on the matter.

~~~

I'm going to stop there for now. I'll continue the review later if I deem it necessary. I'd like to hear people's takes on the pink-highlighted point first.

I have read your post and find it acceptable. You don't seem to get as far as the points on BCornett that have given me reason to suspect him - them being that I feel he was strongly trying to buddy up to Golden in the aftermath of him being confirmed civ. I'm biased since I'm one of the two people I noticed him being claiming strong suspicions of right after Golden said something against them (I'd have to look up who the other was, I just remember there was someone). I also think it's noteworthy that he said he'd show me why he'd put me down as so suspicious and prove it wasn't because of Golden, but never actually did this and has left me alone entirely since Golden died.

Do you find the most important, pink highlighted portion acceptable though? That's what I'm trying so hard to get feedback on. I think it's pretty solid evidence that bcornett24 is town, or at least not mafia.

I think that's an important thing and nobody has given me feedback on that point yet save for Strawhenge (who didn't quite address this critical issue either).

Okay, so you think he either deliberately fudged the facts as a baddie or made an observational error as a civvie trying to catch up - I don't see why it can't be an observational error made as a baddie trying to catch up. Or he wanted to put doubt onto Golden during a period where Golden was doing his best to get lynched anyway. I don't think it's as simple as you make it look.

[Bullzeye]

JJJ, since you may have missed it, what do you think to my opinion that Bcornett was at one point trying to buddy up to Golden once he'd been outed?

I think it's most likely that bcornett simply agreed with Golden about you during that phase of the game and meant to build a case -- but forgot and/or became focused elsewhere. This is really a point he should answer to though.

Like I said, I think there's a very good reason to think he is not mafia, I just need someone to tell me why I'm wrong.

But to label me as one of the three most suspicious people in the game, twice, and never vote for me or address it any further? In a moment I will go back and confirm who the other person was, I definitely remember he did a similar thing to someone else.

[Bullzeye]

FWIW I don't see this as a NO U either as the point I'm making is I think he was trying to mirror a confirmed civ in order to be blendy and avoid scrutiny.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Okay, so you think he either deliberately fudged the facts as a baddie or made an observational error as a civvie trying to catch up - I don't see why it can't be an observational error made as a baddie trying to catch up. Or he wanted to put doubt onto Golden during a period where Golden was doing his best to get lynched anyway. I don't think it's as simple as you make it look.

I don't think it's possible for him to have made an observational error as a baddie. That would require that he legitimately believe that Golden was on HIS team. We now know with near certainty that Golden was not on the mafia team. If bcornett is on the mafia team, he and Golden could not have been team mates ever.

Do you think he is so out of touch with this game that he doesn't even know who his team mates are?

[Bullzeye]

Okay, so you think he either deliberately fudged the facts as a baddie or made an observational error as a civvie trying to catch up - I don't see why it can't be an observational error made as a baddie trying to catch up. Or he wanted to put doubt onto Golden during a period where Golden was doing his best to get lynched anyway. I don't think it's as simple as you make it look.

I don't think it's possible for him to have made an observational error as a baddie. That would require that he legitimately believe that Golden was on HIS team. We now know with near certainty that Golden was not on the mafia team. If bcornett is on the mafia team, he and Golden could not have been team mates ever.

Do you think he is so out of touch with this game that he doesn't even know who his team mates are?

I don't think anybody is that out of touch. Here is the observational error scenario, with cornett as a baddie, as I imagine it.

"Oh no LC has been lynched and we're a baddie down, let's turn this around to kill some civs"

"Who do I remember defending LC that wasn't on our team? That's a good pool of people to accuse! Well lets see, there was... JJJ... and Golden maybe? *Doesn't double check* Yeah Golden definitely, I'm gonna say as much in this post I'm now making"

Oops not Golden oh well.

Maybe it's not so much an observational error in this scenario as a memory error/accidental fact-fudging, but that's what I was getting at.

[Bullzeye]

Replace defending with going after, there's another example of an accidental fudging of the facts for you :P

[DrWilgy]

I would like to point out that bcornett has continued to ignore me for the past 2 days, even though I'm fully analyzed and somewhat scummy according to his list. He all he is doing is, looking at who is the topic of discussion is, clicking view in topic posts, "analyzing then" and ignoring everything else.

I'll try to build a case and answer your questions when I'm back home Fuzz.

If I missed any other questions from anyone, let me know. I will most likely hard reread the past few pages of the thread that formed over the weekend.

Based on what Mac and Matt have said, I believe Matt F is correct on his thoughts about Epi and Mac. Unless Floyd and Fuzz think otherwise.

[Bullzeye]

So the other person I remembered bcornett turning on at the same time as Golden did was Mac, who went from a mid-neutral/strong civ read for the pair of them to bad in Golden's eyes and second from bottom of Cornett's rainbow list within minutes. However, on closer inspection Bcor did call Mac out with a proper post just before dropping him down the list, so I'm no longer as sure. It's still a hell of a coincidence.

I would like to point out that bcornett has continued to ignore me for the past 2 days, even though I'm fully analyzed and somewhat scummy according to his list. He all he is doing is, looking at who is the topic of discussion is, clicking view in topic posts, "analyzing then" and ignoring everything else.

Yes. Looking at his posts this is a very fair judgement. Bcornett seems to make accusations based on the direction the wind is blowing and seldom follows up on them or explains his own perspective. Devin on day five looks like the only real exception to this. I think he looks very blendy and very suspicious.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Apologies in advance, I'mma split this up into several pieces again.

You say that me and LC's interactions make me look scummy. I think they don't...

I made a light gut read on him very early. It was clearly right. Maybe he was phoning it in because of the other games he's running or whatever. I doubt he'd get himself bussed on day 2. That'd be a dick move for a guy with cred around here. As a scum teammate for me to do that to him at the point of the game would be ... well if someone did that to me I wouldn't be impressed.

Well, you say it was a gut read now, but thing is, at least for me, it stood out as a very confident scum alarm bell, with strong words describing how his move on bea might look suspect; it's what gave me a initial confidence boost in you not once, but twice, that you had a good call. But corroborating it now with the other evidence, and with the concept that LC himself was very strategic with those scum moves, it makes me think at least a few of his teammates might have jumped on him right away, to make themselves look good. This is no doubt my interpretation of things, but considering the rest, I think it sticks.

How do you know this? Why is it so hard for many people to believe that LC simply wanted to generate momentum against bea and it blew up in his face? Why does there have to be an underlying secret plan?

"Clearly right", huh? Yeah, in hindsight, you were always very keen to point out how right you were. [Also, hey Epi, did I do the adverb gambit right? Did I? ...no? ]

I can't comment oh how LC would regard getting bussed, the way he cares for his street cred and such. But give me your insight on this train of thought: LC no doubt tried to save himself on D2. Unless Epi will be revealed as bad, he will have had no teammates trying to save him by voting b24. So where are the six of them, then? Have they all spreaded elsewhere? (Which, incidentally, you qualify for) Has none of them considered, at a time when the LC lynch was brewing or growing, to do the buss move? It's not so much about hurting LC's feeling, it's about the well being of the team in the future.

Conflicts with the notion that LC wanted to bail early so he could focus on his own game. I don't recall if you've espoused that perspective Rico, but I'll make the point now anyway.

Side-note: can I not, at least in principle, be startled that none of the four people who challenged LC the most, from the get go, voted for him on that Day? You claim you're town and that I'm misrepresenting your "light gut read" and switch to other directions from back then. Fine. Give me your thoughts on sig, motel room and JJJ, from the perspective of them having done the exact same thing.

This is a good observation. I think one big reason the early momentum against LC didn't translate into final votes was the wave of Syndicate players jumping to LC's defense. It is worth giving those players another look though, even if I must acknowledge my own presence among them. motel room is overdue a thorough review especially.

Your discussion with LC over Flowers certainly looks good on paper, but my problem is deeper. LC talked about Flowers as Flowers himself. Furthermore, for a while at least during D2, he was oddly hissing at you and motel room talking about what would Flowers do or not do. Again, he did this as Flowers himself. Of course, one can assume he tried to mildly paint on the both of you, just like he painted hard on bea and other such maneuvers.1 But in corroboration with other stuff2 and with LC, again, being mindful in his moves and probably in the mafia's team best odds to not get exposed3, I am actively wondering4 if his outburst on you (and/or motel) doesn't look more like shielding and camouflage, rather than spraypainting on further civs.5

This is where you just totally lose me, and indeed where I think everyone loses me. In this paragraph, I observe you trying as hard as you can to make the strongest point in Mac's favor by my estimation look like a point against him. That doesn't have to mean you're doing it on purpose -- it could be tunnel vision, or I could just be missing some crucial point. I've highlighted isolated phrases in this explanation that just made my brain hurt, and I'll try to explain why:

1 -- This possibility should resonate with you a great deal. When I did the LC relationships analyses and determined that you looked terrible in light of what I perceived to be an attempted forced link, you swore to me that it was an intentional move by LC to paint you in a bad light. I want you to think about that assertion you've made to me in your own defense, and apply it to this scenario with Mac in the discussion about the Flowers role that he had in the thread with LC (it wasn't a discussion until LC responded to Mac's public ponderings about the role).

2 -- What is the other stuff? Is this other stuff substantive thread-borne evidence, or are the components of your own mindset about the Mac/LC interaction that are influencing your read?

3 -- Any mafia player must be mindful of this in any game, yes. I want you to explore your own read though, within yourself (it doesn't have to be explained in text if you don't care to), and decide whether you're observing good evidence that LC's treatment of Mac was for the sake of team preservation, or if you're observing something that you want to be good evidence of the same.

4 -- How does "actively wondering" differ from "wondering"? I don't mean to nitpick semantics, I am trying to show you evidence that you are tunneling -- at least I see it. Are you considering a possibility that exists, or are you pushing your mindset towards a possibility that exists? This is an important distinction.

5 -- What about the Mac/LC discussion of the Flowers role strikes you as camouflage, specifically as it differs from the way you view his smearing of bea (and of you, as you assert)? How can you make this separation based on what you know in this thread?

LC probably had a poor outing because of other reasons. To give him the benefit of the doubt and to say that he got himself bussed is the same kind of bullshit that almost stopped him getting lynched in the first place.

I assure you I will look into his BOTDers as well.

You must give them the same vigorous examination as you've given Mac, or it will not be a meaningful product.

I never voted on LC's wagon. So to say I bussed him is wrong there anyway. My interactions with him were crucial to getting him lynched but if the argument is that he was bussed and I was part of it, it's flawed. My vote was elsewhere the whole time. I won't deny that. I had a bigger scum read elsewhere. LC's reaction to me is more what I believe makes me look town, than anything I particularly did.

Yes, you never bussed LC by directly voting him, but your verbal and insistent antagonism with him (to which he also happened to reply with mild counter-attacks) can qualify, if you are teammates, as distancing and keeping him in potential buss zone, with the effect that you'll come out looking very good in the picture afterwards.

You never pulling the switch on him is exactly what bothers me. As the LC lynch started brewing and growing on D2, you yourself became increasingly louder in saying that you approve of this lynch, that the meta arguments on him reek, only to afterwards wag the finger at the BOTDers and meta'ers. AND also hunt them.

You voting elsewhere is exactly what bothers me and I furthermore do no believe you always went for your "bigger scum reads".

D1 your "big scum read" was Diiny, then you switched to a lurker hunt.
D2 your "big scum read" was, I assume, Llama. Here you stuck with it, but also whilst cheerleading LC's lynch from the sidelines. Also, where has your Llama "big scum read" gone since?
D3 your "big scum reads" were Roxy, together with FZ, Epi and Sorsha. Where has your Roxy "big scum read" gone since? You ended up waffling between Sorsha and Golden.
D4 you did simple math and retroactively kept your "big scum read" on Sorsha.
D5 you were out of retroactive votes (you defended Devin previously, so no good going there) so you started building new paths.

This is a more reasonable reason to be suspicious of Mac than anything else in this post, in my opinion. I don't think it's damning evidence, because townies move their votes between suspects too, but at least I can see this presented against Mac and not leave the thread in confusion. The highlighted portion is more evidence, however, of what I perceive to be a biased mindset -- you've condemned Mac's Day 5 voting behavior before you even begin to assess it. Are you trying to see a townie in Mac as hard as you're trying to see a mafioso?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I would like to point out that bcornett has continued to ignore me for the past 2 days, even though I'm fully analyzed and somewhat scummy according to his list. He all he is doing is, looking at who is the topic of discussion is, clicking view in topic posts, "analyzing then" and ignoring everything else.

Please talk about the point I've made in bcornett's favor. It's not far back in my posts. Highlighted in pink.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I don't think anybody is that out of touch. Here is the observational error scenario, with cornett as a baddie, as I imagine it.

"Oh no LC has been lynched and we're a baddie down, let's turn this around to kill some civs"

"Who do I remember defending LC that wasn't on our team? That's a good pool of people to accuse! Well lets see, there was... JJJ... and Golden maybe? *Doesn't double check* Yeah Golden definitely, I'm gonna say as much in this post I'm now making"

Oops not Golden oh well.

Maybe it's not so much an observational error in this scenario as a memory error/accidental fact-fudging, but that's what I was getting at.

There's the rub. bcornett did not accuse Golden of defending LC (that would have been a correct assertion). He accused Golden and me of bussing LC (implying that both Golden and I were aggressive against LC and contributed to his lynch -- incorrect because Golden did not do that).

So if he's bad and made an error, that means he didn't know Golden defended LC while I attacked LC -- which was the entire focus of the battle between Golden and I at that stage of the game which bcornett was commenting on in the first place. I don't think this makes sense.

[Bullzeye]

I don't think anybody is that out of touch. Here is the observational error scenario, with cornett as a baddie, as I imagine it.

"Oh no LC has been lynched and we're a baddie down, let's turn this around to kill some civs"

"Who do I remember defending LC that wasn't on our team? That's a good pool of people to accuse! Well lets see, there was... JJJ... and Golden maybe? *Doesn't double check* Yeah Golden definitely, I'm gonna say as much in this post I'm now making"

Oops not Golden oh well.

Maybe it's not so much an observational error in this scenario as a memory error/accidental fact-fudging, but that's what I was getting at.

There's the rub. bcornett did not accuse Golden of defending LC (that would have been a correct assertion). He accused Golden and me of bussing LC (implying that both Golden and I were aggressive against LC and contributed to his lynch -- incorrect because Golden did not do that).

So if he's bad and made an error, that means he didn't know Golden defended LC while I attacked LC -- which was the entire focus of the battle between Golden and I at that stage of the game which bcornett was commenting on in the first place. I don't think this makes sense.

See my very next post, I had a brainfart while typing. Still makes sense IMO if you replace defending with going after and add in the idea that he wanted to accuse two unconnected civs of throwing LC under the bus but got confused about Golden's actions.

[Elohcin]

Elohcin, who are your top 3 baddie reads at this moment?

I can't pick just three. I am having a hard time trusting bcornett, choutas, and Mac, russ, rico, and floyd. But I am starting to get worried as my suspects are beginning to suspect one another.

A number of RYMers have fallen off quite a bit after decently fast starts:

Diiny
seaside
motel room
Strawhenge

even Choutas and bcornett24 to a lesser degree.

Please find it in yourselves to pick it up guys. I know it's a huge thread, but that doesn't prevent you from playing. Even if you can't catch up, just go from here without worrying about that. It's better than the alternative that RDW and espers chose.

How many players are in RYM games normally?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

See my very next post, I had a brainfart while typing. Still makes sense IMO if you replace defending with going after and add in the idea that he wanted to accuse two unconnected civs of throwing LC under the bus but got confused about Golden's actions.

I'll mull it over.

I understand it's just one thing, and if my interpretation is flawed then my entire read is flawed. Thanks for your feedback.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

How many players are in RYM games normally?

15-22 or so. This is the biggest game in RYM mafia history.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Football is about to happen, and the undefeated Cincinnati Bengals are more important than this headache. BBL. :P

[Tangrowth]

Hey all, just wanted to remind you to make sure you PM all inquiries and role PMs to both hosts!

I've already been spending more time on here than my schedule should allow, and I'm getting relatively backed up amid midterms, so I may not really be here for the remainder of Day 6 going into Night 6. Be sure to address all concerns or questions during that time to Sloonei as well and I'm sure he'll get you folks taken care of.

[Ricochet]

Why don't you trust me, Eloh?

[Choutas]

Baffled, maybe. I have had very little time for this very fast-moving, info-heavy game; I am, as you say, drowning in text.

I honestly have no idea. You look better, Devin and Sorsha and espers are dead, and it appears I am terrible at this game because they were all town anyway... Yeah, I don't know. Epi, maybe? Rico? JJJ? Mac? Choutas? Diiny? Strawhenge? You? DrWigly? sig? Floyd? motel room? seaside? MattF? Brian? Black Rock? Bullzeye? Elohcin? fingersplints? Russti? RadicalFuzz? Roxy?

Probably one or more of those people.

:'|

I have no idea how to play this game either Straw. It's one of those cases when someone can't be that bad as scum. I don't think I've ever met a scum who decided the best way to play the game is to be wrong about everything. They try to balance between right and wrong. Maybe some don't care and mostly vote for townies or others buss their players(maybe all of them). Still it's hard to be wrong about everything. I find it a towntell, anybody else?

[Choutas]

Likely 6 mafia left and definitely 1 SK. 15 vs 6 vs 1, I believe, which is dire.

Can't afford any more bullsuit. One easy way to ensure cooperation is to state who we don't have any interest in lynching on Day 6. Process of elimination based on consensus, modified individually as necessary based on who everyone trusts and doesn't trust.

Come on it's not that dire. You're overreacting. I won't deny that the scum and the SK are winning but we still have chances. There is a vig(I was oblivious about it sue me) and even the SK could throw a mafia kill tomorrow. Don't lose hope. As Steve Perry said don't stop believing.
I'm down for it Jay seriously let's do it.

A number of RYMers have fallen off quite a bit after decently fast starts:

Diiny
seaside
motel room
Strawhenge

even Choutas and bcornett24 to a lesser degree.

Please find it in yourselves to pick it up guys. I know it's a huge thread, but that doesn't prevent you from playing. Even if you can't catch up, just go from here without worrying about that. It's better than the alternative that RDW and espers chose.

I am having Russian lessons on Sunday. I can't get a break man for realz.

[Choutas]

Mac, Matt, Fuzz and Floyd, who did you target last night?

We had a fail kill and no psycho killer. Chances are one of y'all intervined, possibly in both, and y'all should know how. JJJ you should know as well.

I will explain everything as soon as I'm back from the renaissance festival.

JJJ, no beef, got much love for ya.

It should be rather obvious who I would target Wilgy...

Does that count? As far as I'm concerned you could be lying.

You stating who you targeted is not 100% truth. Nor is it revealed by any role powers, simply actions that happened over tge course of the night. MODS HELP.

How did missing your night kill make you feel?

Mac, how sure of this are you?

Floyd, Fuzz, or Matt, did epi miss a night kill?

How did missing your night kill make you feel?

Mac, how sure of this are you?

Floyd, Fuzz, or Matt, did epi miss a night kill?

I am very sure.

This is mafia interaction calling it. Mac and Wilgy are in this together It wouldn't surprise me if all four are a mafia team. TheProfessional had done something similar on rym(the nation game?)

[Ricochet]

Apologies in advance, I'mma split this up into several pieces again.

You say that me and LC's interactions make me look scummy. I think they don't...

I made a light gut read on him very early. It was clearly right. Maybe he was phoning it in because of the other games he's running or whatever. I doubt he'd get himself bussed on day 2. That'd be a dick move for a guy with cred around here. As a scum teammate for me to do that to him at the point of the game would be ... well if someone did that to me I wouldn't be impressed.

Well, you say it was a gut read now, but thing is, at least for me, it stood out as a very confident scum alarm bell, with strong words describing how his move on bea might look suspect; it's what gave me a initial confidence boost in you not once, but twice, that you had a good call. But corroborating it now with the other evidence, and with the concept that LC himself was very strategic with those scum moves, it makes me think at least a few of his teammates might have jumped on him right away, to make themselves look good. This is no doubt my interpretation of things, but considering the rest, I think it sticks.

How do you know this? Why is it so hard for many people to believe that LC simply wanted to generate momentum against bea and it blew up in his face? Why does there have to be an underlying secret plan?

Everything concerning bea was a strategy. His case on her, the indirect links he tried to create (including me in them), his "I was trying to bait players into bandwagoning on my case" (which, given that he was baddie, can only infer more paintjobs), even his distancing from BWT being a successful "bait", back when everybody jumped on BWT. I'd rather throw back the question a bit now: if all this screams planning, why is it hard to imagine that his further actions were also designed and smoothened in some way?

I can think at least - without "knowing" for certain, just interpreting - of his D2 non-stance on b24, who was second wagon almost to the point of being lynched instead of LC. He had no mention of b24, he didn't engage with anyone on b24 and the b24 wagon itself, save for one player still alive of which we can't be sure, had no teammates of his on it. Why think of this as "just the way it is" rather than suspect that LC might made further careful, breadcrumb-less steps on his way out, especially for his team's well being?

"Clearly right", huh? Yeah, in hindsight, you were always very keen to point out how right you were. [Also, hey Epi, did I do the adverb gambit right? Did I? ...no? ]

I can't comment oh how LC would regard getting bussed, the way he cares for his street cred and such. But give me your insight on this train of thought: LC no doubt tried to save himself on D2. Unless Epi will be revealed as bad, he will have had no teammates trying to save him by voting b24. So where are the six of them, then? Have they all spreaded elsewhere? (Which, incidentally, you qualify for) Has none of them considered, at a time when the LC lynch was brewing or growing, to do the buss move? It's not so much about hurting LC's feeling, it's about the well being of the team in the future.

Conflicts with the notion that LC wanted to bail early so he could focus on his own game. I don't recall if you've espoused that perspective Rico, but I'll make the point now anyway.

It doesn't conflict with LC grabbing a final liferope at that stage. Com'on, why would he completely bail, if the opportunity was still there?
I've included that perspective in my analysis, although more as something tangential that other players brought up, which could potentially fuel further the notion of LC planning out things. It doesn't change or alter the rest of my perspective. LC not wanting to bail out doesn't completely discredit any or all his previous moves being potential planning ones.

Side-note: can I not, at least in principle, be startled that none of the four people who challenged LC the most, from the get go, voted for him on that Day? You claim you're town and that I'm misrepresenting your "light gut read" and switch to other directions from back then. Fine. Give me your thoughts on sig, motel room and JJJ, from the perspective of them having done the exact same thing.

This is a good observation. I think one big reason the early momentum against LC didn't translate into final votes was the wave of Syndicate players jumping to LC's defense. It is worth giving those players another look though, even if I must acknowledge my own presence among them. motel room is overdue a thorough review especially.

Big task, but it requires me going back to check if, indeed, the BOTD wave was big enough on Day 1 to discourage the early momentum. Will do it later.

Looking forward to your review(s).

Your discussion with LC over Flowers certainly looks good on paper, but my problem is deeper. LC talked about Flowers as Flowers himself. Furthermore, for a while at least during D2, he was oddly hissing at you and motel room talking about what would Flowers do or not do. Again, he did this as Flowers himself. Of course, one can assume he tried to mildly paint on the both of you, just like he painted hard on bea and other such maneuvers.1 But in corroboration with other stuff2 and with LC, again, being mindful in his moves and probably in the mafia's team best odds to not get exposed3, I am actively wondering4 if his outburst on you (and/or motel) doesn't look more like shielding and camouflage, rather than spraypainting on further civs.5

This is where you just totally lose me, and indeed where I think everyone loses me. In this paragraph, I observe you trying as hard as you can to make the strongest point in Mac's favor by my estimation look like a point against him. That doesn't have to mean you're doing it on purpose -- it could be tunnel vision, or I could just be missing some crucial point. I've highlighted isolated phrases in this explanation that just made my brain hurt, and I'll try to explain why:

1 -- This possibility should resonate with you a great deal. When I did the LC relationships analyses and determined that you looked terrible in light of what I perceived to be an attempted forced link, you swore to me that it was an intentional move by LC to paint you in a bad light. I want you to think about that assertion you've made to me in your own defense, and apply it to this scenario with Mac in the discussion about the Flowers role that he had in the thread with LC (it wasn't a discussion until LC responded to Mac's public ponderings about the role).

It should, of course, but see #2 (which I'll clarify below). The sum of my pings makes me consider that this detail is, in fact, a case in which LC didn't try smearing a civ.

Also, regarding the correspondence with myself, I don't think it's the same thing. For one thing, everything enclosed in LC's bea case is, imo, to be regarded as bullsuit, considering that the case itself was confirmed bullsuit. LC tried to paint bea, tried to paint me, etc. This doesn't automatically extend to every other interaction or attempt of LC with other players, outside this case.

Furthermore, it is the mutual antagonism between LC and Mac that is making me consider the big "what if". By comparison, I was nub who saw LC in a good light and he had no serious interaction with me apart from trying to frame a Rico-bea connection.

Alternatively, I'd rather ask you to do a throwback exercise and think of how strong you felt LC tried to hid me, as teammate, inside his own fabrications. If you felt strong about me, why can't you feel just as strong about LC possibly doing the same with Mac, in a much more direct and interpersonal sussing match? I'm not asking for mutual exoneration or condemning between me and Mac, but you could certainly try the exercise, considering that we're talking about LC as a common denominator.

2 -- What is the other stuff? Is this other stuff substantive thread-borne evidence, or are the components of your own mindset about the Mac/LC interaction that are influencing your read?

Other stuff = other elements in my entire case.

3 -- Any mafia player must be mindful of this in any game, yes. I want you to explore your own read though, within yourself (it doesn't have to be explained in text if you don't care to), and decide whether you're observing good evidence that LC's treatment of Mac was for the sake of team preservation, or if you're observing something that you want to be good evidence of the same.

I'm actually pumped up, without feeling like I'd be squeezing any tin foil too tight on my head, that this path needs to be explored and that LC might have had at least one or two teammates in sync with what they need to do in order to come out on top of the situation the best. You may see this LC treatment of Mac (and viceversa, I'll add) as containing too much in-your-face-ness and feud-ness to be anything but genuine mafia vs civ. But to me it can boil down to a masterful distancing.

4 -- How does "actively wondering" differ from "wondering"? I don't mean to nitpick semantics, I am trying to show you evidence that you are tunneling -- at least I see it. Are you considering a possibility that exists, or are you pushing your mindset towards a possibility that exists? This is an important distinction.

Considering, not pushing. And actively since I've started my reads, with the mindset that something isn't currently working and that we need to look at the extremes.

5 -- What about the Mac/LC discussion of the Flowers role strikes you as camouflage, specifically as it differs from the way you view his smearing of bea (and of you, as you assert)? How can you make this separation based on what you know in this thread?

I've answered this already, I think. Everything in the bea case universe (which includes me) being bullsuit =/= everything in LC's design against others for two Days being bullsuit.

LC probably had a poor outing because of other reasons. To give him the benefit of the doubt and to say that he got himself bussed is the same kind of bullshit that almost stopped him getting lynched in the first place.

I assure you I will look into his BOTDers as well.

You must give them the same vigorous examination as you've given Mac, or it will not be a meaningful product.

I will give them the same read method I gave sig, Mac and motel, so far. It needs to be pointed out that any further vigorousness in examining Mac stemmed from him confronting me about it. The other did not, up to this point.

Yes, you never bussed LC by directly voting him, but your verbal and insistent antagonism with him (to which he also happened to reply with mild counter-attacks) can qualify, if you are teammates, as distancing and keeping him in potential buss zone, with the effect that you'll come out looking very good in the picture afterwards.

You never pulling the switch on him is exactly what bothers me. As the LC lynch started brewing and growing on D2, you yourself became increasingly louder in saying that you approve of this lynch, that the meta arguments on him reek, only to afterwards wag the finger at the BOTDers and meta'ers. AND also hunt them.

You voting elsewhere is exactly what bothers me and I furthermore do no believe you always went for your "bigger scum reads".

D1 your "big scum read" was Diiny, then you switched to a lurker hunt.
D2 your "big scum read" was, I assume, Llama. Here you stuck with it, but also whilst cheerleading LC's lynch from the sidelines. Also, where has your Llama "big scum read" gone since?
D3 your "big scum reads" were Roxy, together with FZ, Epi and Sorsha. Where has your Roxy "big scum read" gone since? You ended up waffling between Sorsha and Golden.
D4 you did simple math and retroactively kept your "big scum read" on Sorsha.
D5 you were out of retroactive votes (you defended Devin previously, so no good going there) so you started building new paths.

This is a more reasonable reason to be suspicious of Mac than anything else in this post, in my opinion. I don't think it's damning evidence, because townies move their votes between suspects too, but at least I can see this presented against Mac and not leave the thread in confusion. The highlighted portion is more evidence, however, of what I perceive to be a biased mindset -- you've condemned Mac's Day 5 voting behavior before you even begin to assess it. Are you trying to see a townie in Mac as hard as you're trying to see a mafioso?

What I've condemned is Mac running into a dead end with what I see as a two-Day consistent "LC defenders must die" mentality. Given the high amount of civ flips, if he's bad, he had ample space to juggle between these names, but on Day 5, his previous defending of Devin meant he can't just flip his stance. Him catching fire from Matt and Epig, at least, concerning the SK angle, could have also benefited him ending this D3-D4 trail to focus on new paths.

I saw Mac as very town twice in my reads, until this revision. I can't say I am able to embrace the "read him both ways" as much anymore. I am confident I am seeing a mafioso in him.

I saw you left out a chunk about what I see as baddie impulse from Mac (the stances on seaside, Sorsha, turning D5 into an SK hunt, etc.). Would you kindly give me your impression of that, since we already covered basically everything else in my post?

[Choutas]

How many players are in RYM games normally?

15-22 or so. This is the biggest game in RYM mafia history.

This game needs at least half an hour every day to catch up. It began with 34 players and 48 hours dayphases. There's just too much stuff to process and it's so much that I can't seem to get anything by it. The vocal players are hidden between thousands upon thousands of words. Seriously let's go back to the old days people.