AGOT Mafia XLIX - The Foundation of the Kingsguard

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Grandison' post='1297628' date='Apr 2 2008, 11.59']Just to clarify: I don't find being in the middle of the road too suspicious, personally I always have a hard time suspecting people early in the game, and don't find it suspicious when others have the same problem. Being "middle of the road" alone doesn't convince me. However, [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showtopic=27221&st=80#"][b]this post[/b][/url] seems a bit forced to me, it seems like he's trying to find an excuse to name those 4 players (the post above, obviously), so as to drop names.[/quote]

So being "middle of the road" isn't suspicious but you are suspicious of [i]something[/i] about the linked post. Can you clarify for me which post you and who is being forced? You link to Fell's post which quotes mine which is in response to Smallwood. Which of these do you find suspicious?

[quote]As for why vote Thorne over Corbay: I said I thought Corbay would be the most likely FM of the 4 named, but I'm obviously not certain. However, Thorne seems like a likely candidate for a symp, and it never hurts to get those out of the way. So yeah, I'm voting Thorne and wouldn't mind lynching him, though for other reasons than you others, it seems.[/quote]

Huh? Your posts and your place on the Thorne lynch are moving you up my list, Grandy.

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Mallister' post='1297676' date='Apr 2 2008, 12.32']Ok, I won't be here during the end of day, so it's time to decide. Thorne? Too easy target, nobody seems to defend them. Grandison? I understand their reasoning... there still are some questions, but not that big, we always might return to Grandy later.
[b]Wythers[/b].
I still think that re-reading players with 2-4 posts isn't best way to help us. Just saying "people, Plumm has only two posts" would be as good... but now Wythers has a reputation of a person who does re-reads. Very comfortable for them, er?[/quote]

Stop just looking at what's directly in front of you. This is the worst justification for a vote I've seen: "He's doing re-reads!" Stop being lazy.

The cases on Thorne, Grandison and Florent all fall in the same category for me still. Each has tried to hedge and been wishy-washy. I think Grandison has the worst offences against logic but I'd like to see A LOT more posts from Florent and Thorne before I'm ready to change.

[House Wythers]

[quote name='House Merryweather' post='1297690' date='Apr 2 2008, 11.47']Really? Why do you think that? It didn't seem the same to me.[/quote]
Well, he is concerned about the same post, just says 'forced' instead of 'middle-roaded', but as I've got it, it's pretty much the same thing. The reason why it seems forced is its middle-roadness.

[House Tyrell]

[quote name='House Merryweather' post='1297690' date='Apr 2 2008, 11.47']Really? Why do you think that? It didn't seem the same to me.[/quote]

It was the symp talk and faulty memory :blush: (too much rushing while at work)


But I did notice one more thing interesting in the Grandy post: he state states that he agrees with Thorne about Florent being suspicious for being indecisive, yet just prior to that statement, he says that many people have a hard time finding someone suspicious on day one, himself included. Rather hypocritical there.

[Magic Mirror]

[quote name='House Plumm' post='1297508' date='Apr 2 2008, 09.47']I think Thorne's middle-roading is worth noting down but not worth lynching today unless no other options come up. He could be keeping his options open but it was early Day 1 so being indecisive isn't that strange. I think Grandison's vote on Thorne is far more suspicious but I'd like to hear from him again before putting down a vote.

For now, I think I'll put a summoning vote on [b]Bar Emmon[/b].[/quote]

We have one person making a somewhat subtle defense for Thorne here. So it isn't like nobody at all is stepping up to the plate for them even if it isn't very much so. Not all that much to work with certainly, but maybe a player to keep an eye on?

I unfortunately find myself agreeing at leas a bit with both cases. Thorne's post was about as middle of the road as possible.

Then we've got Grandison who almost looks like he's throwing himself in the way of the lynch train of Thorne. He's so suspicious it makes me less suspicious of him. If that makes any sense.

[House Tully]

[quote name='House Pommingham' post='1297172' date='Apr 1 2008, 23.41']Right now I'm inclined to agree with Merryweather's points on [b]Thorne[/b]. [b]Thorne's excessive hedging about another player strikes me as rather suspicious. I do not like the implications of a player repeatedly raising issues about another player as if they're a sign of guilt and then immediately pointing out that it doesn't necessarily mean anything. It looks shifty, or if not shifty, rather unhelpful to the innocent cause.[/b]

For me, this play reads like Thorne is trying to shape the group's thoughts about a player while avoiding direct confrontation. Clearly raising an issue as odd or suspicious is going to shape a reader's thoughts even if the observation is followed by a disclaimer pointing out it's not necessarily suspicious, so it looks like a manipulative piece of play to me.

[b]I should point out that there could be another explanation for Thorne's play[/b], namely that Thorne simply has nothing of substance to add and therefore posts inoffensive nothings in an attempt to be seen to contribute. Either way, it still looks suspicious to me.[/quote]

Not much to go on for Day 1, as usual. As Wythers noted, Pommingham seems to be complaining about Thorne's hedging, and the hedges his own vote on Thorne. It reads like an escape clause to me as well. Thorne's wishy-washy post about the FMFMS thing just seems wishy-washy to me. I understand why it is attracting votes. Being middle-of-the-road can be a problem, but I understand what Grandison is saying. It was early, and taking a strong stand against someone (other than a pressure or joke vote) is sort of irrational. At the same time, I don't understand why he would think that Fell is name-dropping suspects that seem to include Fell as a suspect? That doesn't make much sense to me, nor does the defense of Thorne followed by a vote on Thorne. I am not suspicious of Wythers yet, and I like the points he has raised. Mallister is being pushy, which is not a bad thing, but I don't agree with all of his targets so far. I also don't like his absence for the first part of the day, then flooding a bunch of posts including a whiny post about having the 4th most posts, then dropping a vote and skedaddling for the remainder of the day. It's a good setup to make it hard for us to build a case against him today.

There is not enough to go on yet to expect all 15 of us to post brand new insights every time. I don't see why doing re-reads this early is suspicious. Count me among the re-readers. Even if the first 100 posts are mostly joke posts, there are sometimes a nugget or two that becomes more clear with hindsight. I don't think that it matters yet that no one has really defended Thorne, at least in terms of it reflecting on his guilt or innocence. Maybe there are so few FM that they don't want to risk it, especially when the other candidates are not really getting much in the way of votes yet.

I am having a hard time deciding whether to vote for Grandison or Thorne. They both seem too obvious in their errors, to me. I'll put a vote on [b]Grandison[/b] for now as he seems the more suspicious of the two.

[House Clegane]

All right, replying to various mosts, in random order...

First of all:[quote name='House Wythers' post='1297723' date='Apr 2 2008, 19.28']So being "middle of the road" isn't suspicious but you are suspicious of [i]something[/i] about the linked post. Can you clarify for me which post you and who is being forced? You link to Fell's post which quotes mine which is in response to Smallwood. Which of these do you find suspicious?[/quote]
I managed to link the wrong post. In fact, I didn't link a post at all. :blush: I meant to link this one [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=27221&view=findpost&p=1297021"]here[/url]. It's not important, as I repeated the same stuff just afterwards. Hope that clears it up. Do you now understand why I thought Thorne could be a symp? Oh well, I explain it a bit more below...

This brings me on to... [quote name='House Corbray' post='1297731' date='Apr 2 2008, 19.35']Well, he is concerned about the same post, just says 'forced' instead of 'middle-roaded', but as I've got it, it's pretty much the same thing. The reason why it seems forced is its middle-roadness.[/quote]Except I mean something else entirely. I mean the 4 players he mentions seems a bit contrived. I can't really explain why, this is all in the region of gut, but that's the way it seems to me. Hence why I find it suspicious and what got me thinking of possible symp clues. The idea was that he manufactured that list in order to put his two masters on there.
[quote name='House Connington' post='1297682' date='Apr 2 2008, 18.42']I'm still trying to figure out why he's voting the symp over the FM.[/quote]
I kinda tried to explain it. Mostly I wanted to hear people's reaction to my idea of Thorne as a symp. Seems you all disagree, though, so I guess I'll remove the vote.

[b]Remove vote[/b]

However, I'm more than willing to replace the vote when the time limit nears - or change it, if anything good-looking comes up.

[quote name='House Fell' post='1297737' date='Apr 2 2008, 19.38']But I did notice one more thing interesting in the Grandy post: he state states that he agrees with Thorne about Florent being suspicious for being indecisive, yet just prior to that statement, he says that many people have a hard time finding someone suspicious on day one, himself included. Rather hypocritical there.[/quote]My bad, I wrote those two lasts posts in a bit of a hurry, and therefore they are a bit of a mess. Anyway, when I wrote that post I was a bit annoyed about Florent's style with one-liners and somewhat cryptic posts - that's what I read them as at that moment, anyway. Example [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=27221&view=findpost&p=1296931"]here[/url]. So what I should've written is something like "I'm also suspicious of Florent, because of his noncontributive ways and strange posts" or the like.

Right, double-checking I got the links right this time around...

[House Corbray]

[quote name='House Erenford' post='1297798' date='Apr 2 2008, 11.07']Then we've got Grandison who almost looks like he's throwing himself in the way of the lynch train of Thorne. He's so suspicious it makes me less suspicious of him. If that makes any sense.[/quote]

Er, no, it doesn't make sense, especially when you take into account that Grandison voted for Thorne. Start making sense.

I actually had a real reason for suspecting Florent yesterday. I need to go back and remember what it was, hang on. I do agree that Thorne and Grandi are suspicious, though. Both of them are the hedgiest hedgers that ever hedged their bets. Well, at least in this game. So far.

[House Corbray]

Oh right, it's this whole exchange. Wythers also pointed it out, but I just wanted to reiterate how silly it is. Watch Florent play the 'I agree' game:

[quote name='House Florent' post='1296870' date='Apr 1 2008, 17.57']I must say [Wythers], you present a compelling argument [about Smallwood having a secret code].

:dunno:

Yes, there is.^ :leaving:[/quote]

Oh yes, I agree with Wythers here.

[quote name='House Florent' post='1296931' date='Apr 1 2008, 18.53']Aye, I'm very suspicious of Smallwood right now. Seems too innocent to be innocent, even though he's not acting too innocent. :unsure:[/quote]

Now I'll make a vague statement that could be read either way. :smash:


[quote name='House Merryweather' post='1296936' date='Apr 1 2008, 18.56']Yeah that is what I saw as the code.[/quote]

Merryweather agrees that he sees my code.


[quote name='House Thorne' post='1296937' date='Apr 1 2008, 18.57']I think I agree with you, but explain yourself properly![/quote]

Thorne agrees with Merryweather.

[quote name='House Florent' post='1296938' date='Apr 1 2008, 18.57']I don't think I can!

He knows too much...

EDIT: My reasoning is almost as is almost as good as Wythers'. :P[/quote]

Florent is just throwing it up there and seeing what sticks. I think he's suspicious of me at this point.

[quote name='House Thorne' post='1296943' date='Apr 1 2008, 19.00']Perhaps they knows nothing at all![/quote]

Oho, Thorne comes up with a new possibility! Thar's a bright one.

[quote name='House Florent' post='1296946' date='Apr 1 2008, 19.01']That's what I'm guessing, to be honest.[/quote]

"Oh yes Thorne, I agree with you now, even though I just agreed with Wythers a few posts ago. I'm just so agreeable, it's great! I agree!"


[quote name='House Merryweather' post='1296956' date='Apr 1 2008, 19.11']Huh? You people are confusing. What are you guessing?[/quote]


[quote name='House Florent' post='1296973' date='Apr 1 2008, 19.24']That Smallwood knows nothing.[/quote]

Confirmation: Florent knows nothing.



Now that I read it again, however, I think there's a possibility that Florent could be a symp to (in order of most to least likely) Thorne, Wythers, or Merryweather. Hard to tell, though. Thorne and Florent were equally wishy-washy during this exchange, but Florent was the one parroting back Thorne's ideas.

There's also the chance that Florent is just clueless.

[House Corbray]

Note: I have to leave in about 30 minutes for....well, a bunch of hours, and probably won't be able to post before the end of the day. I'm going to vote for Thorne unless someone can convince me that there's a better option. I'm not impressed with Grandison's earlier post, but his last one was better, even if I don't agree with the 'Thorne is a symp' theory.

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Smallwood' post='1297842' date='Apr 2 2008, 14.30']Er, no, it doesn't make sense, especially when you take into account that Grandison voted for Thorne. Start making sense.[/quote]


Except that Grandison just removed vote from the Thorne train.... and left himself open to vote for whomever. :unsure:

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Tollett' post='1297821' date='Apr 2 2008, 14.17']Not much to go on for Day 1, as usual. As Wythers noted, Pommingham seems to be complaining about Thorne's hedging, and the hedges his own vote on Thorne. It reads like an escape clause to me as well.[/quote]

Pommingham and I already cleared that up. Reading Pomm's post it is another suspicion not an excuse.

[quote]Thorne's wishy-washy post about the FMFMS thing just seems wishy-washy to me. I understand why it is attracting votes. Being middle-of-the-road can be a problem, but I understand what Grandison is saying. It was early, and taking a strong stand against someone (other than a pressure or joke vote) is sort of irrational. At the same time, I don't understand why he would think that Fell is name-dropping suspects that seem to include Fell as a suspect? That doesn't make much sense to me, nor does the defense of Thorne followed by a vote on Thorne.[/quote]

So do we have another defence of Thorne? That's also mildly defending Grandy?

[quote]I am not suspicious of Wythers yet, and I like the points he has raised.[/quote]

We're not buddies yet.

[quote]Mallister is being pushy, which is not a bad thing, but I don't agree with all of his targets so far. I also don't like his absence for the first part of the day, then flooding a bunch of posts including a whiny post about having the 4th most posts, then dropping a vote and skedaddling for the remainder of the day. It's a good setup to make it hard for us to build a case against him today.[/quote]

Mallister is being lazy and unhelpful. Not pushy, just pushing back at me.

[quote]There is not enough to go on yet to expect all 15 of us to post brand new insights every time. I don't see why doing re-reads this early is suspicious. Count me among the re-readers. Even if the first 100 posts are mostly joke posts, there are sometimes a nugget or two that becomes more clear with hindsight.[/quote]

Maybe we can be friends...

[quote]I don't think that it matters yet that no one has really defended Thorne, at least in terms of it reflecting on his guilt or innocence. Maybe there are so few FM that they don't want to risk it, especially when the other candidates are not really getting much in the way of votes yet.

I am having a hard time deciding whether to vote for Grandison or Thorne. They both seem too obvious in their errors, to me. I'll put a vote on [b]Grandison[/b] for now as he seems the more suspicious of the two.[/quote]

Maybe a defence of Thorne is building via another lynch train. Split the votes and we go to night, is that the plan?

[House Connington]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1297876' date='Apr 2 2008, 14.56']Maybe a defence of Thorne is building via another lynch train. Split the votes and we go to night, is that the plan?[/quote]

Both trains are just so damn obvious and I hate the obvious...

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Grandison' post='1297832' date='Apr 2 2008, 14.25']This brings me on to... Except I mean something else entirely. I mean the 4 players he mentions seems a bit contrived. I can't really explain why, this is all in the region of gut, but that's the way it seems to me. Hence why I find it suspicious and what got me thinking of possible symp clues. The idea was that he manufactured that list in order to put [b]his two masters on there[/b].[/quote]


So Grandison, you got some info on the number of FM you want to share with us?

[House Corbray]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1297871' date='Apr 2 2008, 11.48']Except that Grandison just removed vote from the Thorne train.... and left himself open to vote for whomever. :unsure:[/quote]

But 'throwing himself in front of the Thorne train'? To me that implies that he's trying to protect Thorne in some way. Come on. He got into all this shit in the first place by saying "I don't think Thorne is all that suspicious, but I do, so I'm going to vote for him." Then in the post where he removed his vote from Thorne, he still said he liked the theory of Thorne being a symp and was willing to vote for him. He hasn't presented any other suspects. I guess thinking about it more I could see Grandi as suspicious again, but I just disagreed with Erenford's wording.

I would rank Grandison's potential intentions in this order:

1) Trying to get Thorne lynched because he's not connected to Thorne (hence the vote)
2) Selling out a partner because he's afraid of the Coroner Finder (less likely, because the CF could die, not exist, or not come out for a few days)
(other possibilities)
10) A symp trying to save his master by voting for him, because that makes so. much. sense. here.

[House Corbray]

[b]Thorne[/b].

Don't count on me coming back before the end of the day.

[House Upcliff]

[quote name='House Smallwood' post='1297859' date='Apr 2 2008, 13.40']Oh right, it's this whole exchange. Wythers also pointed it out, but I just wanted to reiterate how silly it is. Watch Florent play the 'I agree' game:

Oh yes, I agree with Wythers here.

There's also the chance that Florent is just clueless.[/quote]

Well, to be honest, it may seem like I agreed with Wythers, but like many other people said, the code is just... stupid, lol. It'd be way too obvious to figure out. In other words, my post was a semi-joke. :lol:

The second quoted statement is a bit true, however :P

[House Frey]

[quote name='House Tollett' post='1297821' date='Apr 2 2008, 13.17']Thorne's wishy-washy post about the FMFMS thing just seems wishy-washy to me. I understand why it is attracting votes. Being middle-of-the-road can be a problem, but I understand what Grandison is saying. It was early, and taking a strong stand against someone (other than a pressure or joke vote) is sort of irrational. At the same time, I don't understand why he would think that Fell is name-dropping suspects that seem to include Fell as a suspect? That doesn't make much sense to me, nor does the defense of Thorne followed by a vote on Thorne.

...

I am having a hard time deciding whether to vote for Grandison or Thorne. They both seem too obvious in their errors, to me. I'll put a vote on [b]Grandison[/b] for now as he seems the more suspicious of the two.[/quote]

I agree with Wythers, this reads like a mild defense of Thorne and/or Grandison to me. But he follows up with a vote on Grandison, so if its anything, its probably a defense of Thorne.

[House Clegane]

[quote name='House Wythers' post='1297871' date='Apr 2 2008, 20.48']Except that Grandison just removed vote from the Thorne train.... and left himself open to vote for whomever. :unsure:[/quote]
Because no one thinks my idea was any good. That was my reason to vote for him. However, it's most likely I'll replace my vote on him, unless some other case that I agree with gains momentum.

I've considered voting for Mallister, and was making a case on him. It collapsed, but I'll share my thoughts anyway:


He strikes me as manipulative and trying to get as little out of day 1 as possible. [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=27221&view=findpost&p=1297486"]This[/url] is obviously an attempt to get me or Thorne lynched. Not special, a lot of people seem to want that these days. What is special is that he expresses doubts but saying it's "too late", which is a bit odd, when you have 10 hours left.

Then he starts complaining about Wythers contributing to the game. He does have a point about it would've been faster to just say "Plumm has only two posts", but still... These two posts together strike me a an attempt to end day 1 as fast as possible. Now, why would anyone want that? Is he evil, and wants to end this day with as little discussion as possible? Yeah, I think that's entirely possible. Same sentiment [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=27221&view=findpost&p=1297644"]here[/url].

And then this entire idea collapses [url="http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=27221&view=findpost&p=1297676"]here[/url]. This clearly doesn't fit with the other posts I've refered to, so I guess I should retract my statement. Then again, he does very little to convince others to join (next to nothing), and this basically makes it a "lost" vote, unless we all suddenly agree to lynch Wythers. This way, he places a vote, but (as far as I can see) it ends up as a "useless" vote lynch-wise, because Wythers isn't going to be lynched - and thus one vote less for a lynch. We might end up with too few votes to lynch, with some people seemingly absent (Bar Emmon? Where are you?), and in that kind of scenario Mallister's action is really a problem for the innocent (assuming he doesn't come back before night).

I really can't make up my mind. I'll be on later though, so let's just place a vote and see what you others seem to think of it.

[b]Mallister[/b].

[House Frey]

[quote name='House Grandison' post='1297832' date='Apr 2 2008, 13.25']The idea was that he manufactured that list in order to put his [u]two masters[/u] on there.[/quote]

:unsure: If thats a guess, I'd like to know why you think its 2 and not 3.

[quote]I kinda tried to explain it. Mostly I wanted to hear people's reaction to my idea of Thorne as a symp. Seems you all disagree, though, so I guess I'll remove the vote.

[b]Remove vote[/b]

However, I'm more than willing to replace the vote when the time limit nears - or change it, if anything good-looking comes up.[/quote]

I hate this. You remove your vote because nobody agrees why you. Why? Who cares what other people think?

Do you still believe the theory, or have you been convinced that it doesn't make sense? If the latter, then what convinced you?