AGOT Mafia XLIX - The Foundation of the Kingsguard

[Lady Gaga]

Anyone want to counter claim?

[House Tyrell]

I am not the CF.

I had no read on Pom, so I too will wait also to see if there is a counter-claim, but I am inclined for the moment to believe him.

[House Corbray]

I'm not the CF--if I had been, I probably would have come out already. But the timing is fine, I guess--we can't afford to lose more innocents.

Incidentally, this makes me trust Mallister more. His "90% certain Grandison was evil" thing seems really out of place for a killer or symp. I'm moving him down to tier 3 with Wythers and Pommingham. Other tiers remain unchanged.

[Magic Mirror]

[i]I just got home from work, so give me a little bit to gather myself a quick shower and some food.[/i]

I see that the cf has come out, and said all of our lynches thus far have been innocents. That's just wonderful isn't it? *head-to-desk*

I also see that a lynch against me has gained a nice amount of momentum while I was gone. I'll take this moment to say I am innocent, and will be posting my defense when I get back.

I still believe that our FM has been in on our lynches. It's the only thing that would make sense, and if it isn't an FM in on our lynches I'd be rather confuzzled.

[House Mooton]

[quote name='House Bar Emmon' post='1302223' date='Apr 5 2008, 22.30']I tend to believe Mallister but have doubts about a few things. I would like him to explain why he ruled out Plumm, Florent, and Fell yesterday, as I can't see what about their posts would lead him to trust them.[/quote]I thought Plumm was CF. I was wrong, evidently, but I was quite sure yesterday. As for Florent and Fell, they were widely discussed already, I preferred people to try something new.
I still have doubts about Pom. Anybody wants to counter?

[House Sunglass]

[quote name='House Mallister' post='1302468' date='Apr 5 2008, 21.52']I thought Plumm was CF. I was wrong, evidently, but I was quite sure yesterday. As for Florent and Fell, they were widely discussed already, I preferred people to try something new.
I still have doubts about Pom. Anybody wants to counter?[/quote]
It's just Bar Emmon and Corbray yet to check in. Could be a while. :rolleyes:

[Magic Mirror]

[quote name='House Plumm' post='1302071' date='Apr 5 2008, 14.14']Allow me to summarize:

1) He wanted wait and see which way the winds were blowing. Keeping options open much? (To clarify: I do believe he fell asleep. I'm just annoyed that he didn't vote back in the post prior when it seemed clear that he preferred Thorne over Grandy.)
2) States again that he thought the case on Thorne was the strongest, so it bears asking, [i]why didn't he vote?[/i] I assume he didn't plan on falling asleep, so he would've, as far as he knew, been around to change his vote later anyhow. Why wait? As an innocent, I know I'm vote-happy, content to place things anywhere--after all, the worst that could happen is a little bit of pressure. As an FM though, I've always been more cautious to not seem opportunistic, more likely to play the waiting game to see how the dice fall.
3) If he thought Grandy could've been a symp trying to defend his FM (ie, Thorne), then seriously man. Where the hell was your vote? That only solidifies the case on Thorne, it shouldn't make you feel even more split between the two.

He claims he was split, but "I believe the one on Thorne was the strongest" seems pretty un-split to me.[/quote]

1.I like keeping my options open. If the only two suspects you have already are being pressured then what is the point of another vote on them? It doesn't add any more pressure than there already is.
2.I also believe that wet paper towel is weaker than a paper towel. However, they both aren't very strong now are they? It's called a difference in play styles. I like to be a little more patient, and you like to leap about placing votes on everything. Does one vote on somebody add any more pressure if there are already 3 or more on them? They already know that a lynch is gaining momentum quickly, and are bound to try and defend themselves.
3.I thought that Grandy could've been a symp. Maybe. Possibly. All words that denote a not strong belief in something. However, I also at the time believed it was possible they were just trying to raise a general ruckus, which distracted us. It succeeded we got distracted.

[quote]He posts again suggesting that GGGrand is purposely drawing attention to himself in attempt to distract from somebody else. Clearly, this means GGGrand was a symp. ...A symp to [i]who[/i], may I ask? Thorne? Thorne's dead. Erenford also mentions the idea of two, communicating symps, which made me [i]wtf[/i] back then and it still makes me go wtf now. I'm not sure what the idea was behind that.[/quote]

I'm sorry if that made you 'wtf' and really I was just spitting out an idea. I thought it was possible Grand was a symp it is true. I didn't know who it could be at the time. Hadn't a frakking clue

[quote]So what on earth [i]are[/i] you suggesting? Nothing? It looks more like Erenford's trying to plant the idea of GGGrand being a symp, and hoping everyone else will follow the train tracks for him. Were he innocent, I'm [i]very[/i] sure that Erenford would've at least got off his ass and speculated on who GGGrand's FM masters could've been. It's what I would've done and what any decent player with the innocents' best interests in mind would've done. But he doesn't. This isn't a super-active game, quite the opposite, and it shouldn't have taken long to just skim through and see what possible connections there were.[/quote]

I like throwing ideas out there, and seeing if anybody thinks their decent. I'm sorry you think I'm a crappy player. I've never had anything but the innocents well being in mind. Sometimes it doesn't come across especially in this game where I've been quieter than usual.

[quote]Middle of the road post. Says he's willing to vote Grandy. Doesn't vote Grandy. Clearly waiting for some other option to show up, to the point that I could suspect an Erenford-GGGrand partnership what with Erenford suggesting GGGrand was a symp (and you obviously want to lynch the FM over the symp) and joining the lynch train relatively late.[/quote]

Again I'm a patient person. I like to sit and look around. It doesn't translate well to some people as I can tell here. I don't always make cases right away either. I'll make observations, throw out data, and ideas. That's how I work. I did indeed join the lynch train late as I did against you.

[quote]He does some genuinely useless vote analysis. And by genuinely useless, I [i]do[/i] mean genuinely useless. Check it out:

This, my friends, is what we call contributing-without-contributing. What is this? He even says flat out that he can't draw any conclusions from it. I could randomly pick three people and there'd be a half-decent chance that one FM would be on the list. Sure, Fell or Smallwood could be FM. Or me, from your perspective, but I'm not, so yeah.[/quote]

Well shit it's fucking useless. Congrats captain goddamn obvious. I stated that myself to everyone. OH SHIT PEOPLE AREN'T ALLOWED TO MAKE MISTAKES RUN FOR THE DAMN HILLS!

[quote]He makes this list of Fell, Plumm, and Smallwood, and he says he doesn't draw any conclusions, but if he made the list then he's clearly making some conclusions, however weak. If he didn't favor a GGGrand lynch, why didn't he vote for me? If he's suspicious of me and his vote analysis (without a public CF, vote analysis for a day and half IS really very weak data, but still data) supports it, why not vote? He's testing the waters, I think, dropping bait and seeing who bites.

Still refuses to commit a vote. What on earth is he waiting for? [i]Why[/i] does he keep on waiting? What's he afraid of? Some people are indecisive, yes, but this is taking it to one hell of an extreme. Does he want to consult a partner? Make sure they're not lynching their symp? Is he [i]still[/i] waiting to see which way the winds are blowing, to keep his options open? Is he trying to seem reasonable?[/quote]

I didn't draw any conclusions asides from that perhaps an FM was among those people. It's damn weak conclusion, and I wanted to see what other people thought. It's not dropping bait. It's tossing out ideas for other people to consider.

[quote]So, uh, now he's saying both cases suck, but he'd rather vote Smallwood [i]if[/i] people will support it. Testing the waters much? Pandering the public? Great! So, he's sitting in front of his computer, watching as these so-called crappy cases come up... and what does he do? Nothing? If he prefers Smallwood, for the love of god, [i]push[/i] the Smallwood case. Build a case of quotes and analysis and whatnot, be an advocate ffs. I'd much prefer that over him using a lot of words to say that he's not a fan of either a Smallwood or Grandy lynch.[/quote]

I wasn't going to waste the time voting on a lynch that would go nowhere, and then have no lynch at all. That would be pointless. Why build a case that somebody else has already built? To re-iterate what people said previously, and then get told I repeated what somebody else said?

[quote]And he backs off of Smallwood. Basically, it seems to me like his support of a Smallwood lynch is likely fabricated. At this point, I believe the Grandison lynch was starting to look more and more inevitable, and if Smallwood's a partner, then it would've been a great time to do some distancing.[/quote]

See here I was more than happy to bounce and put pressure on somebody else. If I had wanted the easy way I would've just killed Grandison and been done with it. Instead I decided 'what the hell' and went with it. Smallwood tossed up a thorough defense, and so I backed down. OH NOES BEING REASONABLE IS BAD!

[quote]And again, he suggests we all look at Mallister but does not actually get off his ass to take a look at Mallister himself. He does promise to look at Mallister the next day before he finally votes Grandison though. Of course, Tollett beats him to the chase.[/quote]

Tollet did indeed beat me to creating the case. No other excuse. I was looking through the thread at the time to look for something.

[quote]Again, if he has the data to work with, why not make a full-blown case on Mallister? Why keep throwing little facts and ideas at us? Low-profile, reasonable FM, I say. Hell, Erenford tried (sort of) to switch momentum to Smallwood, also unsuccessfully.[/quote]

I did try to switch momentum a little, and apply pressure to Smallwood. It didn't succeed. No other defense available for this because it's a spot on observation of what happened. I didn't know I was so low profile, but I am fairly reasonable. I was actually trying to become more involved at that time.

[quote]He does another vote analysis that I'm not going to bother quoting in full. It's more solid than his last, and probably worth at least taking a look at, I guess. This is the conclusion:

When is this guy ever going to commit to a vote? All this vote analysis is nice, but vote analysis is a wonderful tool for an FM because it's logical, clean and easy. Doesn't involve any risks. People can't pull any connections out of you one way or another if you keep sticking to looking at the cold facts. For me, I've always found it difficult to build a real case based on quotes, looking for suspicious behavior as an FM, because it just feels so weird when you know you're an FM. I find it interesting that bulk of his posts are either vote analysis or comments on other people's cases (usually saying they're good, but not good enough).[/quote]

I voted twice. It was towards the end on both, which is apparently not in my favor. I didn't vote on day one because I fell asleep, and wasn't convinced by either case. I like data to analyze because it's useful, and other people can use it quite easily in their cases if they choose to. It's also a good way to find patterns, which could help with finding new suspects to look at.

Well shit I'm done. This is my defense for what it's worth. I don't see it reversing the momentum on me for some reason. Let me have some last words at least before you kill me off.

[House Tyrell]

I do prefer the case on Erenford better than the one on Florent. I'll off to bed and will return bright and early.

In the mean time, I will add my vote to [b]Erenford[/b], just in case something comes up. (my life is rarely my own and can get a little unpredictable)

[House Ashford]

[quote name='House Pommingham' post='1302474' date='Apr 5 2008, 22.57']It's just Bar Emmon and Corbray yet to check in. Could be a while. :rolleyes:[/quote]
I'm not the CF.

[House Mooton]

It's very hard to admit this news.
Evidently, both Wythers and Pommingham can't be symps, so my theories were wrong anyway. I need to think what conclusions we can make from presumption Pom is a symp.

I don't buy case on Erenford. I don't think guilty Erenford would hesitate so about innocent lynch.

[House Ashford]

[quote name='House Mallister' post='1302468' date='Apr 5 2008, 23.52']I thought Plumm was CF. I was wrong, evidently, but I was quite sure yesterday. As for Florent and Fell, they were widely discussed already, I preferred people to try something new.[/quote]
You didn't want to consider lynching them because we'd already talked about them a little (a very little in Fell's case)? :o

[House Ashford]

[quote name='House Mallister' post='1302496' date='Apr 6 2008, 00.25']It's very hard to admit this news.
Evidently, both Wythers and Pommingham can't be symps, so my theories were wrong anyway. I need to think what conclusions we can make from presumption Pom is a symp.

I don't buy case on Erenford. I don't think guilty Erenford would hesitate so about innocent lynch.[/quote]
Why not? I can see an FM hesitating to vote for an innocent because they are afraid it's going to come back and haunt them later, especially with the possibility of a CF reveal. It seems to me Erenford has avoided committing himself to any lynch that might come back to bite him in the ass until the lynch was already inevitable.

In case it's not clear, I am leaning towards Erenford today (although I am still suspicious of Fell), but I do want to look at a few things first and also make sure there isn't going to be a counterclaim.

[House Mooton]

[quote name='House Bar Emmon' post='1302504' date='Apr 6 2008, 05.48']You didn't want to consider lynching them because we'd already talked about them a little (a very little in Fell's case)? :o[/quote]Yes. I preferred to concider lynching people who haven't talked about at all, such as Pom and you.
[quote]I can see an FM hesitating to vote for an innocent because they are afraid it's going to come back and haunt them later[/quote]But hesitating haunts them earlier. :)

[House Ashford]

[quote name='House Mallister' post='1302516' date='Apr 6 2008, 00.06']Yes. I preferred to concider lynching people who haven't talked about at all, such as Pom and you.[/quote] If you'd like to make a case, be my guest. :P
[quote]But hesitating haunts them earlier. :)[/quote]
Does it? I believe the chief points against Plumm were that he was middle of the road and that he was overhasty in voting Grandison day 2. Plumm is dead, and Erenford isn't, yet.;)

[Lady Gaga]

I'm going to have some time this morning (not much) and a little more tonight before end of day to hope to flesh out ,my current theory: Mallister and Erenford as partners. I'm not convinced by Erenford's defense and I think Shabba was onto something there.

We still haven't heard from Corbray and likely won't given his posts, I'm believing Pomm for now. If Corbray is the CF or Pomm is bluffing we're pretty well screwed and congrats to the FM for playing us all like suckers.

Here's how I see the game currently:

[u]CI[/u]
Pommingham
Wythers

[u]PI[/u]
Smallwood

[u]Possible FM[/u] (in alpha order)
Corbray
Erenford
Fell
Florent
Mallister

Looking at the bottom 5, Corbray remains a cypher due to not really playing the game. I would have preferred that he at list tell us his suspects but if he's having RL problems of the kind he described then he's probably unable to read the thread.

Erenford has a good case against him by a person I'm assuming to be innocent. I'm not feeling pursuaded by the defense posted. It is essentially the defense done yesterday but WITH MORE CAPS. Erenford is a good lynch today.

Fell also remains mostly a mystery to me. Someone I want to take a closer look at in terms of connections / possible partners.

Florent - I'm leaving Florent alone for now.

Mallister - This one I'm not letting go of yet. There's just something about their interaction during the "Smallwood / Grandison" debate that's bothering me and I think Shabbaplumm's case against Erenford works agianst Mallister too. I think the throwaway suspicion at Mallister by Erenford, without the follow-up case or making any pressure on Mallister, even when I was pushing it is what's making me look at those two right now.

I have another busy day with Lady Wythers and the Little Squirrels (sounds like a minstral troupe :P ) but like I said I will try to make this more concrete later today.

In the meantime I will add my vote to the [b]Erenford[/b] mob.

[House Sunglass]

Sorry about the absence. I've had a few more things on my plate today than I'd have liked. 'Fortunately' I've not missed much at all. Unfortunately I've not actually had much chance to get some new opinions. I'm off to do that now.

[House Tyrell]

I see only Corbry has yet to check in and I am feeling better about Pommy being the CF. I am looking for connections today...possible partners, but I will be out for a few hours and as much as I would like too, I suspect taking my laptop to a family gathering would be beyond rude :/

[House Mooton]

Wythers, we have 9 players, not 8. You lose Bar Emmon, guess why?

I still don't want to say something of value until I hear from Corbray. Corbray, I understand it sucks to post from mobile, but you need 2-5 letters only: "CF" or "not CF".

[House Targaryen]

It is day 4.

9 players remain: Bar Emmon, Corbray, Erenford, Fell, Florent, Mallister, Pommingham, Smallwood, Wythers.

5 votes are needed for a conviction or to go to night.

1 vote for Erenford (Smallwood)

8 players have not voted: Bar Emmon, Corbray, Erenford, Fell, Florent, Mallister, Pommingham, Wythers.

Just under 12 hours left.

[Lady Gaga]

[quote name='House Mallister' post='1302743' date='Apr 6 2008, 10.00']Wythers, we have 9 players, not 8. You lose Bar Emmon, guess why?[/quote]

Damn. I had him there right at the top of my pad of paper. You're right.

Bar Emmon is another that needs another look. I was feeling better about him yesterday in terms of participation but you are right that he's flying low.

[quote]I still don't want to say something of value until I hear from Corbray. Corbray, I understand it sucks to post from mobile, but you need 2-5 letters only: "CF" or "not CF".[/quote]

As I said before, if he's not reading the thread....But I hope you're right.

If we don't have a counter-claim then I'm going to assume that the symp either was mistakenly NK'd by his masters or we lynched him. (Or worse the CF was NK'd and symp Pomm has gambled and won in which case we're done) I don't think the FM are in a position yet that they would be forced to counter-claim. It also leads me to believe that with all the people in this game that have been accused of being a symp, the FM likely have no idea either.