AGOT Mafia Game n= May 2011.

[House Tyrell]

Your turn, Simba. What are your tiers?

This could change after some deeper analysis. But right now, after re-reading the thread once, I'd rank my suspects like this:

Tier 1 - Sooty, Mummy, Garfield

Tier 2 - Marple, Humpty Dumpty, Puff, Wonder Woman, Krakatoa

Tier 3 - Barbie, Ernst, Edward

Will post some more detailed thoughts over the next few hours.

[House Reed]

Also, if there's been any big cases made at this point --particularly on Simba and WW -- I'd appreciate it if people would point out the post numbers.

There isn't really a big case on either of them. Your predecessor voted for Simba and called him evilest of evils, which I disagreed with because I might be crazy, and proceeded to for you.

(This is why I dislike replacements. Sorry. You may never be able to answer for Sotty's reasoning, although if you're evil, well, that sure makes things easier.)

[House Stokeworth]

Yeah, you know all that thing called reading the thread that you're supposed to do in order to make cases and actually get a read on people? Might be awhile before I do that...

It would help me a million if people would list their suspects in tiers if they haven't already done so, along with giving the rationale on their top suspects.

You ... are having trouble catching up so you want us to dump enormous posts full of information all over the thread?

That's just so ... you. :P

I don't think I can do 'tiers' of evil-seeming in any meaningful way right now, because my reads on people are sparse enough that I still prefer to prod someone on whom I have no information, rather than accusing someone for whom I have some minor, ill-defined suspicion. I'll try to do 'tiers' of interest-in-investigating though.

Puff: Needs to talk more, AND seems incredibly overdefensive from what we've seen (286 referencing 279).

--

Ernst Blofeld: I need to reread. I'm concerned with how many posts he has when I considered him in my 'quiet liability' category; I need to check to see if that was spurred by the train on him or if he was just posting many times but with little content. Dodging trains deserves some scrutiny, and unlike the Kat or Simba trains I don't particularly remember why this one didn't happen.

--

Edward: Meta reasons. Scarily quiet. Creepy avatar.

Garfield: Needs to talk more, but seems inconsistent with a newbie killer. Still needs to talk more.

Simba: Doesn't match my memory of WJ's play very well (which, I later realized, is probably because the vast majority of games I played with WJ he was alt-hiding at this point.) As I mentioned before, I think Malcolm's early insights have a surprising accuracy (which does not mean over 50%) despite his inabilty to explain them properly, and Malcolm's early insight was against Simba. I can't put my finger on anything he's doing that's specifically suspicious, though.

--- (not currently interested in lynching/pressing below this line)

Humpty Dumpty: Seems meta-consistent with what little I know about her. Behavior doesn't seem particularly evil. Null read on a more vocal person means not currently interested.

Krakatoa: Meta-consistent, not particularly evil behavior. My gut is twitching though, she may be rising a tier.

Miss Marple: Consistent and no read. I need to reread and form an opinion. Barbed cookies are a concern.

The Mummy: As Marple.

--

Showgirl Barbie: Just because you're always wrong amd a liabilty to your team doesn't mean you're evil. Usually the opposite.

Sooty: It's Halo. He can kill himself without my help. If he doesn't do something suicidally bizarre, then I'll start thinking he's evil then, but I'll give him the chance first. Likely to move wherever after I hear Halo's overall thoughts and compare to Sotty's strangeness.

[House Connington]

Tier 1 - Sooty, Mummy, Garfield

Sooty 1.0 must of said something REALLY suspicious in her 3 posts in the thread to be #1 in your top tier of suspects, because I'm sure you wouldn't be going after someone solely because they have a low post count, would you?

Likewise, has Garfield played here before? If not, why do you think it is that your top tier is made up of 2 noobs --whose playstyles you're unfamiliar with-- and Gert, whose playstyle you've often said you 'don't get'? I don't want to accuse you of picking soft/typical targets, but that's sort of what it looks like.

There isn't really a big case on either of them. Your predecessor voted for Simba and called him evilest of evils, which I disagreed with because I might be crazy, and proceeded to for you.

(This is why I dislike replacements. Sorry. You may never be able to answer for Sotty's reasoning, although if you're evil, well, that sure makes things easier.)

I thought you said WW was your top suspect but given kuro's last post I think I may have misread.

I'll be honest, I don't know if I've got enough of a grasp on this game to call you (Kat) and/or WJ suspects just yet, but I do find it interesting that you're trying to direct attention away from him.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I also sort of felt like your first post might not be totally genuine. Like you were parodying emotions --indecisiveness, frustration, etc.-- that we've all come to expect from innocent Kat.

[House Wythers]

What you suggested Kat was doing (intimidating you into silence) isn't supported by the text, and is thus irrelevant. What Kat actually did (voted a quiet player who seemed to be trying to 'fit in' - the distinction of being voted keeps you from fitting in as well and provokes you to respond, in other words it 'stirs the pot') is quite like what you did.

That's not the way it felt at the time. Maybe that is what Krak was doing, I don't know how she plays. I do know that the initial response it elicited from me was something like 'Yikes! What did I say wrong?! I need to slow my roll and get the lay of the land before posting more.' It occurred to me that that strategy wouldn't serve me well and maybe Krak was trying to get me to go down that road intentionally. Sort of a half formed idea, but whatever. It's what was fluttering through my mind at the time and I posted it. She still rubs me the wrong way.

You asked me my thoughts on Marple and Ernst. Here they are:

Marple - I am at a bit of a loss here. I don't know Lany well, but she seems like a careful person with organized thoughts (plus I hear she's played this game a million times). I get the distinct impression that any 'missteps' she would make at this point would be on purpose to get reads on other players. She could be FM, she could be team. I think she would be posting similarly regardless of what faction she belongs to. I'd be lying if I said I had a clue.

Ernst - He has been flying under my radar a bit. a lot of you have. You are all new to me. That being said, nothing Ernst has said has risen any red flags for me. He seems kind of townish.

[House Tyrell]

Will start with my top tier.

Sooty

This one is pretty simple. Goes back to the issue from day 1, where he misrepresented my post and used that as a reason to vote for me.

Also, his response to Kat's vote against him was strange. Humpty has already pointed this out.

Krakatoa, why would I joke vote when I was already late to the game? It's just pointless time wasting really. I don't really get why you find that scummy. You seem to be suggesting I voted Simba to bandwagon him, well aren't you just doing the same thing to me right now?

I don't think Kat was actually saying either of those things. And then Sooty followed up by voting for Kat, with the excuse that he thought Kat was more likely to be lynched than me. The explanation doesn't make sense, because Kat and I both had 1 vote aside from Sooty's vote at that time. Perhaps the better answer is that he felt it would benefit him to get rid of Kat (of course, that interpretation would work better if I hadn't been voting for Sooty as well...hmm).

I'll admit, it's not a strong case for day 2. But combined with the lack of contribution, it's enough to keep Sooty in my top tier for now.

Side question - Humpty, you've also mentioned that you were suspicious of Sooty changing his vote from me to Kat on day 1. Can you explain your own theory as to why an evil player would have done that?

Garfield

Didn't give much thought to Garfield on day 1, but going back over his few posts, he looks somewhat suspicious. His first few posts are strangely comfortable with the game. Contrast that to Puff, who has no idea whats going on. Could possibly be the result of consulting with a partner.

Then, after Barbie defends him, he says -

At risk of sounding defensive, voting for me does seem kid of scummy. This can be a pretty intimidating game for a n00b. Calling out a new person for sounding suspicious/trying to hard to fit in when they haven't said much is a great way to make sure new people keep quiet and hesitant. And quiet people tend to get lynched, am I right?

I've got my eye on you.

He's right...it does look defensive.

But most importantly, it's his decision to keep his vote on Starlin that looks suspicious. Can't fault anybody for voting against Starlin. But this reasoning is extremely weak -

I haven't been able to make myself remove my vote for some reason. Hate to say it's a gut feeling, but it is what it is. Maybe they (other people) voted for you for the same reason I haven't removed my vote yet.

Kat has really already made this case against Garfield, over the course of a few posts. I'm mostly just agreeing with her.

I'll save The Mummy for my next post.

[House Connington]

I'll admit, it's not a strong case for day 2. But combined with the lack of contribution, it's enough to keep Sooty in my top tier for now.

I can't really comment on the other stuff you mention, but as far as contribution goes, I think you can expect a bit more from here on out. Can't guarentee it will be quality though, I'm much more of a quantity guy.

It's funny, I think this is the first time I'm being tossed around as an early game lynch option for something someone else has done :P

[House Stokeworth]

Okay, I did a rush reread of the Mummy to try to make an independent opinion before WJ posted his.

I was mostly struck by how often I found myself agreeing with her and/or having her agree with me, which is always gratifying. But then I noticed one little thing...

She votes Joseph Starlin while catching up, as IIRC the fifth vote on the sole train. Then apparently realizes there was a train and removes vote.

After this she doesn't seem to express suspicion towards Joseph Starlin at all.

You were suspicious enough of him to vote before checking vote-counts, but by bedtime he's not even on your list? What changed?

[House Tyrell]

The Mummy

There's something off about Gert in this game. Unfortunately, this is very similar to the feeling that led me to vote for Malcolm on day 1. But I'm going to roll with it anyway.

The first major point against her is the lack of activity. Gert has become one of our strongest players over the past few years. And one of the things that has stood out to me is that she has been very active on day 1 whenever she is innocent. I expect her to be a leader....but she hasn't taken on that role at all in this game. She's actually pretty under the radar.

Next is the relatively easy and uncontroversial nature of her posts.

I'm going through the thread and quoting posts that I want to comment on, and so far the only one I've been saving are Stalin's. I was just about the multi quote them all when I came across this post and it brings up pretty much everything that bothers me about Malc's posts. I guess at this point I can only say 'ditto'. One post that wasn't brought up was where Malc said 'he is the same when evil and inno, just like me'. I thought it was unusually self-serving.

Starlin

At this point I don't find Barbie's push for night scummy, just misguided.

Basically just agrees with the largest mob. Throws in a bit of new evidence against Malc (always something I expect from an evil player who doesn't want to be called out for sheeping other people). And then finishes up by echoing the consensus about Barbie. Doesn't bring up anything new (beyond the throwaway point about Malc).

But then she backs off of her Starlin vote, when she sees that he has a lot of votes.

Ah crap, Stalin's got a shit ton of votes already. I'm removing vote until I finish my read of the thread.

Some people might argue that an evil player would be more careful, and avoid the whole vote / remove vote ordeal altogether. But I disagree - I could see Gert doing it.

Then she echoes my call for explanations to accompany votes -

I really don't get why Puff is obviously town. Unless I missed it, he's had like two posts at this point not saying much except for an opportunistic vote on Starlin (I keep wanting to add Darlin' after that). I see that Igor is not big on explaining, but this one baffles me. +1 for Simba for calling this out, although to be fair, I think most people would have called him out if they'd been around.

Again, it's nothing original. I can't fault Gert for being late to the game and wanting to let us know the points that she agrees/disagrees with. But like I said before, I expect more from her.

It goes on like that for a few posts, until Gert hits her first main suspect - Barbie. Just so happens that its in response to Barbie suspecting her first. Which isn't automatically suspicious...but it does fit with my read that Gert is taking the easy route, and not necessarily looking for the FM.

First, her response to being on Barbie's suspect list -

Since I had one post at this point saying absolutely nothing, is the criteria for my FMness purely my low profile? Combine this with your post saying WW's vote on Starlin was OMGUS and it looks like you're not really trying to find the evilz. You also decided to champion the go to night movement, which is a good way to contribute to the discussion without drawing heat and having to actually discuss who looks evil. I hear that it's hard for FM to make up cases on people who they know are innocent. Just sayin'

Then Gert's vote -

I know Humpty ended up posting a lot, but at this point I was a bit fried trying to take in the whole thread and I don't have a good read on her. I never have a good read on Krakatoa. No reason to suspect Simba or Igor. Not sure about Edward or Marple. Feel good about Wonder Woman. I need more from Garfield. Also need more from Ernst, Sooty and Puff (slightly suspicious, Sooty leading that pack). That leaves my top suspects as Starlin and Showgirl. Starlin I am willing to leave for now as usually I don't get a good read from him on day 1, but I will say I really didn't like his day one play. He seemed like he was trying to be ... less contentious than normal. I dunno, that one's gut and like I said, I'm willing to let it ride. So yeah, that brings me to Showgirl Barbie for his lack of effort in hunting killers. Sure, you could see it as OMGUS, but tell me I'm wrong.

Showgirl Barbie

That second post there really drew my attention. Again, Gert is a leader when she's innocent. She's somebody who calls people out for their suspicious behavior. Now, as I've mentioned, I know she was catching up. But to basically just run through everyone in a short summary paragraph? That's weak as hell. And let's break down the actual content.

"Humpty...I don't have a good read on her."

"I never have a good read on Krakatoa."

"No reason to suspect Simba or Igor."

"Not sure about Edward or Marple."

"I need more from Garfield."

"Also need more from Ernst, Sooty, and Puff."

I mean, c'mon...has she said anything worthwhile in any of those comments? The whole thing is full of empty, meaningless crap.

Also, her one positive read has no evidence to back it up - "Feel good about Wonder Woman."

And her suspects are -

"Starlin I am willing to leave for now as usually I don't get a good read from him on day 1, but I will say I really didn't like his day one play. He seemed like he was trying to be ... less contentious than normal. I dunno, that one's gut and like I said, I'm willing to let it ride."

"So yeah, that brings me to Showgirl Barbie for his lack of effort in hunting killers. Sure, you could see it as OMGUS, but tell me I'm wrong."

Her suspicion of Starlin is very wishy washy, with plenty of caveats. And her attack on Barbie is very safe - she's going after the one person who has listed her as a top suspect. (Note, that is a key point here - she isn't making any new enemies.)

Over the next few posts, she just reiterates her suspicion for Barbie.

Then, after Kat presses her to consider a vote for Sooty, she says -

Well, not much of a chance. I just reread her (him?) to see if I would throw a vote there and I'm not really comfortable doing that. Although the most worrisome thing is the vote switch from Simba to Krakatoa for a better chance of getting a vote when you were both at one. Shit. Now that I am putting it into words, it is more worrisome than I thought on the re-read. Getting too much heat for voting Simba and decided to back off? Anyway, I still think my vote is probably not going there. I want to re-read Ernst because I am thinking I might have given him too much credit. Puff is worrisome and loe-profile too, but I'm not sure there is enough there for me.

It's another dose of wish-washy uncertainty. She starts by not wanting to vote for Sooty, but quickly backs off and says Sooty is more worrisome than she realized. Leaves the door open to change her mind. She also mentions Ernst in a vague way and offers a non-committal comment about Puff.

Eventually, she decides to move her vote to Ernst before going to sleep. Here's her reasoning -

As Simba said, all of the reasons for voting Simba came after he actually voted. Perhaps not the strongest reason, but it's all I got right now. If I do make it to the end of the day, I could possibly be persuaded to vote Sooty, possibly Puff. I still prefer Showgirl Barbie above all, but I seem to be alone in that. Eh, I have a niggling gut evil on Edward too, but nothing I can pinpoint. Probably not willing to act on that at this point.

First, I'll mention that she is once again non-committal, as she follows her vote by adding she "could possibly be persuaded to vote Sooty, possibly Puff".

But more importantly, look at her reason for voting Ernst. She cites one of my arguments against Ernst from early on day 1. But she explains it incorrectly. This is pretty big, in my opinion.

Lets start with what Ernst said to justify his vote against me.

He protects himself more than sombedy else (as for me). Killers more frequent than citizens defence themselves a lot.

He argued a lot with Igor but didn't even asked me with same reasons, why I said that Barbie is innocent.

He was suspected by Joseph, so he would be great as the second person, who may be hanged up.

There are 3 points there. I respond in post 125, and as part of that response, I ask for evidence of his 1st accusation (that I was being over-defensive). Ernst answers with 'evidence' that all occurred after his vote against me - illustrating some inconsistency on his part. As I said at the time, it was enough to make me suspicious of him.

Then, later on, Gert comes along and uses that exchange to justify her vote against Ernst. But do you see where she possibly slipped up? She said -

all of the reasons for voting Simba came after he actually voted.

Which is incorrect. Only the first reason for voting against me came after Ernst voted. The other 2 reasons that Ernst provided came before his vote against me. And while I disagreed with them, the time travel argument didn't apply.

The reason why this bothers me because it shows that Gert wasn't actually reading and thinking about the exchange on her own. She simply saw my argument, latched on to it, and spat it out as a justification for her vote. But she didn't actually understand it. Seems like the type of move I'd expect from a lazy FM who was possibly overwhelmed by showing up to the thread late and being forced to catch up with everything.

So...when you put all of that together, she is my top suspect right now. I guess there's always a chance that a lot of this comes down to Gert being unexpectedly busy throughout day 1. But I can only base my analysis on what we have in the thread.

The Mummy gets my vote.

[House Tyrell]

Sooty 1.0 must of said something REALLY suspicious in her 3 posts in the thread to be #1 in your top tier of suspects, because I'm sure you wouldn't be going after someone solely because they have a low post count, would you?

You're not number 1 - I didn't rank suspects within the tiers. Mummy is my top suspect right now.

As for the rest - you can see my reason for suspecting you in my post from a few minutes ago.

Likewise, has Garfield played here before? If not, why do you think it is that your top tier is made up of 2 noobs --whose playstyles you're unfamiliar with-- and Gert, whose playstyle you've often said you 'don't get'? I don't want to accuse you of picking soft/typical targets, but that's sort of what it looks like.

I don't think I've said that I "don't get" Gert's playstyle. At least not recently. She'll hate me saying this, but I personally think she uses logic as much as she uses gut at this point.

Either way, she's far from an easy target.

[House Tyrell]

Anyway, I'm headed to sleep. Other thoughts will have to wait until tomorrow.

[House Targaryen]

It is day 2.

12 players remain: Edward, Ernst Blofeld, Garfield, Humpty Dumpty, Krakatoa, Miss Marple, Puff the Magic Dragon, Showgirl Barbie, Simba, Sooty, The Mummy, Wonder Woman.

7 votes are needed for a conviction or 6 to go to night.

1 vote for Garfield (Krakatoa)

1 vote for Puff the Magic Dragon (Wonder Woman)

1 vote for The Mummy (Simba)

9 players have not voted: Edward, Ernst Blofeld, Garfield, Humpty Dumpty, Miss Marple, Puff the Magic Dragon, Showgirl Barbie, Sooty, The Mummy.

[House Stokeworth]

My vote is on Puff. Puff's vote is not on Puff.

The reason why this bothers me because it shows that Gert wasn't actually reading and thinking about the exchange on her own. She simply saw my argument, latched on to it, and spat it out as a justification for her vote. But she didn't actually understand it. Seems like the type of move I'd expect from a lazy FM who was possibly overwhelmed by showing up to the thread late and being forced to catch up with everything.

Do you expect Gertrude to be a lazy, overwhelmed FM? I don't.

The nonconfrontational aspect you bring up is quite suspicious, but I disagree with most of your meta. I'm very interested in hearing Gertrude's reasoning (not someone else imagining her reasoning, please) for her sudden Starlin-blindness.

Out for a while. Puff, give us something to work with!

[House Upcliff]

I need to sleep, but before I go to bed, I must tell that I've found one particularly strong innocent-tell:

on Humpty Dumpty

I was thinking and clearly that was not faked. She's innocent.

OK, please explain the tell. Don't pull an Igor on us.

She votes Joseph Starlin while catching up, as IIRC the fifth vote on the sole train. Then apparently realizes there was a train and removes vote.

After this she doesn't seem to express suspicion towards Joseph Starlin at all.

You were suspicious enough of him to vote before checking vote-counts, but by bedtime he's not even on your list? What changed?

My suspicion of Starlin was pretty much the same as you - mostly meta on what I expected from him. My vote was meant as pressure. When I realized just how many people were also pressuring him, I backed off because I didn't really want to lynch him. My rule of thumb with Malc is that by day 3 if I don't get an inno read on him, I put him at the top of my suspect list. I was never really interested in lynching him on Day 1, even though he was ringing some alarms. I did mention him again, but said I was willing to let him ride.

She'll hate me saying this, but I personally think she uses logic as much as she uses gut at this point.

LIES!!

[House Upcliff]

The first major point against her is the lack of activity.

My work schedule is crappy and I have no access to a computer all day. I simply wasn't around. When I did come back, not a lot of people were around so I took the time to read through the thread and try to comment on it as I was reacting to it.

Next is the relatively easy and uncontroversial nature of her posts.

{stuff about Stalin)

But then she backs off of her Starlin vote, when she sees that he has a lot of votes.

Explained above.

Some people might argue that an evil player would be more careful, and avoid the whole vote / remove vote ordeal altogether. But I disagree - I could see Gert doing it.

WIFOM. I know you know this, but you can't really use it as an argument.

Then she echoes my call for explanations to accompany votes -

Again, it's nothing original. I can't fault Gert for being late to the game and wanting to let us know the points that she agrees/disagrees with. But like I said before, I expect more from her.

But you are faulting me. You keep calling me unoriginal and lazy. I do find it harder to get intot he game when reading a huge chunk of the game without being involved in it. Your claims of my logical play aside, I get a feel for this game by interacting and going back and forth with players, not just sitting back and analyzing it. My gut needs to be in the middle of it, otherwise I have a difficult time evaluating motives.

It goes on like that for a few posts, until Gert hits her first main suspect - Barbie. Just so happens that its in response to Barbie suspecting her first. Which isn't automatically suspicious...but it does fit with my read that Gert is taking the easy route, and not necessarily looking for the FM.

Yeah, yeah, OMGUS and all. You think his suspects were good? Or that calling Wonder Woman's vote against Starlin the most suspicious?

But to basically just run through everyone in a short summary paragraph? That's weak as hell. And let's break down the actual content.

"Humpty...I don't have a good read on her."

"I never have a good read on Krakatoa."

"No reason to suspect Simba or Igor."

"Not sure about Edward or Marple."

"I need more from Garfield."

"Also need more from Ernst, Sooty, and Puff."

I mean, c'mon...has she said anything worthwhile in any of those comments? The whole thing is full of empty, meaningless crap.

I mostly put everyone in as a check to myself. I wanted to make sure I at least remembered everyone and knew how I felt about them, even if it was just 'I have no friggin clue'. That little bit was more for myself rather than anyone else.

Also, her one positive read has no evidence to back it up - "Feel good about Wonder Woman."

This is true, it wasn't explained. To me it was obvious so I didn't bother putting it in words. As I was going through the thread I'd get tot he point where I'd want to break off and comment only to find the very next post is Wonder Woman saying everything I was going to. Right now he's the one who's thought's I am able to follow and agree with best. Of course I don't want to vote him off right now.

Her suspicion of Starlin is very wishy washy, with plenty of caveats. And her attack on Barbie is very safe - she's going after the one person who has listed her as a top suspect. (Note, that is a key point here - she isn't making any new enemies.)

Over the next few posts, she just reiterates her suspicion for Barbie.

Then, after Kat presses her to consider a vote for Sooty, she says -

It's another dose of wish-washy uncertainty. She starts by not wanting to vote for Sooty, but quickly backs off and says Sooty is more worrisome than she realized. Leaves the door open to change her mind. She also mentions Ernst in a vague way and offers a non-committal comment about Puff.

At this point I was feeling pressured to make a decision because I just realized I would probably miss the end of the day. The Barbie thing was not going to happen, so this is just me thinking out loud about my choices. I didn't want to just throw a vote out without thinking about it.

But more importantly, look at her reason for voting Ernst. She cites one of my arguments against Ernst from early on day 1. But she explains it incorrectly. This is pretty big, in my opinion.

<stuff>

The reason why this bothers me because it shows that Gert wasn't actually reading and thinking about the exchange on her own. She simply saw my argument, latched on to it, and spat it out as a justification for her vote. But she didn't actually understand it. Seems like the type of move I'd expect from a lazy FM who was possibly overwhelmed by showing up to the thread late and being forced to catch up with everything.

Actually, it was the move of an overwhelmed innocent showing up to the thread late desperately trying to find a reason to suspect one weak suspect over another. I'll have to read that over, but I thought I understood that argument. Apparently I didn't.

[House Upcliff]

Again, I'll have to reread, but as much as Simba is saying that I'm not playing up to his expectations, he's not playing up to mine. You're by far as active if not more than me. You may have more posts than me, but I don't get the feeling that you're invested. You had a few short posts via phone plus your vote this morning, but I remembering being disappointed that you hadn't contributed more. Perhaps that's not fair, but If you're using it against me ...

However, I was already half suspecting you because of your bullying post towards Humpty. She suspected you so you browbeat her trying to get her to back off by appealing to past games. It really, really hit me wrong. That and the fact that Stalin had a few vibes on you. Now I see this case on me which is, how shall I put this - a fairly big post - to put up a few points against me surrounded by fluff and meta. Seriously, there was a lot of filler in there to give the case weight. It feels like a full on WJ press based on not much information.

Simba

And Edward ... where the hell are you?

eta: just realize Edward and I have the same post count :blush:

[House Upcliff]

Didn't give much thought to Garfield on day 1, but going back over his few posts, he looks somewhat suspicious. His first few posts are strangely comfortable with the game. Contrast that to Puff, who has no idea whats going on. Could possibly be the result of consulting with a partner.

Do you really believe that Garfield is being coached?

[House Reed]

Kat has really already made this case against Garfield, over the course of a few posts. I'm mostly just agreeing with her.

I'm kind of worried that my logic is being held up as something to follow here. :uhoh: But ok, sure, yes, I agree?

It's funny, I think this is the first time I'm being tossed around as an early game lynch option for something someone else has done :P

Gah! (:P) Are you going to keep making this argument? I know Sotty probably left no notes for you, but....well.....it's kind of an excuse for an easy way out of any tight spot, isn't it?

Do you really believe that Garfield is being coached?

I had that thought. But I dunno. Maybe he's just read the wiki and stuff. There's just something that feels really off about the way Garfield has been voting (or not voting) so far, imho.

I'm really worried about today getting sidetracked by two people arguing, neither of whom I have an evil read on...sort of like what happened yesterday. I don't suspect you, Gert, especially because I know what it's like to arrive late in a thread and have to jump into the action.

Having a hard time piecing together a coherent picture of who could be evil. If Garfield is evil, and has a partner, I don't think it's Sooty, but those are two of my favorite suspects. Except, wrt Garfield's general stench of competence, Sooty wasn't really in a position to coach G. This is all just speculation, of course. Plus, they have both attacked me or at least suspected me for one reason or another, and I don't think coordinated partners would put their eggs in one basket like that. (tl;dr too early for making lists of possible partners I guess. Just deleted some lists from my posts when I realized they were kind of useless.)

Things that I would like:

1. More posts from Edward! Unless he's just going to spend the whole time trying to lynch me, in which case, no, stay the lurker you are. :P But seriously, would like to hear from Edward on 1) why he thinks Simba is innocent- that was a pretty big statement he made late on Day 1 kind of out of nowhere.

2. More of Puff the Magic Dragon! Like just a few posts with a suspect list would be fine. Or a vote. Or a reason why we shouldn't vote you out for lurking. An answer to why you did not seem to consider anyone other than Starlin on Day 1 would be fabulous.

3. A vote from Sooty- pick a person to vote for and write it in stone. Soft stone. Maybe even lava. I just want something to nail you with.

4. More from Humpty Dumpty. So, now that you've been pushed around by Simba, how do you feel about him? What about some of the new players?

[House Baratheon]

This could change after some deeper analysis. But right now, after re-reading the thread once, I'd rank my suspects like this:

Tier 1 - Sooty, Mummy, Garfield

Tier 2 - Marple, Humpty Dumpty, Puff, Wonder Woman, Krakatoa

Tier 3 - Barbie, Ernst, Edward

Will post some more detailed thoughts over the next few hours.

O RLY? Even in 5p Lylo it's damn hard to get the right 2p ties. 3 player ties in 12p day? LMAO. This is such a bullshit.

Humpty Dumpty - is damn obv innnocent, because I had already explained why.

And isn't it your post maked her reaction?

I mean, stop your crap spree! From what I've seen you did't even analysed simple reaction responses from the people you were talking.

At first I didn't wanted to vote you, because Malc was a bit too contradictory to my liking too. The only reason which stoped me from voting him was a bare gut. And I started to doubt that you might not be FM when you was making this posts:

Malc is definitely a very insightful player, but I've learned to not expect much from him on day 1. He usually doesn't get going until later.

Reading back over his posts, the one thing that stands out to me is his response to my question toward Mina, followed by his inaccurate assessment of how I play when innocent/evil. But those are just minor things, and right now he's only in the middle of my suspect list.

And then lynched him anyways. (I read your case on Malc too)

But that is not the point. I am not blaming you in voting Malc, that proves nothing. I am blaming you in crap play.

I really hate all recent posts of yours, but too busy to make word-by-word analisis. And I guess that would be too much of a distraction.

Summary:

1) Rude play in order to justify survilal.

Aka this post of mine:

Nope. Simba was playing rude and I think he knows that he won't be lynched at this point anyways, so he make a slightly bad things, just to make a legit reason for his survival. That's good ol' scum method to get a long play with "red herring" flavour.

2) Completely wrong and extremely contradictory with your own interations cases. Aka

this

"

Tier 1 - Sooty, Mummy, Garfield -- I would be laughting so hard if somebody tells me that this is a scumteam

Tier 2 - Marple, Humpty Dumpty, Puff, Wonder Woman, Krakatoa --- here is the place to put your FM-pertner, I swear. Marple? Wonder Woman?

Tier 3 - Barbie, Ernst, Edward --- greatst scumteam evar! LMAO x 2"

[House Baratheon]

VOTE SIMBA