Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Teneb]

Extension granted. New deadline is 20th of March, 22:00 BRT

[IronyOwl]

Conveniently, I'm available sooner than I thought. Not soon enough to survive that deadline had we not extended, but still better now than later, I suppose.


Quadressence:

One, I've now resigned myself not to answer it, so I wouldn't feel good about answering it.

Meaning what, exactly? You said you wouldn't so now you can't? If you're bound by fey rules of oathbreaking, you'd best not refuse to do things until you're certain you won't need to. Otherwise, what are you saying here?

Two, if I answer it, I'll be indited as being pressured (ICs can confirm, I assure you!) which would only make me look more suspicious.

Yielding to pressure is only worse than not yielding to pressure when it looks panicky, or possibly when your actual reasons are so absolutely awful it's better to remain insolently silent for no good reason. As you've failed to explain why asking for your reads is unreasonable (and as far as everyone who's commented is concerned, failed to explain why it's reasonable), this is hopefully not one of those times.

Three, I'll have contributed no additional information to finding scum, as IronyOwl has shown himself to be incredibly suspicious.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. "X is scummy therefore nothing else matters" is a terrible excuse. It's tunnel vision at best, and scummy, lazy, town-hurting tunneling stonewalling at worst.

Guess which version this is, and then explain why you finding me suspicious invalidates everyone else's curiosity about you.

It is especially hard to scumhunt when your target has not posted, and you have no reason to go for anyone else.

What possible reason could this be?

I am after IronyOwl here. There is no reason for me to bother with the likes of you two. I am merely answering your questions until you provide me with a reason to suspect you.

Also NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

First of all, this is more of that tunnel vision. You always want to be poking more than one suspect. Not necessarily strongly; some people find they focus (either reading scumtells, applying pressure, or both) better on a lone target. But ignoring everything else and deciding that X is your target and thus you don't care about anything else is essentially wagering the entire game on X being scum, seeing as you're not going to have the slightest clue on anyone else if they're not.

Secondly, waiting for others to provide an excuse to suspect them is lazy, opportunistic, and scummy. It's essentially saying "Well, I don't suspect you guys at the moment, but neither do I have any interest in hunting you to find out. So, I'm just gonna sit here and ignore you UNLESS you give me an excuse, in which case I'll jump onto an easy bandwagon."

Third, you seem to be completely ignoring that sometimes other people interact with you because THEY want to know if YOU'RE scum, and thus whether or not YOU are looking for more suspicions right now is totally irrelevant.

IronyOwl (It's not worth quoting your post because it's huge.):

Alright, fair e-

Are you suggesting that you have numerous scummy issues? Aren't you supposed to be experienced, and therefore less likely to lean scummy?

...

See, this is the danger in talking flowery and responding in general rather than point by point. I was referring to NQT's case; you may recall, you went on a long tirade about how he had, as I just said, numerous scummy issues, then said his case was "of quality" and must be considered. Which is it, and where did you get that I was referring to myself out of:

Mm? Which is it? Quality case or numerous scummy issues?

You're not countering notquitethere's points. It feels like you're stalling, delaying, until you find something to redirect to, and, as I pointed out, I figured it would be me. "Teehee."

What of NQT's points aren't I countering?

Also, you don't really get points for predicting I'm going to vote for you unless you can show it was a scummy thing to do. Otherwise you basically just predicted yourself being scummy (or confrontational, or otherwise liable to attract votes).

You even admit that you're not bothering with his case. But, he has good points. There is a connection between you and Flying Dice. The only reason I can think of to avoid his case is to not draw attention to it.

No I don't, and no there isn't. Provide quotes if you'd like to show otherwise. Explain why you're lying if you'd rather not.

You're already peering at my brainmeats. It's spewed all over my posts. And yet, here you are, saying that you'll have to follow the herd to survive.

*She snaps her fingers, suddenly sporting pointed gray ears and a fluffy tail. Around her hands are paw gloves.*

I mean, who's to say wolves are the bad guys? Maybe you're just afraid of alphas. I don't really enjoy the taste of sheep. Too tasteless, tacky.

Yes, but I'm not liking what I'm seeing. I could lurk entirely and you'd get some insight into my actions. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be ruinous to me finding scum, ruinous to town figuring out if I was scum, and ruinous to me not getting my ass lynched for a completely avoidable reason.




NQT:

What happened to:

NQT:

How does this relate to asking about [what information will be gained by NQT's lynch], though? Does knowing how or checking on whether town will benefit from your lynch make it less likely or more productive or something?

Well, I'd hoped that it might make it less likely if they had to actually stop and think about what would be gained from my mislynch. It's hopefully no longer a pressing issue now.

Who would we have learned a lot from lynching, then? Or was this a simple, selfish attempt at defense by lack of gain?

?

As I pointed out, my theory isn't a Total Theory of scumhunting, but one principle in tracking guilt. If you're innocent when you're dead, then I think I'll look into the person with the second-most votes.

Sure, that's why it's not the only way of doing things and that's why I'm continuing the pressure on you.

Except your current case is based entirely on me having the least vote-interaction with Remuthra/FD, using your presumed success in lynching him as proof of effectiveness. How's that utilizing different methods, why is Shakerag no longer on your hitlist, and how is "I'll give up on it once I've tried it" not a scummy, lazy excuse for why you're doing what you're doing?

What is it about me and Shakerag that means you can't be scum while we're alive but if we both get lynched, yeah, it could totally be you?

If you're both innocent when dead and I'm still alive, then there would be certainly greater room to doubt my sincerity or competency.

Considering that you'd be 0/2, yeah, that'd raise some doubt as to your current method. Why is that the breakoff point, though, and how does that justify any of what you're saying currently?

At the time there was good reason to suppose that you and Shakerag were the only suspects, so not a false dichotomy at all.

By the time you made that dichotomy, I'd (and Shakerag'd) already pointed out the problems with it. We hadn't yet had confirmation from DS on the nightkill, but by this point you had two ICs telling you your theory had holes in it, but kept with it anyway.

Why?

But they wouldn't precisely because you already suspect the possibility of a bus. Let's break it down: bussing would have been a terrible idea because not only would it have made it harder to win, but people would still suspect a bus so you wouldn't be off the hook (as proven by the fact that you suspect a bus).

This is really not sinking in for you, is it?

I AM 100% CONFIRMED TOWN. YOU CAN TELL I AM 100% CONFIRMED TOWN BECAUSE YOU CURRENTLY SUSPECT ME FOR NOT SUSPECTING REMUTHRA. SCUM WOULD KNOW NOT TO NOT SUSPECT REMUTHRA BECAUSE THEN TOWN MIGHT SUSPECT THEM FOR IT, THUS IT'S SOMETHING ONLY TOWN WOULD DO.

Now your response to this is...?

I spent too much of my last few posts answering questions. It'll be all analysis now until a solid case has been made.

So what are you saying here? We're not allowed to hunt you until you've decided who you're going to vote and then sit on impatiently until they're dead?



Spaghetti:

I don't have much time tonight, but I can say this much:
I find IronyOwl and NQT the most suspicious. NQT tries too hard, and from what little there is to analyse about Irony it seems they tried to distance themselves from FD till it became disadvantageous. So, I'm all up for voting Irony if push comes to shove.

I don't recall this at all.

[Quadressence]

My one fatal flaw is my inability to respond to you all with one post. As such, this shall be an entertaining set of posts to follow.

Get your tickets to the show, because this is going to need a few Acts to explain. If only you all were slightly less noisy. Turn off your cellphones, and get your snacks. Here we go.

*Act 1. The curtains lift to reveal a young maiden, dressed in a nightgown. She sits upon her bed as the moonlight pours in from her open window.*

Quadressence:

I'm not going to follow the typical method of information gathering, nor shall I let you gather information from me in the typical method.

I never proposed a different method of gathering information other than what we're already supposed to do.

Hmmm. Do you see the blatant contradiction?

I did propose a different method of thinking. One without blind faith in the system, without following the leader, without mindlessness!

Anyway. Tell us your method. Now.

No contradiction. You're simply misconstruing things. I never did propose a method. I said that I would use one that didn't involve posting my reads on everyone. I deemed it... Not posting your reads. Why? Mostly because I didn't want to. It was mindlessly following. Like, I know I'm new to this whole thing, but I thought we were here to learn. Not just follow the leader. So, I said to myself, what would the Org do?

You see, that's the thing. These ICs are supposed to teach you how to play, but, honestly, they're just teaching you how they play. Poorly, at that. You'll leave this game thinking you've learned a bit, but really, no one has taught you anything. Very few of you will last to play continuously. And that's fine. It's a necessary evil.

Look at it. The ICs are simply saying I'm lazy scum. Nothing to try to improve my game. What do my actions signify, ICs? Don't you understand?

And yet, I'm certain there's a vast number of players with a similar style to my own. Webadict, ToonyMan, Org, Pandarsenic. Are these newbies supposed to unaware of these styles? To simply ignore them? Because you two do.

But, let's throw that aside for now.

My "method" involves looking at what people say. The content. The meaning. The context. The subtext. The wordplay. The grammar. The structure... And I say to myself, "Would I write that as scum?" And sometimes I say "yes" and sometimes "no" but overall, it helps me feel who's scummier than others. Will I post a list of reads. Mmmm, let me thi--No. Why? Because that's a lot of useless nonsense that can change at the press of an Enter. I give you what's important. What's meaningful. What's happening right now. And here, I'm already called wordy. 

The point of laziness refers to my opinion of you as a player with me as an IC.  I distinctly said you'd be scummy due to question-dodging.  As has been stated by others, only scum have something to hide; townies should be forthright in giving information. 

[Also, I've seen plenty of non-scum lazy lurkers, and laziness doesn't necessarily mean you're lurking; a player being lazy can just be making half-assed arguments too.]

Quadressence:  So, what I'm basically gathering from your posts, outside of a simmering dislike of magical detectives, is that your scumhunting boils down to ... what?  Suspecting and voting someone, asking them a few questions, and largely doing little else while you wait for them to reply?  Oh, and waiting for other players to give you reason to suspect them, of course.

I thought sleuths went looking for clues, not waiting for them to drop in their laps. 

Extend.

Oh, question dodging! You've got a big charge on little ol' me. How often to scum dodge questions now? Like, give me a good estimate. Especially newbie games, if you want to be entirely serious. No, go on. I want an answer.

So, that means my one and only charge is question-dodging. Also, I have to prove a case that doesn't have to be answered by the accused. Oh, right, and you've given me no real reasoning for your votes. I mean, other than offhanded remarks, almost to the tone of sarcasm. I can really feel the expertise you're trying to spread to newbies. Can anyone else?

In fact, I'd say that the newbies are the ones actually teaching. I mean, I've gotten actual tips to help play from them. They even came up with a decent assessment for why I should answer the question. As opposed to the half of one I got from Shakerag. I think IronyOwl might have just repeated that half of a tip somewhere too.

Let's not even forget that I also didn't refuse to give any reads, either.

Let's have some consensus. Who do we want to lynch? I'd be fine with any of the three above, but from most to least preferable: NQT, IronyOwl, Quadressence. I'm actually starting to find Quad scummier with every post she makes.

Oh man. What about that last post made me look scummier? I'll have to act as IC for now, I suppose. You don't list any reasons for it. You just say that the post made you think I was scummier.

*The lights dim, and the actress falls into bed. End Act 1.*

[Quadressence]

*Act 2. The curtains rise on the fair maiden as she's eating cereal. Drowsily, she attempts to navigate the spoon to her mouth.*

I don't have much time tonight, but I can say this much:
I find IronyOwl and NQT the most suspicious. NQT tries too hard, and from what little there is to analyse about Irony it seems they tried to distance themselves from FD till it became disadvantageous. So, I'm all up for voting Irony if push comes to shove.

This is almost exactly what I've posted about IronyOwl and notquitethere. Explain to me how it's taken you this long to only have these suspicions.

Quad

Quit your quest! But, a query, a quiz, and mayhaps a qualm to quell, to quench, my quill.

Quite.

Notquitethere! Explain your vote on Flying Dice! Of course, you think, 'But that is the enemy, surely, you jest!' On the con(trary), I suggest that it be an elaborate ruse, a masquerade! You intend to lynch your partner and enjoy town status. Adequate, but you explained your vote too well, too much, to have it go unnoticed.

There's more! This morning, you exempt yourself from suspicion not on the grounds that you believe yourself to be innocent, but that there would be no way for scum to bus themselves. Another nail in the coffin for you, as there can be no way for you to prove this except by being scum, which would then make it grounds for a lie.

I gave my fullest argument against Flying Dice when I cast my vote. I can't do anything to prove that I didn't bus FD, so by all means continue to suspect me. I can only say that it would have been a pretty rubbish tactic if I did.

I- I think we've got it!

this squib. So nervous, but for what?

Hesitancy, not nervousness. I don't always think bold and swooping claims become us.

I actually believe you. Bussing Flying Dice would be a poor strategy. Flying Dice could avoid the scrutiny of Town if he had not been lynched. It only seemed plausible near the end, where you'd gotten extremely wordy to justify your vote. But, I suppose the alternative wouldn't be much better, so I relent.

The only female player is Quin.

... Come on. Quadressence! Not Quintessence! I'm the fourth element! I suppose that makes me any of earth, air, water, or fire.

Although, if Quintessence were my name, I'd prefer Quint.

The IC's votes for Quad make me nervous. I'm getting more and more certain that one of them is scum, because I think Quad is an easy target for scum to lynch. She certainly acts it, but I personally don't think she's scummy enough to lynch.

I'm not sure which IC I'm more suspicious of, but since it's unlikely we'll get a Shakerag lynch, I'll go with IronyOwl. Someone needs to break the tie anyway.

NQT:

Wet Sheep

NQT: What do you think of my idea that you are experimenting in bussing?

Nice theory, but I would only really experiment with a tactic that I thought likely to work. And bussing in this case was not likely to work. (After all, am I not suspected of bussing now?)

How could you have known what would happen beforehand?

Let's have some consensus. Who do we want to lynch? I'd be fine with any of the three above, but from most to least preferable: NQT, IronyOwl, Quadressence. I'm actually starting to find Quad scummier with every post she makes.

How about we lynch Owl today and if she's innocent then you can kill me tomorrow. Fair deal?

Eh. Maybe. I'm not quite certain on anybody, but voting IO to avoid a nolynch. Anyway, I don't like to make promises on who I'll try to lynch.

OnyxJew: Please come back.

Seriously? No arguments on why you chose IronyOwl over Shakerag? I'm actually curious if you came up with bussing before I did, because it seems like you have no original arguments. So, how about between IronyOwl and me? You should be able to give arguments for this.

Also this one thing:

Okay, then, what's your social security and credit card number?

That's not relevant to the game. Your reads are. Feel free to laugh at (and question the motives of) anyone demanding to know what you had for breakfast this morning. For game-related stuff, "Too bad, take what I choose to give you" will impair town's hunting ability and result in you being lynched.

So, what you're saying is that if I don't do what you say for your implied reason of "or else I'll lynch you," you'll lynch me? Then explain to me how not only is that scummy but also how that makes me scummier than everyone else. If your reason was simply to teach me a lesson, then you've certainly shown us what ICs are truly capable of, because that's literally the only reason I've gotten to answer the question. And I told you, I won't answer the question. So, what are you going to do? Let's see you start actually teaching players how to play.

Huge amounts of my bad on here. Anyway, disregard earlier picks, I have some new interests. Probably, if I'm remembering my old scumpicks correctly.

Quad

Admittedly, this one is part actual suspicion, part annoyance. Quad refuses to share her information and I see little activity, but I'm also just genuinely incensed by his/her attitude and methodology. A good amount of fluff seems to be hiding a total lack of comprehensive analysis or even any action. I think we can all agree on this at the very least, What in the bloody name of Sithis are these Methods?

NQT

Personally, NQT is on this list out of necessity. I am very much eager to see how his 'vote pattern analysis' works with more data than a rather obvious scum, but his actions pretty much guarantee he should be on this list.

How so? You're stating right now just how awesome a position it would be for scum, and I've explained several times how WIFOM of this nature works, so what is it? What would have made this such a bad or impractical idea for scum that they'd never do it, even if it's obvious that anyone who did it would get a free pass to the end of the game?

But they wouldn't precisely because you already suspect the possibility of a bus. Let's break it down: bussing would have been a terrible idea because not only would it have made it harder to win, but people would still suspect a bus so you wouldn't be off the hook (as proven by the fact that you suspect a bus).

You realize this is quickly dropping into a heavy WIFOM spiral, correct? You'd best drop it. This is, was, and most likely will be, WIFOM. Accept it. You will look both less stubborn and less scummy if/when you do.

What is it about me and Shakerag that means you can't be scum while we're alive but if we both get lynched, yeah, it could totally be you?

If you're both innocent when dead and I'm still alive, then there would be certainly greater room to doubt my sincerity or competency.

I'm not even going to dignify this wit─oh, wait. That's my job, right. This is terrible. Your defense is that there are bigger targets in your eyes. That is in no way a good reason for why you aren't scum, or even why others are. Claiming that we should just lynch your targets and then when/if they turn up as Town then we should lynch you is a horrid idea. Especially considering, oh I don't know, the fact that we would all be dead by the time that happened.


So yeah, I'm a terrible person. I come back after my hiatus with a spiteful vote and some justifications. I'm fully willing to go for it and see how it plays out. Admittedly, if Quad had layed off the fluff and explained these mystical and wondrous methods, I might be a little less aggressive in her case, but the Town is a cohesive unit. We live or die as a team, and while Irony and NQT aren't exactly the most spotless individuals, at least they are trying/pretending to contribute. This is a game about learning, so remember this paragraph Quad. Whether or not you live through this day.

You're really laying it hard into to me, aren't you, which sounds a lot worse than I meant it.

So, I have an attitude (OMG!), an unexplained methodology (Like, whatever!), and the inability to comprehend things (Get the picture!). I'm sure if you have gotten this far and still care about my method, then I'll just assume you don't read anything, and we can stop right there. Instead, let's talk about why you think notquitethere has to be on the list. Your argument is stolen from IronyOwl, as are a lot of your arguments for me. I suppose you've brought a bit of originality with telling notquitethere not to be dumb with the gambling bit, which is dumb, but that's not enough of an argument to expect him, as you seem to imply.

Back to me for a second. I'll say that your arguments hold the least amount of weight in my head. IronyOwl is second least, but you, who wasn't here for a majority of the day, are the least. Do you know why? Because your original argument is that I don't comprehend things. You say you're going hardball on me? I say you're throwing punches like a... well, certainly not like a girl.

How is pretending to contribute better than actually contributing? The only people that have to pretend to contribute are scum, right? There's no need to pretend. And don't go about reaffirming my arguments, like it's okay to vote me but pretend my case is justified. Because if I'm scum, my case wouldn't be justified. You got that? Scum don't have justified cases. They have pretend cases, where they exploit weaknesses in townies to create a case. So don't give me garbage about how they pretend to be useful and aren't spotless for pity points. I don't want you to say tomorrow, "Well, I lynched her, but I felt her case was decent." and then steal my case. That's low.

Heh, I did it again. I keep forgetting to Extend in these games. Always rushing to the finish line then making statements with heavy finality before I even remember we can buy more time. In Extension Mafia, with several posts sandwiching mine in pure Extend, and I still forget to do it until now.

I should get a checklist for these things.

You rushed to the finish line? Is that why you didn't bother voting last time? Well, feel free to vote me now, big shot. I'll extend all day until I'm done talking, and if that happens to end in my lynch, well, looks like that'll have to be, won't it? No need to be afraid of a no lynch. I won't let that happen.

I swear I will never play another game with unlimited extensions, this is ridiculous.

I spent too much of my last few posts answering questions. It'll be all analysis now until a solid case has been made.

Oh man. You spent too much of your last few posts answering questions?

But they wouldn't precisely because you already suspect the possibility of a bus. Let's break it down: bussing would have been a terrible idea because not only would it have made it harder to win, but people would still suspect a bus so you wouldn't be off the hook (as proven by the fact that you suspect a bus).

This is really not sinking in for you, is it?

I AM 100% CONFIRMED TOWN. YOU CAN TELL I AM 100% CONFIRMED TOWN BECAUSE YOU CURRENTLY SUSPECT ME FOR NOT SUSPECTING REMUTHRA. SCUM WOULD KNOW NOT TO NOT SUSPECT REMUTHRA BECAUSE THEN TOWN MIGHT SUSPECT THEM FOR IT, THUS IT'S SOMETHING ONLY TOWN WOULD DO.

Now your response to this is...?

This is our IC, folks. That's right. The condescending douchebag that's here to teach you all how to play. Don't worry, though, he clearly knows better than you at everything. Perhaps I should just save this for Act 3, my cereal's already gone, and I've made no progress.

I haven't seen worse teaching since Webadict. And that's saying something. Seriously, if you can't keep your cool around newbies, how do you expect to teach them? Did you forget your job? IC first, Mafia second. I'll show you how you could respond without being a jackass:

If you suspect me for not suspecting Remuthra, then I must be town. Scum would know not to suspect Remuthra because then town might suspect them for it, thus it's only something town would do.

Do you see how I'm not belittling someone for that? It's WIFOM, and sure, it has some problems, but to not use WIFOM in your calculations can be a folly. Using it in a way that's constructive can help you figure out the mindset of the scum, which is important in figuring out who the scum are, and sometimes what their goal is, and I believe his use of WIFOM is constructive. I think scum would likely not lynch Flying Dice because he wasn't a liability. Sure, I could be wrong. But, I'm probably right, and I'll take probably as an excuse to build off the argument.

*The maiden leaves, the bowl still sitting on the table. The lights go out, but the sunlight spills onto the table at the bowl of cereal. Act 2 ends.*

[Shakerag]

Hmmm... I need to sleep, but I don't want a no-lynch. I will check back here before the deadline in (just under) three hours. Also, Borno/Quad and Owl are the best candidates for lynching (other than Shakerag), so let's not have any shenanigans here. Oppose Extension.

Do you have a taxi outside with the meter running or something, NQT?  Is there a reason you don't want to take the time to get good reads on the new replacements? 

The IC's votes for Quad make me nervous. I'm getting more and more certain that one of them is scum, because I think Quad is an easy target for scum to lynch. She certainly acts it, but I personally don't think she's scummy enough to lynch.

Of course, it couldn't possibly be the case that maybe both ICs see something worth investigating.  You yourself even said (@391) that you were fine with a Quad lynch, and you were finding her increasingly scummy.  Actually, looking back now, Quad only posted once between you stating that you thought she was town and then saying you found "Quad scummier with every post she makes".  What caused the somewhat quick change of heart there?

I swear I will never play another game with unlimited extensions, this is ridiculous.

I spent too much of my last few posts answering questions. It'll be all analysis now until a solid case has been made.

[BMs have unlimited extensions because this is a learning game.  It's naturally going to take longer.  Most non-BM games do tend to have a cap on the number of extensions allowed, however.  If you feel the day is running too long, you can always oppose an extension (which you have), or just lay out such a brilliant case on why someone is scummy that no one can find any fault with it and we all agree to go ahead and lynch them.]

If only you all were slightly less noisy.

[I'm so sorry we're all not living up to your expectations.]

Like, I know I'm new to this whole thing, but I thought we were here to learn. Not just follow the leader. So, I said to myself, what would the Org do?

[So instead of following the ICs, you're just going to follow what Org would have done?  You rebel, you.  Also, fantastic choice of role model.]

You see, that's the thing. These ICs are supposed to teach you how to play, but, honestly, they're just teaching you how they play. Poorly, at that. You'll leave this game thinking you've learned a bit, but really, no one has taught you anything. Very few of you will last to play continuously. And that's fine. It's a necessary evil.

Look at it. The ICs are simply saying I'm lazy scum. Nothing to try to improve my game. What do my actions signify, ICs? Don't you understand?

And yet, I'm certain there's a vast number of players with a similar style to my own. Webadict, ToonyMan, Org, Pandarsenic. Are these newbies supposed to unaware of these styles? To simply ignore them? Because you two do.

[Given that there's no Mafia 101 textbook, yes, we teach by imparting what we know.  It is our hope that players leave these games with some direct knowledge (IC comments) but also hands-on experience with playing a game.  The BMs are an environment where new players can make some mistakes (and get advised on said mistakes) without getting dogpiled on by the veterans D1 (I'm looking at you, Dariush).  And, yes, part of it is to get them acclimated to how we play here.  As I understand it, each Mafia board is a little different from the next, with different "house rules" and communities.

If you don't see ways in which to improve your game in the ICs commentary, then I don't know what to tell you.  We're not going to hold your hand and tell you exactly what to say.  Learn by doing.  If we think you're making mistakes, we comment.  If you do again, and we don't comment, then maybe you figured something out on your own.

We're also not here to teach new players how to play like those veterans.  Their playstyles have evolved out of many, many games and the scope of that sort of thing is way outside of a BM.  We're here to get the basics down, and leave it up to the individual players to figure out their own style outside of the BMs.]

[Bah, out of time.  I'll have to finish this later.]

[TheWetSheep]

Quadressence:

One, I've now resigned myself not to answer it, so I wouldn't feel good about answering it. Two, if I answer it, I'll be indited as being pressured (ICs can confirm, I assure you!) which would only make me look more suspicious. Three, I'll have contributed no additional information to finding scum, as IronyOwl has shown himself to be incredibly suspicious.

Addressed somewhat by IronyOwl, but yeah, these reasons are terrible.
First point: So you won't answer a question because it hurts your self-image?
Second point: Yielding to this kind of pressure is not scummy in the least. It's merely admitting that you were wrong in the past. Surely you don't think you're infallible.
Third point: This is basically a textbook example of tunneling, which you said you didn't do here:

As for tunnel vision, of course not. If anything, people will tunnel vision me. I'm very attractive. Who wouldn't want to waste wonders on wandering women? Ridiculously refuses the regular road righteously? Everyone is removing themselves from the game to try to get me to answer a question that has no right answer other than to not answer it. *The witch turns and laughs.* Tunnel vision? *She laughs again.*

Now, despite the fact that you gave no reasons as to why you don't have tunnel vision, here are some other quotes that show you are only pressuring one person:

I have not given up finding scum, as can be told by my reasoning for suspecting IronyOwl.

I am after IronyOwl here. There is no reason for me to bother with the likes of you two. I am merely answering your questions until you provide me with a reason to suspect you.

Do you see? You repeatedly say that since you are suspicious of IO, there is no reason to question anybody else. Are you so confident that you think your initial suspicion is the only possible scum?

Everything I say can reveal something scummy, so the correct answer is I'm not afraid to talk.

This is interesting. I don't really understand it. Do you mean you are afraid to talk? Because that's the reason you've given me for not posting your reads. "Everything I say can be used against me," you say. So why don't you just lurk, not posting at all? Nothing could be used against you then. The reason is that not contributing looks more scummy than actually contributing. So if your reason for not contributing your reads is that you don't want to get lynched, you're kind of in a bad position. If you didn't notice, you had two votes and another person who wanted to vote you, but refrained from making a tie.

Oh, question dodging! You've got a big charge on little ol' me. How often to scum dodge questions now? Like, give me a good estimate. Especially newbie games, if you want to be entirely serious. No, go on. I want an answer.

You do realize that the thing Remuthra/Flying Dice was lynched for was dodging questions, right?

Let's have some consensus. Who do we want to lynch? I'd be fine with any of the three above, but from most to least preferable: NQT, IronyOwl, Quadressence. I'm actually starting to find Quad scummier with every post she makes.

Oh man. What about that last post made me look scummier? I'll have to act as IC for now, I suppose. You don't list any reasons for it. You just say that the post made you think I was scummier.

Some bad reasoning/tunneling. I've gone through it above. But yeah, I should have posted it then, but was a little rushed.
Shakerag:

The IC's votes for Quad make me nervous. I'm getting more and more certain that one of them is scum, because I think Quad is an easy target for scum to lynch. She certainly acts it, but I personally don't think she's scummy enough to lynch.

Of course, it couldn't possibly be the case that maybe both ICs see something worth investigating.  You yourself even said (@391) that you were fine with a Quad lynch, and you were finding her increasingly scummy.  Actually, looking back now, Quad only posted once between you stating that you thought she was town and then saying you found "Quad scummier with every post she makes".  What caused the somewhat quick change of heart there?

Alright, it's true. My opinion on Quad has been all over the place. I'm finding it hard to find a solid read, since she does a lot of things scum do(refusing to answer questions and give reads), but I just can't see her being scum. Right now I'm going with my gut feeling, and that says she's town. I think she's simply stubborn and likes to be right all the time. How much of your vote is thinking she's scum, and how much is simply wanting her out of the game?
Everyone:
I'm sorry to say it, but I'm not in favour of a Quadressence lynch. My gut feeling says she's not scum, and I'll go with that.

[Quadressence]

Let's just skip Act 3 for a bit, because my time is everywhere and nowhere, all at once and never.

The IC's votes for Quad make me nervous. I'm getting more and more certain that one of them is scum, because I think Quad is an easy target for scum to lynch. She certainly acts it, but I personally don't think she's scummy enough to lynch.

Of course, it couldn't possibly be the case that maybe both ICs see something worth investigating.  You yourself even said (@391) that you were fine with a Quad lynch, and you were finding her increasingly scummy.  Actually, looking back now, Quad only posted once between you stating that you thought she was town and then saying you found "Quad scummier with every post she makes".  What caused the somewhat quick change of heart there?

I swear I will never play another game with unlimited extensions, this is ridiculous.

I spent too much of my last few posts answering questions. It'll be all analysis now until a solid case has been made.

[BMs have unlimited extensions because this is a learning game.  It's naturally going to take longer.  Most non-BM games do tend to have a cap on the number of extensions allowed, however.  If you feel the day is running too long, you can always oppose an extension (which you have), or just lay out such a brilliant case on why someone is scummy that no one can find any fault with it and we all agree to go ahead and lynch them.]

If only you all were slightly less noisy.

[I'm so sorry we're all not living up to your expectations.]

Like, I know I'm new to this whole thing, but I thought we were here to learn. Not just follow the leader. So, I said to myself, what would the Org do?

[So instead of following the ICs, you're just going to follow what Org would have done?  You rebel, you.  Also, fantastic choice of role model.]

You see, that's the thing. These ICs are supposed to teach you how to play, but, honestly, they're just teaching you how they play. Poorly, at that. You'll leave this game thinking you've learned a bit, but really, no one has taught you anything. Very few of you will last to play continuously. And that's fine. It's a necessary evil.

Look at it. The ICs are simply saying I'm lazy scum. Nothing to try to improve my game. What do my actions signify, ICs? Don't you understand?

And yet, I'm certain there's a vast number of players with a similar style to my own. Webadict, ToonyMan, Org, Pandarsenic. Are these newbies supposed to unaware of these styles? To simply ignore them? Because you two do.

[Given that there's no Mafia 101 textbook, yes, we teach by imparting what we know.  It is our hope that players leave these games with some direct knowledge (IC comments) but also hands-on experience with playing a game.  The BMs are an environment where new players can make some mistakes (and get advised on said mistakes) without getting dogpiled on by the veterans D1 (I'm looking at you, Dariush).  And, yes, part of it is to get them acclimated to how we play here.  As I understand it, each Mafia board is a little different from the next, with different "house rules" and communities.

If you don't see ways in which to improve your game in the ICs commentary, then I don't know what to tell you.  We're not going to hold your hand and tell you exactly what to say.  Learn by doing.  If we think you're making mistakes, we comment.  If you do again, and we don't comment, then maybe you figured something out on your own.

We're also not here to teach new players how to play like those veterans.  Their playstyles have evolved out of many, many games and the scope of that sort of thing is way outside of a BM.  We're here to get the basics down, and leave it up to the individual players to figure out their own style outside of the BMs.]

[Bah, out of time.  I'll have to finish this later.]

I'm, like, three steps ahead of you, aren't I? Should I wait for you to catch up, or should I just keep going? I'll probably just keep going because then the people that are pretty on-par right now can stick together.

I chose Org because he was underappreciated. His style was pure chaos, anarchy, and yet hid a subtle genius to it. Not only that, but he didn't even realize himself what he was doing. I think if he'd continued playing, he'd evolve much like Toonyman has, and his style would be pretty feared, creating an unholy dakarian/Org combination. To scoff at his play style is to not have learned a thing from history. It's his unpredictability that made him unique but also troublesome. If he was focused chaos... He'd be a god.

But that's a different story. One where I'm trying to get people to look at more than just words. Words are words. Nothing is inherently scummy about them. If I said "kill" and "mafia", these words mean very little on their own. And even in a sentence, "Kill mafia." can differ from "Kill, mafia." You're short-sighting these newbies. You're saying that things are done this way or else you're scum. You should simply be saying things are done this way because of this. It's way too meta for me.

I'm not asking for a script. I don't need one. I'm asking for rationale. That would make learning a hell of a lot easier.

So, if you want to teach by example, then make a case against me other than "doesn't answer questions" because that's a poor reason, and that's not nearly enough. I'm waiting.

Quadressence:

One, I've now resigned myself not to answer it, so I wouldn't feel good about answering it. Two, if I answer it, I'll be indited as being pressured (ICs can confirm, I assure you!) which would only make me look more suspicious. Three, I'll have contributed no additional information to finding scum, as IronyOwl has shown himself to be incredibly suspicious.

Addressed somewhat by IronyOwl, but yeah, these reasons are terrible.
First point: So you won't answer a question because it hurts your self-image?
Second point: Yielding to this kind of pressure is not scummy in the least. It's merely admitting that you were wrong in the past. Surely you don't think you're infallible.
Third point: This is basically a textbook example of tunneling, which you said you didn't do here:

As for tunnel vision, of course not. If anything, people will tunnel vision me. I'm very attractive. Who wouldn't want to waste wonders on wandering women? Ridiculously refuses the regular road righteously? Everyone is removing themselves from the game to try to get me to answer a question that has no right answer other than to not answer it. *The witch turns and laughs.* Tunnel vision? *She laughs again.*

Now, despite the fact that you gave no reasons as to why you don't have tunnel vision, here are some other quotes that show you are only pressuring one person:

I have not given up finding scum, as can be told by my reasoning for suspecting IronyOwl.

I am after IronyOwl here. There is no reason for me to bother with the likes of you two. I am merely answering your questions until you provide me with a reason to suspect you.

Do you see? You repeatedly say that since you are suspicious of IO, there is no reason to question anybody else. Are you so confident that you think your initial suspicion is the only possible scum?

Everything I say can reveal something scummy, so the correct answer is I'm not afraid to talk.

This is interesting. I don't really understand it. Do you mean you are afraid to talk? Because that's the reason you've given me for not posting your reads. "Everything I say can be used against me," you say. So why don't you just lurk, not posting at all? Nothing could be used against you then. The reason is that not contributing looks more scummy than actually contributing. So if your reason for not contributing your reads is that you don't want to get lynched, you're kind of in a bad position. If you didn't notice, you had two votes and another person who wanted to vote you, but refrained from making a tie.

Oh, question dodging! You've got a big charge on little ol' me. How often to scum dodge questions now? Like, give me a good estimate. Especially newbie games, if you want to be entirely serious. No, go on. I want an answer.

You do realize that the thing Remuthra/Flying Dice was lynched for was dodging questions, right?

Let's have some consensus. Who do we want to lynch? I'd be fine with any of the three above, but from most to least preferable: NQT, IronyOwl, Quadressence. I'm actually starting to find Quad scummier with every post she makes.

Oh man. What about that last post made me look scummier? I'll have to act as IC for now, I suppose. You don't list any reasons for it. You just say that the post made you think I was scummier.

Some bad reasoning/tunneling. I've gone through it above. But yeah, I should have posted it then, but was a little rushed.
Shakerag:

The IC's votes for Quad make me nervous. I'm getting more and more certain that one of them is scum, because I think Quad is an easy target for scum to lynch. She certainly acts it, but I personally don't think she's scummy enough to lynch.

Of course, it couldn't possibly be the case that maybe both ICs see something worth investigating.  You yourself even said (@391) that you were fine with a Quad lynch, and you were finding her increasingly scummy.  Actually, looking back now, Quad only posted once between you stating that you thought she was town and then saying you found "Quad scummier with every post she makes".  What caused the somewhat quick change of heart there?

Alright, it's true. My opinion on Quad has been all over the place. I'm finding it hard to find a solid read, since she does a lot of things scum do(refusing to answer questions and give reads), but I just can't see her being scum. Right now I'm going with my gut feeling, and that says she's town. I think she's simply stubborn and likes to be right all the time. How much of your vote is thinking she's scum, and how much is simply wanting her out of the game?
Everyone:
I'm sorry to say it, but I'm not in favour of a Quadressence lynch. My gut feeling says she's not scum, and I'll go with that.

You're actually pretty perceptive, I'll give you that. It's nice knowing someone's paying attention. Alright, let's start.

I can't answer the question because I've already made up my mind not to. Multiple reasons, including the ones I've given, but like it or not, I won't. Mostly because people want it answered. I'm a tease. Ironically, I want to answer the question of my own free will because I actually have better reads on people, but I can't due to being an ass. See what I'm reduced too? Hard choices.

I'm unable to vote you for basically any reason now. You're too bouncy, chaotic, to be scum. Not focused enough. Plus, you've nailed a lot of good points, so even if you are scum, I'd be okay losing to you.
notquitethere can't be scum either. He's leading the town too much, and he admitted to being too hesitant before. Again, too bouncy. Plus, his case on IronyOwl, while lacking, would be stupid for scum to make. Combine that with a bus on his scumpartner, and he's either the stupidest genius alive, or the craziest psychopath I know. Either way, not fit to be scum.
Onyxjew is too obscure. He doesn't post enough, and when he does, he just copies other people. <-- I suggest looking at this kid.
IronyOwl is a tool, but has a connection to Flying Dice. Needs to learn how to stay calm better.
Shakerag is trying, but lacks firmness. Needs to better state his case.
And I can't even remember anything notable about Spaghetti7, so what do I care? Make him talk more. <-- He should be looked at too.

I'm only answering these questions because I like you, and you'll at least take these notes into account.

Now, I didn't mean that I'm only suspicious of IronyOwl. I meant that I really only care about one suspect at a time in regards to questioning and case building. I'll note things that are suspicious. So, take away this: notquitethere isn't scum. It's too unlikely. It's one of those four. Unfortunately, there's only three lynches, so if you can figure out which one to eliminate, then fine by me (Or maybe figure out which ones most likely to be scum, since, you know, that's the smarter play.)

I suppose the talk thing could be taken like that, but I meant that my talking serves as a replacement for my reads. If I continue talking, I will be looked at continually.

As for Remuthra getting lynched for that, you got me there. I didn't read too much of the beginning.

[Shakerag]

Will I post a list of reads. Mmmm, let me thi--No. Why? Because that's a lot of useless nonsense that can change at the press of an Enter. I give you what's important. What's meaningful. What's happening right now. And here, I'm already called wordy. 

And we want to know what your opinions are about all the players -in that moment in time-.  This also help us to determine if you're being consistent in your opinions, or see if you've suddenly changed how you view one of the players.  If you're town, you have no reason to hold this information back, because you'll be able to justify any changes later on from your reads when we requested them. 

Oh, question dodging! You've got a big charge on little ol' me. How often to scum dodge questions now? Like, give me a good estimate. Especially newbie games, if you want to be entirely serious. No, go on. I want an answer.

I'm not going to give you statistics, because I don't have them.  I can say that when players waffle about with answers to questions, people get suspisious as to why they are waffling.  TheWetSheep has a point about Remuthra, but I'd say that was a bit of an extreme example.  My point is that scum are concerned about giving away too much information.  Townies are trying to gather more information, because they are the uninformed majority (as opposed to the scum being the informed minority). 

Oh, right, and you've given me no real reasoning for your votes. I mean, other than offhanded remarks, almost to the tone of sarcasm. I can really feel the expertise you're trying to spread to newbies. Can anyone else?

In fact, I'd say that the newbies are the ones actually teaching. I mean, I've gotten actual tips to help play from them. They even came up with a decent assessment for why I should answer the question. As opposed to the half of one I got from Shakerag. I think IronyOwl might have just repeated that half of a tip somewhere too.

Let's not even forget that I also didn't refuse to give any reads, either.

So far, I've largely been voting you for pressure to see how you'd react and to get a better read on you.  I'm feeling less inclined to remove that vote as time goes on. 

[For what it's worth, in the time I've been here, I've only really seen one major issue with how an IC is teaching in a BM.  Apparently you disagree with our methods.  That's fine, but this thread is not the place to discuss that.  You can take it to a discussion thread on this sub-board, or you can take it with you and not let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  If the other newbies are helping each other out, great.  To me that says that they're figuring out the things we're trying to push them toward and using that information in their interactions with the other players.]

How exactly have you not refused to give any reads?

How much of your vote is thinking she's scum, and how much is simply wanting her out of the game?

Like I said above, my vote was initially mostly pressure to help develop a read on her.  It's gravitating more toward cocky scum as time has gone on.  My vote has nothing to do with what I think of her as a person.

[Quadressence]

Will I post a list of reads. Mmmm, let me thi--No. Why? Because that's a lot of useless nonsense that can change at the press of an Enter. I give you what's important. What's meaningful. What's happening right now. And here, I'm already called wordy. 

And we want to know what your opinions are about all the players -in that moment in time-.  This also help us to determine if you're being consistent in your opinions, or see if you've suddenly changed how you view one of the players.  If you're town, you have no reason to hold this information back, because you'll be able to justify any changes later on from your reads when we requested them. 

Oh, question dodging! You've got a big charge on little ol' me. How often to scum dodge questions now? Like, give me a good estimate. Especially newbie games, if you want to be entirely serious. No, go on. I want an answer.

I'm not going to give you statistics, because I don't have them.  I can say that when players waffle about with answers to questions, people get suspisious as to why they are waffling.  TheWetSheep has a point about Remuthra, but I'd say that was a bit of an extreme example.  My point is that scum are concerned about giving away too much information.  Townies are trying to gather more information, because they are the uninformed majority (as opposed to the scum being the informed minority). 

Oh, right, and you've given me no real reasoning for your votes. I mean, other than offhanded remarks, almost to the tone of sarcasm. I can really feel the expertise you're trying to spread to newbies. Can anyone else?

In fact, I'd say that the newbies are the ones actually teaching. I mean, I've gotten actual tips to help play from them. They even came up with a decent assessment for why I should answer the question. As opposed to the half of one I got from Shakerag. I think IronyOwl might have just repeated that half of a tip somewhere too.

Let's not even forget that I also didn't refuse to give any reads, either.

So far, I've largely been voting you for pressure to see how you'd react and to get a better read on you.  I'm feeling less inclined to remove that vote as time goes on. 

[For what it's worth, in the time I've been here, I've only really seen one major issue with how an IC is teaching in a BM.  Apparently you disagree with our methods.  That's fine, but this thread is not the place to discuss that.  You can take it to a discussion thread on this sub-board, or you can take it with you and not let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.  If the other newbies are helping each other out, great.  To me that says that they're figuring out the things we're trying to push them toward and using that information in their interactions with the other players.]

How exactly have you not refused to give any reads?

How much of your vote is thinking she's scum, and how much is simply wanting her out of the game?

Like I said above, my vote was initially mostly pressure to help develop a read on her.  It's gravitating more toward cocky scum as time has gone on.  My vote has nothing to do with what I think of her as a person.

And yet, I still wasn't going to give you the reads. Mostly because your reason to give them was terrible. Because I can justify the changes later but also because I can be consistent in my views? Those two are kind of opposites. Your reasoning is incredibly silly.

What scum are afraid of information? That's silly. Withholding information just makes them stand out. You could maybe argue that I am willingly trying to WIFOM the town by being extremely combative and stubborn, so that I could argue scum wouldn't do that. And to that, I technically can't say I wouldn't do, but I'm not doing that now. Scum would be better off baiting information from others and steadily absorbing it into their repertoire, but the point is moot here, as there's really only a power role to obtain. Everything else would be misinformation infiltration, which is easy enough.

Your vote wasn't a pressure vote. That's incredibly silly to say so, as you kept it there for plenty of time, including up until the end of the day. You don't have to lie. You can say, "I voted for her because she was scummy." Lies are detestable, and you know that. Don't lie about this fake pressure business to make you feel/look better. It's a horrible way to explain your vote, because you basically don't. You can just keep it there without having to come up with additional reasoning as well, since you can just say that you don't feel like moving it without explanation.

Come on, Shakerag. (Don't be lazy scum.)

Cocky scum. I snickered a bit at that. It means you're actually treating me like a threat now instead of a noob. Maybe next post will give a good example of what a real case looks like, but judging by your current lack of a good case, I wouldn't count on it.

Your attitude is depreciating too. Geez, what a good bunch of ICs we've got here. I don't disagree with the method. I disagree with the teachers. You've both shown disgraceful ways on how to make a case. The other newbies are the only ones helping the newbies. I've seen them make better cases than either of you. You can hate my attitude, my play style, my thinking, but then you'll have to deal with the mirror I hold to yours. You think I can't call you out for failing as an IC? You're going to be unpleasantly surprised. You want me to be nicer about it? Fine. But then start doing your job.

[Onyxjew944]

'Kay. Just finished some of the reading. Quad, I only have a few words for you.

IronyOwl is a tool, but has a connection to Flying Dice. Needs to learn how to stay calm better.

... I'm not─ I don't even─ Guh. This sentence physically hurts my brain. You spend three massive posts berating everyone in sight, and even specifically state in "Act Two" that you having an attitude is fine. So, remind me of the difference between verbally attacking people, and losing your calm? I see a difference in cause, but incredibly little in effect.

Shakerag is trying, but lacks firmness. Needs to better state his case.

[/quote]
This coming from the person who took half the damn board yelling at you to finally give your reads or reasons.

If only you all were slightly less noisy.

If by noisy you mean opinionated, I don't think I have to make any of the blatantly obvious quotes, like the one right above, to point out how horribly self-righteous and hypocritical this statement is.
If you meant posting long or frequent posts, then that's kind of the goal of the game, is it not? And again, you did this as well. Three times, by last count.
If you meant an unknown third option, please do elaborate.

Quad, silence the hypocrisy. I can only take so much stupid in one day before I have an aneurysm.


In other news, I'm lost with these allusions to Org and Dariush. I take it they're common patrons of the other parts of the Mafia board?


I've decided my Quad vote wasn't really as accurate as I would have liked. I think it was more of a vain hope at silencing her out of irritation, as pointed out above, rather than true scumhunting. I'm not saying I confirm her as town, I'm just saying I really don't have a good enough reason to lynch her just yet. Considering I was fully prepared to lynch someone for personal reasons, that would probably be a new low for me in Mafia. Time for a new target or two.


Irony, damn. I really want to find someone to pick on besides Quad, and something tells me there's something I could pick at within your posts, but I just can't find it. Curse you noob juices!

WetSheep, you haven't been getting much attention lately, have you? Have a question.

I'm beginning to hit conspiracy levels of paranoia about Quad. She is either hitting the absolute noob gold vein I capitalized on in my first Mafia. You may know the one, the

It's terrible, but why would scum possibly do that?

I actually survived into the final rounds of the last BM on practically just that. Admittedly, I was Town, but still. I'm realizing I'm having those same thoughts when I read Quad's posts. I keep thinking she is painfully annoying, but I can't see a reason why scum would throw themselves into the spotlight with pure antagonism. It's either a beautifully powerful new technique for scum-hiding, or she is genuinely being an annoying twat and oozing noob. What do you think about this?

[Quadressence]

This coming from the person who took half the damn board yelling at you to finally give your reads or reasons.

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa.

What did you just say?

Those reads weren't for you. Those reads were specifically for TheWetSheep. You think I posted that because you pressured me? You think I'm afraid of you? The guy who has only recently started posting. Your pressure of hating my attitude? You cannot be serious.

I owe you nothing.

I've decided my Quad vote wasn't really as accurate as I would have liked. I think it was more of a vain hope at silencing her out of irritation, as pointed out above, rather than true scumhunting. I'm not saying I confirm her as town, I'm just saying I really don't have a good enough reason to lynch her just yet. Considering I was fully prepared to lynch someone for personal reasons, that would probably be a new low for me in Mafia. Time for a new target or two.

And you thought this was pressuring me? You even admitted to only disliking me for my attitude. Thanks for showing that you've done nothing these past few days.

*The maiden scoffs.* Pressure. I yield to no one.

[Teneb]

I must ask all players to not attack other players on a personal level. I must also ask that any criticism to the ICs be done in a respectful manner.

Failure to do either so will result in a very angry Deathsword, who is already quite angry for tangential reasons.

[Onyxjew944]

Personal issues aside you clearly read my post. Answer the question, if you would.

[Captain Ford]

Quad: While I like the flavor you're playing with, those massive posts are beginning to make my eyes bleed. I think everyone would appreciate it if you could pare it down a little.

Also, just like visiting a foreign country, showing respect for the board's culture will go a long way towards getting along with the residents.

[TheWetSheep]

Yay! Two consecutive posts from Quad with no fluff!

Quad:

I'm unable to vote you for basically any reason now. You're too bouncy, chaotic, to be scum. Not focused enough. Plus, you've nailed a lot of good points, so even if you are scum, I'd be okay losing to you.
notquitethere can't be scum either. He's leading the town too much, and he admitted to being too hesitant before. Again, too bouncy. Plus, his case on IronyOwl, while lacking, would be stupid for scum to make. Combine that with a bus on his scumpartner, and he's either the stupidest genius alive, or the craziest psychopath I know. Either way, not fit to be scum.
Onyxjew is too obscure. He doesn't post enough, and when he does, he just copies other people. <-- I suggest looking at this kid.
IronyOwl is a tool, but has a connection to Flying Dice. Needs to learn how to stay calm better.
Shakerag is trying, but lacks firmness. Needs to better state his case.
And I can't even remember anything notable about Spaghetti7, so what do I care? Make him talk more. <-- He should be looked at too.

Great! Although I'm a little confused as to why you explained why you couldn't give your reads just before you gave them.

These do help me, in case you were wondering. One big reason why is so that I don't have to keep devoting so much energy into trying to get you to give them. They do raise a question though:

You state being bouncy and lacking focus to be a town-tell. I know you're a fan of chaos, but I would think it's a scumtell, because it means they lack devotion and don't care about who they lynch. Unless we have different meanings for bouncy.

Also, it's worth noting that I think the reason that I give so much advice is that I have a ton of time on my hands. Spring Break and all that.

Onyx:

WetSheep, you haven't been getting much attention lately, have you? Have a question.
I'm beginning to hit conspiracy levels of paranoia about Quad. She is either hitting the absolute noob gold vein I capitalized on in my first Mafia. You may know the one, the

It's terrible, but why would scum possibly do that?

I actually survived into the final rounds of the last BM on practically just that. Admittedly, I was Town, but still. I'm realizing I'm having those same thoughts when I read Quad's posts. I keep thinking she is painfully annoying, but I can't see a reason why scum would throw themselves into the spotlight with pure antagonism. It's either a beautifully powerful new technique for scum-hiding, or she is genuinely being an annoying twat and oozing noob. What do you think about this?

I'm leaning towards the latter. Quad's dropping so many scum-tells in such a towny way she'd have to be brilliant to be scum. But I don't think it's really oozing noob. I think she could act a lot more towny if she really wanted to and wasn't so confident in her own method.

Shakerag:
Gah. I was reading all your activities over Day 1 in hopes of revealing something scummy. It turns out you're not as scummy as I thought. Only thing I could find was this:
It seems to me you put an inordinate amount of pressure on SuperBlast over trivial things. Example:

Here's a question back, your scum that everyone generally believes is town and your partner currently the town's center of attention and about to be lynched. Let's make it Day 1 as well. What would you do it that situation?

Wave goodbye to my partner in scumchat and bus them without remorse.  Looking for advice about what to do with your scumbuddy Remuthra, superBlast?

Damn why does it seems like all my questions make people suspicious of me >.>

And to answer you, no I'm not but if you turn out scum then bussing is viable an option for you. I'll keep that in mind when we catch one of the scum.

And yet, you've not explicitly denied being neither scum nor having Remuthra being your partner.  You just denied that you're looking for advice.  Tell Urist Imiknorris to coach his scumlings better for me.

I look at what he said that made you suspicious and see genuine, easy-to-make noob mistakes. Don't you?

I tried going through Day 2 looking at all of NQT's posts, but I'm getting tired and it's getting harder to concentrate. What I did see wasn't very scummy. Since I'm not too suspicious of either Onyx or Spaghetti, my vote will stay on IronyOwl.

Man, I feel like I was going to put other stuff in but forgot it. Oh well.