What follows is a long, meandering post that attempts to distill my many written notes about the game thus far into a single, coherent narrative of sorts that outline my suspicions of a particular player. The structure may seem a bit incoherent, because it is composed of bits and pieces assembled over the course of the month and a half that the game has taken place during thus far. For simplicity’s sake, a more condensed, simplified version is available at the bottom – but please do read through the post in its entirety as it sufficiently outlines my thought process, albeit in a fragmentary manner.
I would like to lay down my suspicions of a certain member for the town’s perusal. While I stand by my initial statement that pressuring Viral was the correct course of action for the day, I have new suspicions that have arisen from the discussion involved in that, and after watching this player’s progression over the course of the game feel confident in voicing these suspicions.
FoS: A Link In Time
Let us examine his posting history. In Day 1, he was absent for the majority of the early discussion, citing a number of real life concerns that occupied him. Fair enough. When he did begin to post with frequency, he remained non-committal for a time. For example:
I agree with Draco. Wyatt, you're not going to convince people to your side with some vague statements that you've outlined your major reasons for Axle being scum already. Many seem to doubt this is true or fear a major loss for the town if a miscalculation is made. That said, there's an obvious argument for the validity of your statements. If Axle is town, you will likely be lynched the next day.
Still lingering on DH too. I don't recall his behavior being different from prior games here and from what I recall he's always played either a town role or a neutral role. Voting for a shorter day raises eyebrown but overalll he's been rather consistent with his play style. I'll withhold a vote or for that matter even a finger of suspicion until further comment from him.
At the time, two major camps were forming: a camp that wished to lynch Axle based on Kybyrian’s intuition, and a camp that wished to lynch Darknut_Hunter based on perceived anti-town behaviors, be they motivated by scum alignment or otherwise. Here, ALIT shows a lack of conviction with regard to either camp. Being non-committal, however, is not a scummy behavior in itself. Let’s continue.
Wyatt's taking a huge risk by going in for the kill. I trust his intuition. The next lynch will be easy if Kybyrian is mistaken.
Vote: Axle the Beast
Interesting – given that, only three posts earlier, ALIT was chiding Kybyrian for his lack of evidence. No new evidence was presented, simply a reaffirmation of a point that ALIT made in his previous post. So why the sudden vote? Still, not necessarily scummy – the day was dragging on, and perhaps he’d rather lynch Axle on a hunch and either lynch a mafia member or reveal Kybyrian as a potential mafia member through Axle’s innocence – a fair gambit and preferable alternative to a no lynch. Moving on.
Darknut_Hunter appears obsessive on the point of shortening the day. Unlike Axle he has a clear controversial position. While the deadline to shorten the day has passed, DH appears unable to explain himself effectively. Not sure why he's coining Axle's vote a "hammer vote" when he clearly had some solid evidence. Of course Axle doesn't want to die on Day One either, no one does. His experience could be a valuable town asset. Next day we should keep a close eye on Axle and Kybyrian.
Unvote
Vote: Darknut_Hunter
This will put the vote at a 5-5 tie between Axle and DH. Let's see how it unfolds from there.
And here ALIT changes his vote. The reasons he cites for doing so, however, are reasons that existed before he cast his first vote – little has changed in the 15 odd posts since his first vote. So why the sudden change?
At this point, Kybyrian chimes in with the statement that the town are “acting like idiots” (how eloquent), which ALIT scrutinizes and deems as unhelpful. Kybyrian responds by roleclaiming, under no pressure. ALIT responds:
I realize my frequent unvoting may cause me to appear scummy but I believe your words especially since you opted to reveal your role. It's been a rather intense random voting stage and the information we've gleaned appears believable.
Unvote
Vote: Axle the Beast
Here we go with gridlock again. 5 votes for both Axle and Darknut_Hunter.
And back to square 1. I’m not ultimately sure why ALIT was switching back and forth with such rapidity here. But take note of it – there is a trend of inconsistency within his day 1 posts, in which he finds certain pieces of evidence more convincing and less convincing at varying times with no further developments that should sway his opinions. That trend is one that will continue into day 2.
After this post, ALIT made no other significant contributions to the discussion, and the day ended shortly thereafter. In day 2, ALIT began the discussion and was a frequent poster throughout – though once again a trend of inconsistency can be seen, as well as a strange new quirk.
At the beginning of day 2, most of ALIT’s post were – as in day 1 – non-committal, which, as I said earlier, is not inherently scummy. But it’s becoming a trend with him – even in day 1, commitment didn’t mean much, and ALIT changed his vote twice. Yellow flag.
One of the strangest things that developed over ALIT’s posting history in day 2 is an insistence that mafia members do not post frequently. There were a few suspicions allayed against ALIT (though few were particularly developed, and in most cases were simply a passing mention of possibility rather than a firm expression of suspicion), and in most cases his defense amounted to “I post frequently, so I’m not scum”. For instance:
Typically Mafia members lurk in the shadows, not post frequently. Posting is the easiest way to make a slip and get scum lynched.
I don't understand the reasoning the Thareous and I are suspicious. Scum prefer to lurk in the shadow to prevent a slip. The more they say, the more likely it is they'll be uncovered. Thareous and I, however, have been two of the most active players this game.
These are not defenses, and both of them dodge the initial point raised against ALIT (an unformed, somewhat cryptic post from MonkeyFightSquad in the first case, and a query regarding ALIT’s strange desire to know Thareous’ role in the second). Dodging points is never a good sign. Another yellow flag. I’d also like to note the strange desire to know Thareous’ role; that’s going to be important in a moment.
The trend of inconsistency also resurfaced in day 2, as ALIT’s initial suspicions of Viral Maze are stated thusly:
This strikes me as suspicious. Why are you choosing to refrain from supporting your posts? While he was proven to be town, this also threw me off about Kybyrian's posts-he failed to be straightforward and banked his game plan on vague intuition. While it ultimately paid off, he required evidence later on to bolster his position.
Now this I find interesting. ALIT, despite having wavered, ultimately sided with Kybyrian on day 1. The only difference between the two situations as he describes them in his own posts is that Kybyrian ultimately role claimed.
This raises two questions for me: 1, why is Kybyrian excused from not presenting his suspicions clearly, but when Viral does the same, it’s labeled as suspicious? And 2, why is ALIT insistent on knowing the roles of players?
I have no real answer to the first question, and I have several answers to the second in mind. I like none of those answers. The strange comment regarding Thareous’ role, and an apparent lack of trust without knowledge of the player’s role do not sit well with me. This comes from my firm belief that role claims are bad for the town. We cannot trust a role claim, as there is no rule enforcing honesty in role claims – a scum could just as easily claim to be a townie and get away with it. The only way we have to ensure the truth in a claim is if somebody else were to counterclaim, and even then they could just as well be lying. But scum could easily claim a certain way to draw out a counterclaim to discern the identity of our cop or doctor, and that’s not a good thing. So bottom line: claiming is not something we can trust, and is not something that ends well for the town, as it either tells the mafia “hey player X is the cop,” fools the town into believing a scum is actually a town, or is used as a gambit by the mafia and thus forces the town to play right into their hands. Any player who seems to desire role claims or to be overly trusting of role claims (even ones that turn out to be true!) lands themselves a spot on my unspoken “watch them” list.
Okay, so – ALIT is inconsistent in regard to what he will accept as evidence and how much he needs in order to vote; he is strangely reliant upon and desiring of role claims; he insists that active members are not mafia or are significantly less likely to be so, and insists this at the expense of not addressing points allayed against him.
Enter day 3.
One of ALIT’s first posts has this little gem embedded within it:
Draco isn't remotely scummy especially with Viral trying to defend mafia members, realizing his plan had failed, and then retreating on the defensive but not before damage had been done. Draco's voting for Axle earlier can be excused as it was during the first day, the random voting stage. Relying on Wyatt's intuition for the entire game isn't a safe strategy.
Note the first four words. Now, let’s look at ALIT’s
last post from the day before. In this post, he places an FoS on Dracomajora. He cites this as being due to Draco’s defense of Axle:
By defending Axle adamantly, you're potentially scum.
Now, in day 3, he says that Viral is suspicious… for this very same reason: “Viral trying to defend mafia members…” While he writes off Draco’s previous offense as excusable due to being the first day (which doesn’t really make much sense given that his suspicion was not Draco’s defense of Axle, but his
adamant defense of Axle), this doesn’t mesh well with me.
What changed? Why was Draco suspicious for adamantly defending Axle at the end of day 2, but then excused for doing this in day 3 by virtue of his defense taking place on day 1? Why is Viral suspicious for defending mafia members in an ancillary fashion (simply saying that it is likely inexperience rather than scumitude, a word I just invented) but Draco is not for defending a mafia member adamantly?
Why are you being so wildly inconsistent over the course of the game? Why are you insistent upon role claims for some members and so quick to trust and vote based on a role claim? Why do you maintain that active players are unlikely to be mafia when a finger of suspicion is pointed your way, but you continue to point the finger toward active players?
Why, ALIT? That is what I want to know. Because, to me, you seem like a potential scum at worst, and a town member who is easily swayed by a smooth talker due to a lack of conviction in votes and suspicions on your part. Neither of those is good for the town, and hence my concern.
