I can't help it :( I enjoy Mafia too much to just type things simply. Where's the fun if everyone can instantly see the point that you're trying to make without thinking a little about it first. It's like analysing a classic book - time consuming, but worthwhile.

Being cryptic isn't the best way of helping the town find scum is it?

I can totally see how that would look suspicious.

Know that it's not that I'm defending radish, but that I know that if he's mafia he will most likely give it away later. Plus, he's been very cooperative with questioning although some of his statements have been inconsistent. I just don't really see him as mafia at this point.

More to the point, I don't want to lynch radish because I want to lynch kantor. I know it's pretty selfish of me to pursue my own goals instead of the blatant one in front of me. But I really don't see radish as blatant. He's been answering questions, unlike Kantor, who has been avoiding almost everything that's been said. He must be following the thread, because he's voting for radish.

The thing is, I was wondering why no one was helping me pressure kantor (simply to get dialogue out of a lurker) and then noname made a list of about 5-6 things that make kantor seem shady, and he hasn't bothered to answer any of those things.

Also, yesterday he showed up to say he was reading the thread and I asked him an hour later if he was done yet. Another half hour later I FoS him and he immediately quotes my earlier question, complaining of having trouble keeping up. Yet, to get to that post, he had to run through all the radish diatribe and yet avoided any comment about it until this morning when he put a vote which is supported by a reason that I don't think anyone shares motivation with. His reasoning was "refusal to lynch on day 1". I don't think that is suspicious. I don't think anyone does. But Kantor does.

On top of that, he's complaining about the statistics tables for day 1 mislynch, and questions my desire to lynch lurkers. He said "you still on about lurkers?" Last game every mafia was lurking, despite any reasoning for it. I agree that not all lurkers are mafia, but it is often the case that mafia are lurkers.

I really want more out of kantor before this lynch.

please someone unvote radish

No, radishhead, actually when two completely separate communities react to your play style by screaming LYNCH then you're doing something wrong. 

As for "I didn't lie I only exaggerated" your exaggeration is to the point that it might as well be a lie.  "I am totally against a first day lynch, as always; well OK I used to lynch first day; well actually it's just that I don't want to lynch someone without a really good reason, and I wildly exaggerate when I say things."

ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!
"Obviously, if the situation changes before the end of the day, I'll vote for someone"
(NOTE:  The italicized quote was not part of the exchange with noname that put the pressure on you.  It shows that you flatly contradict yourself even within this thread.)
"I've never lynched on the first day"
"I've made it clear in all the games that I've played here that I don't lynch on Day 1"
"It's not my fault that I don't like GOW very much :(
     "Ironically, I think the reason that I voted for him was because he was trying to get a 1st day lynch"
(NOTE:  Note that when your words are proven to be wrong, the first thing you say isn't 'haha sorry I was exaggerating' but rather making excuses -- 'that was a one time thing because I hate GOW and he was trying to do a 1st day lynch'.)
"it's just my way of telling people that I've got all bases covered"
(NOTE:  Second example of being proven wrong; more excuses.)
"I've never made a contradiction in a Mafia game before. It's all about how you interpret what I say"
>.<
"It wasn't a lie though, because in all my mafia games I've made it clear that I don't 1st day lynch, but I also make it clear that I will lynch people if the situation changes."
"Maybe you're a Mafia who is intimidated by the careful thinking that I could bring to the game"
(NOTE:  hahaha ahahaNO.  "Careful thought" and "blatant self-contradiction for no reason" are mutually exclusive.) 

NEW:  "I'm annoyed that some people have seen through my disguise - I actually have no preference either way, but  I make it look like I do so that I can't be blamed for a mislynch on the first day."

This is so scummy it's just ... super scummy! 

Seriously radish, you need to learn to not do that and if necessary we'll hang it out of you.  Starting today.  FINISH HIM! 

Too late.  Going by linkz's chart, radish has been hammered.  I'm comfortable with it because at the very least he's played poorly (just refusing to acknowledge his lie is unamusing, and compounding it with "I was the Serial Killer, not the mafia!" is extremely...hmm). 

I'll admit I'm still unsure if he's scum though, and would have preferred a bit more time to ask Kantor some questions.  Ah well, I guess I shouldn't complain that, for once, a day didn't drag on eternally.  I just hope we can keep up a similar pace for the rest of the game, rather than our usual month=day practice.

I'm sympathetic, but radish just really deserves to die.  I think we have a decent Day 1 under our belts and you can always get back on his nuts tomorrow. 

If radish does flip scum my top suspects are prof and kantor.  If not ... well, whatever. 

No, he's at L-1

please someone remove a vote