I'm starting to wish I had listened to Wonk's idea. If you're a townie then you continue to display a lack of paying attention to things, or reading further than the obvious. If you're scum then well-played, because it's getting on my nerves. Actually any emotion towards you is probably due more to my day, so my apologies if you take this as rude.

This is a 180 from what you said within the quote. First you say he wasn't suggesting you were improved, then you say he continued to state you weren't improved. And yes, I already pointed out his actual stance as well as his main point which you were either mistaken about or intentionally trying to twist here:

If that is so, then why did you say the following AFTER Wonk's last post?

There are a couple of other instances, but I'm not all that suspicious of you so it'd just be mean to keep piling on.

@bolded: Why would you hate it if he were mafia? I would actually hate it more if he were a townie. Lurking townies do the town absolutley no good, and it was made clear in the sign-ups that everyone should be prepared to play.

Also, It's very strange that you list me in Town and then noname in parenthesis, but then list us both again under Unknown. Did you just slip-up, because I can't see any way that you'd have us both under Town. Even if you were the cop and scanned me that wouldn't explain noname, or vice-versa. Why don't you have radish listed under any category either?

lol, i edited that to add the U. the word "humor" looks funny to me.

anyway, i think you'll agree we've discussed the life out of that one topic?

Are you joking again? trash and radish all only voted once as well.

firstly, thank you for actually noticing this!

the notes i wrote in class, i was writing from memory of the game so far.. i guess i forgot to put radish down there :/ until recently i was pretty sure that he was innocent, but im not so sure.

i would hate it if stefl was mafia and absent, because he's giving us absolutely nothing to go on - therefore, we cant judge him. which means we have no strong reason to FoS/vote him, and that annoys me.

i am unsure about you and noname, but i feel strongly that you are town. obviously my list isnt accurate, if it was that would be very strange! but i do feel that you're town, given the quality and content of your investigations on everyone. you've been very thorough and developed them well, and you haven't voted for anyone for stupid reasons. i liked that in the build up to your vote on wonk you had a proper indepth discussion with him.

im not quite as sure when it comes to noname, which is why he's in brackets. so im unsure about you both, i think you are probably town and im leaning towards that for him too, but im not feeling it so strongly for him. thats why :) sorry if it was confusing.

Yes the part you quoted it poorly worded, I did make the point that ABC would have been stuck at L-1 as is said at the end of the quote.

Here you do confirm that you chose the train most likely to succeed and not the most deserving of a lynch.

You do however point out that you had a thourough lookout on the situation, a post from 6 days ago that I did not dig out. It does list wonk as your second suspect (second on the list), and thus just puts you in a position of going for an imediate kill rather than have the kill you though was best but wait on the timer. I'd downgrade you to HoS, the vote being there to put presure and forcing you to react, but i'll first read the 100 replies I see waiting in the thread (2 pages at 50 ^^).

because she was exterior to the wonk inquisition... and thus not incriminated by complying to a request on a train lynch, just doing a townie's job to get the day moving, same for ABC and FF... What I mean is that this vote doesn't say much about them, hence why they could vote easily.

I believe I explained that in the longpost... but it was long I do conceed. (and i'm often confusing when I explain stuff).

well, that was until I realized (thanks to ABC actually) that mafia probably hadn't noticed the clue in the flavor.

When I wrote that post, I was serious. I don't see how 2 exceptions discredits the idea, since they could've just gone with a random decision (or they are both mafia, big guy).

But, please, continue reading the thread.

Ahh, I should've included this in my last post directed at you.

1) Wonk didn't really have any suspicions of you, at least not that I recall. The argument was that you're weak, not that you're scummy.

2) ABC wasn't making the same arguement at all. He stated that he thought the discussion between you and Wonk was artificial, thus you were both scummy. He was then asking you WHY would Wonk single you out? Later he dropped it, with the rational that you were both probably town, as he's done with just about everyone he's claimed to be suspicious of.

And I know you brought up the emotion thing earlier, but we're not face-to-face or even audible to each other, so I don't think it'd be too hard to mask emotions no matter how one responds to posts. I do agree with the style probably being easier to hide slip-ups behind, but it hasn't stopped things that are illogical from being said. I would rather lose the edge in scumhunting there than have constant misunderstandings that can lead to severe distractions.

I was replying to linkz and used the linked posts... I don't see where the challenge to his townieness was when it concluded with proff saying "GOOD role" as in townie. You're talking of challenge of the roleclaim though which is not in relation to my conclusion, I'm talking about townieness and not power role.

By distant from the action I mean that many of your posts have been late sumaries and conclusions of the events. Yes you have been active, I do not deny this, but you also have not been the pushing force behind any of the investigations of yesterday. If you reread my sentence, in no way does it say that you were not active, the point that I make is that talking to you today will be more informative than talking to proff.