[Fanderay]

Ok, did a quick read up of the past few days.

Yestrday, Trake was incredibly interested in partners. Which, as it turns out, was a waste of time. Hanas actually pointed this out (though in his explanation it was more along the lines of "looking for partners to confirm scum is unnecessary")

Now, the Hanas lynch. Jalan got the ball rolling. His case on Hanas was based on the fact that Hanas happened to not talk BS, and post little but with content. As someone who recently started doing teh whole "mafia from work" thing, I have to echo Hanas in saying "wtf?" not having banter due to time constraints certainly should not be a sign of scummyness. Because content-filled posts take forever to write, and if you want to make a content-filled post, you'll probably spend as much time as you would writing 10 joking banter replies.

The sticking poing Ghennan used to convince himself into voting Hanas is that me and him never spoke directly. Rather, Hanas kept repeating to my name to Ultama. Ugh.

Now, if you've actually bothered to go back and read that entire sequence, you would see that at the exact same time, I was verbally assaulting Ultama about the MO connection. I was attacking him. Hanas Ultama was defending. Hanas was pointing out the flaws in his defence, as was I. yeah, we didn't speak to each other--why would we need to, if we came to the same conclusion about Ultama? (except I had no freaking clue it was tats, because I suck @ alting and i don't play with meta)

And then Trake. Ah, yes, trake. Trake's been throwing my name around all damn game. Yet he only really voted me whenever the lynch was unlikely. You know, for scum, I am a godsend. because if they keep derailing my lynch, ever so subtly, every single day they can bring me up again. Knowing I will defend vigorously against a BS case, and if they then derail to someone at the last minute, well,so much the better.

The Hanas lynch was made for all the wrong reasons. I'm having a hard time reconciling why people would go that way, save they had little choice (partially due to my own failure to vote)

Jalan's case was a gross misinterpretation of how Hanas actually played. coupled with his agression against me right now, it gives me pause.

Ghennan's reason to "convince himself" is also a bit dodgy--but he barely made it to the lynch, and he does not strike me eager to lynch at all.

Trake... fuck. Trake is hard to accuse. Unless he did, in fact, pick me as his pawn a while ago. The fact that he keeps mentioning me as a lynch, but never follows through is.... disconcerting. My gut is screaming that there's something wrong with that. But objectively, there isn't much there. If he is scum, well-played.

[Fanderay]

ok, that took way longer than expected. gonna be working pretty much non-stop now.

[Jalan]

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Ok, did a quick read up of the past few days.

Yestrday, Trake was incredibly interested in partners. Which, as it turns out, was a waste of time. Hanas actually pointed this out (though in his explanation it was more along the lines of "looking for partners to confirm scum is unnecessary")

Now, the Hanas lynch. Jalan got the ball rolling. His case on Hanas was based on the fact that Hanas happened to not talk BS, and post little but with content. As someone who recently started doing teh whole "mafia from work" thing, I have to echo Hanas in saying "wtf?" not having banter due to time constraints certainly should not be a sign of scummyness. Because content-filled posts take forever to write, and if you want to make a content-filled post, you'll probably spend as much time as you would writing 10 joking banter replies.

The sticking poing Ghennan used to convince himself into voting Hanas is that me and him never spoke directly. Rather, Hanas kept repeating to my name to Ultama. Ugh.

Now, if you've actually bothered to go back and read that entire sequence, you would see that at the exact same time, I was verbally assaulting Ultama about the MO connection. I was attacking him. Hanas Ultama was defending. Hanas was pointing out the flaws in his defence, as was I. yeah, we didn't speak to each other--why would we need to, if we came to the same conclusion about Ultama? (except I had no freaking clue it was tats, because I suck @ alting and i don't play with meta)

And then Trake. Ah, yes, trake. Trake's been throwing my name around all damn game. Yet he only really voted me whenever the lynch was unlikely. You know, for scum, I am a godsend. because if they keep derailing my lynch, ever so subtly, every single day they can bring me up again. Knowing I will defend vigorously against a BS case, and if they then derail to someone at the last minute, well,so much the better.

The Hanas lynch was made for all the wrong reasons. I'm having a hard time reconciling why people would go that way, save they had little choice (partially due to my own failure to vote)

Jalan's case was a gross misinterpretation of how Hanas actually played. coupled with his agression against me right now, it gives me pause.

Ghennan's reason to "convince himself" is also a bit dodgy--but he barely made it to the lynch, and he does not strike me eager to lynch at all.

Trake... fuck. Trake is hard to accuse. Unless he did, in fact, pick me as his pawn a while ago. The fact that he keeps mentioning me as a lynch, but never follows through is.... disconcerting. My gut is screaming that there's something wrong with that. But objectively, there isn't much there. If he is scum, well-played.

You're grossly misinterpreting my case on Hanas. I stated quite clearly in that case that it wasn't a matter of him only making contentful posts, it was the fact that all the cases he dedicates his sole posts to are pointless side-cases, making him look like he was "doing something" but not actually partaking in the current on-thread issues. ie: no involvement in day 1, pointless and badly made case on me day 2 that was only ever him and he doesn't re-vote, bad case again on Ghennan on day 3.

The mention of how he does not banter was given as part of the reason it was so hard to get a read on him, because most of his play was making bad cases irrelevant to the current on-thread discussions and then disappearing for the rest of the day.

Having now gotten his CF, and assuming he was not a symp, I guess I was wrong and he really did believe in his cases, even if he disappeared rather than push to support them.

Either way, the way you here are presenting my case is very inaccurate and I don't see any way you could easily have made that misinterpretation as an honest mistake. Looks more like you are strawmanning me.

As for the rest of your post, you seem rather incapable of reaching any sort of conclusion. You basically put your summaries in of each of us at the end and then make no mention of which way you're leaning.

I don't mean to get condescending, but I feel the need to explain that if you really are town there's a possibility you will get NK'd tonight. If that happens, us survivors will want to be able to look back tomorrow and know that you felt X was the most likely scum. It doesn't make a vote tomorrow, but it will help with figuring out who among the 3 remaining is scum to have a 4th opinion.

It's in town's best interest to have a fairly clear statement of how you would like it to go tomorrow, not this fairly wishy-washy "everyone could be scum" ending you've given here.

[Fanderay]

Jalan, on 01 November 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Ok, did a quick read up of the past few days.

Yestrday, Trake was incredibly interested in partners. Which, as it turns out, was a waste of time. Hanas actually pointed this out (though in his explanation it was more along the lines of "looking for partners to confirm scum is unnecessary")

Now, the Hanas lynch. Jalan got the ball rolling. His case on Hanas was based on the fact that Hanas happened to not talk BS, and post little but with content. As someone who recently started doing teh whole "mafia from work" thing, I have to echo Hanas in saying "wtf?" not having banter due to time constraints certainly should not be a sign of scummyness. Because content-filled posts take forever to write, and if you want to make a content-filled post, you'll probably spend as much time as you would writing 10 joking banter replies.

The sticking poing Ghennan used to convince himself into voting Hanas is that me and him never spoke directly. Rather, Hanas kept repeating to my name to Ultama. Ugh.

Now, if you've actually bothered to go back and read that entire sequence, you would see that at the exact same time, I was verbally assaulting Ultama about the MO connection. I was attacking him. Hanas Ultama was defending. Hanas was pointing out the flaws in his defence, as was I. yeah, we didn't speak to each other--why would we need to, if we came to the same conclusion about Ultama? (except I had no freaking clue it was tats, because I suck @ alting and i don't play with meta)

And then Trake. Ah, yes, trake. Trake's been throwing my name around all damn game. Yet he only really voted me whenever the lynch was unlikely. You know, for scum, I am a godsend. because if they keep derailing my lynch, ever so subtly, every single day they can bring me up again. Knowing I will defend vigorously against a BS case, and if they then derail to someone at the last minute, well,so much the better.

The Hanas lynch was made for all the wrong reasons. I'm having a hard time reconciling why people would go that way, save they had little choice (partially due to my own failure to vote)

Jalan's case was a gross misinterpretation of how Hanas actually played. coupled with his agression against me right now, it gives me pause.

Ghennan's reason to "convince himself" is also a bit dodgy--but he barely made it to the lynch, and he does not strike me eager to lynch at all.

Trake... fuck. Trake is hard to accuse. Unless he did, in fact, pick me as his pawn a while ago. The fact that he keeps mentioning me as a lynch, but never follows through is.... disconcerting. My gut is screaming that there's something wrong with that. But objectively, there isn't much there. If he is scum, well-played.

You're grossly misinterpreting my case on Hanas. I stated quite clearly in that case that it wasn't a matter of him only making contentful posts, it was the fact that all the cases he dedicates his sole posts to are pointless side-cases, making him look like he was "doing something" but not actually partaking in the current on-thread issues. ie: no involvement in day 1, pointless and badly made case on me day 2 that was only ever him and he doesn't re-vote, bad case again on Ghennan on day 3.

The mention of how he does not banter was given as part of the reason it was so hard to get a read on him, because most of his play was making bad cases irrelevant to the current on-thread discussions and then disappearing for the rest of the day.

Having now gotten his CF, and assuming he was not a symp, I guess I was wrong and he really did believe in his cases, even if he disappeared rather than push to support them.

Either way, the way you here are presenting my case is very inaccurate and I don't see any way you could easily have made that misinterpretation as an honest mistake. Looks more like you are strawmanning me.

As for the rest of your post, you seem rather incapable of reaching any sort of conclusion. You basically put your summaries in of each of us at the end and then make no mention of which way you're leaning.

I don't mean to get condescending, but I feel the need to explain that if you really are town there's a possibility you will get NK'd tonight. If that happens, us survivors will want to be able to look back tomorrow and know that you felt X was the most likely scum. It doesn't make a vote tomorrow, but it will help with figuring out who among the 3 remaining is scum to have a 4th opinion.

It's in town's best interest to have a fairly clear statement of how you would like it to go tomorrow, not this fairly wishy-washy "everyone could be scum" ending you've given here.

interpret this whichever way you like, but i'm about 75% certain I will not be killed, I'm way too much of a convenient lynch target for scum to remove.

I haven't said which way I'm leaning, because I haven't quite made up my mind yet. I have presented things I see that make each of you possible scum. I still need to weigh each person's evidence to figure out who the most likely scum is.

As for re-telling your case, I re-read it, and I've read Hanas' defence. For instance, I disagree that he offered "pointless side cases" You know why? because the only consistent case that has been made, in this game, starting with Day 2, and all the way till now was the case on me-made by trake, elaborated by Ghennan, repeated ad nauseum by just about everyone. Hanas made it clear he disagreed with it. There isn't much you CAN do to defend such association cases--so it's pretty common that people who have to defend against them don't dwell on the defence. I'm sure to some it looked like "derailing". To those of us who didn't think the case on me (and consequently, Hanas, and to a lesser degree, yourself) was worth anything to begin with, it was an attempt to get out of the clusterfuck we've been herded into.

And right now, i'm very tempted to vote Trake, because he's the one that started this whole thing. And then didn't follow through--twice. Because if we are gonna be honest, yes, you should have probably lynched me instead of Lock, my protests over your idiocy notwithstanding. Because clearly we are unable to avoid being tunnel-visioned, and this was played masterfully by scum.

[Trake]

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Yestrday, Trake was incredibly interested in partners. Which, as it turns out, was a waste of time. Hanas actually pointed this out (though in his explanation it was more along the lines of "looking for partners to confirm scum is unnecessary")

Meh, I stick by this as fine, WCS was 2 scum D-day, so it's best to take a strategy most likely to hit scum if that is the case imo, as it's the most likely to avoid loss.

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

And then Trake. Ah, yes, trake. Trake's been throwing my name around all damn game. Yet he only really voted me whenever the lynch was unlikely. You know, for scum, I am a godsend. because if they keep derailing my lynch, ever so subtly, every single day they can bring me up again. Knowing I will defend vigorously against a BS case, and if they then derail to someone at the last minute, well,so much the better.

Meh again, you'll notice that when I voted you we had the numbers to get a lynch on you. It's Hanas' outright refusal to vote you that makes it unlikely, not me. You being useful for scum as a distraction is one reason I wanted you lynched earlier.

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Trake... fuck. Trake is hard to accuse. Unless he did, in fact, pick me as his pawn a while ago. The fact that he keeps mentioning me as a lynch, but never follows through is.... disconcerting. My gut is screaming that there's something wrong with that. But objectively, there isn't much there. If he is scum, well-played.

This whole implication that I've somehow masterminded you not being lynched is total trash. For yesterday, Hanas was behind it, I wasn't even there when Grasp was lynched, etc etc. You could equally throw the accusation anywhere really...

Of an explanation for someone narrowly avoiding lynch, scum de-railing from inno as opposed to scum de-railing from scum just seems far-fetched.

[Trake]

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

And right now, i'm very tempted to vote Trake, because he's the one that started this whole thing. And then didn't follow through--twice. Because if we are gonna be honest, yes, you should have probably lynched me instead of Lock, my protests over your idiocy notwithstanding. Because clearly we are unable to avoid being tunnel-visioned, and this was played masterfully by scum.

Hey look, it's OMGUS.

It's much more likely, in your scenario, to be poor town play good scum play. Ridiculously so.

[Fanderay]

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Yestrday, Trake was incredibly interested in partners. Which, as it turns out, was a waste of time. Hanas actually pointed this out (though in his explanation it was more along the lines of "looking for partners to confirm scum is unnecessary")

Meh, I stick by this as fine, WCS was 2 scum D-day, so it's best to take a strategy most likely to hit scum if that is the case imo, as it's the most likely to avoid loss.

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

And then Trake. Ah, yes, trake. Trake's been throwing my name around all damn game. Yet he only really voted me whenever the lynch was unlikely. You know, for scum, I am a godsend. because if they keep derailing my lynch, ever so subtly, every single day they can bring me up again. Knowing I will defend vigorously against a BS case, and if they then derail to someone at the last minute, well,so much the better.

Meh again, you'll notice that when I voted you we had the numbers to get a lynch on you. It's Hanas' outright refusal to vote you that makes it unlikely, not me. You being useful for scum as a distraction is one reason I wanted you lynched earlier.

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Trake... fuck. Trake is hard to accuse. Unless he did, in fact, pick me as his pawn a while ago. The fact that he keeps mentioning me as a lynch, but never follows through is.... disconcerting. My gut is screaming that there's something wrong with that. But objectively, there isn't much there. If he is scum, well-played.

This whole implication that I've somehow masterminded you not being lynched is total trash. For yesterday, Hanas was behind it, I wasn't even there when Grasp was lynched, etc etc. You could equally throw the accusation anywhere really...

Of an explanation for someone narrowly avoiding lynch, scum de-railing from inno as opposed to scum de-railing from scum just seems far-fetched.

which is why I'm giving you mad props if you are scum, and conclude that despite my gut wanting to lynch you, I have very little objective reasons to so.

[Ghennan]

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

What is your opinion, Trake?
I'll take lunch in about an hour and do a proper reread of the past 2 days. Right now I've got Ghennan and jalan at about same level of suspicion, with you trailing fairly far behind.

Who are your suspects?

I would be voting you. Simply put, narrowly avoiding lynch so much (particularly Hanas essentially choosing himself as the lynch over Fanderay, in terms of what was possible), just rings alarm bells. Now I don't really like speculating about symps because it's not reliable, but still. That's just hard to overlook. This is also combined with the fact that neither Ghennan nor Jalan have seemed that scummy to me over extended periods.

Really with Ghennan it's just his second vote, and I've thought some of his cases have been a bit flimsy. Unsure on Jalan, he's been hard to read all game, not been very confrontational, though he's definitely turned it on now a bit. Even so, I'm not sure that's exactly scummy, and it's hard to really point at anything else he's done as being scummy either, so really the only thing is general stuff.

No. Fuck you. You started the whole Fanderay issue on day two, and then backed off it. I pushed for a Fanderay lynch day three, and you agreed, and then backed off it. You spent most of day four saying how scummy it was that Fanderay avoided a lynch two days in a row, and then you backed off Fanderay again. You're contributing to Fanderay not getting lynched, and then saying it's suspicious that he isn't getting lynched, and this seems so scummy to me I want to lynch you now.

[Fanderay]

so then all that's left for me is to ask: why the fuck are you guys not voting me yet?

I don't see the point of stretching this any further. I've given you my opinion. Trake wants to lynch me. Jalan thinks i'm scum who forgot to put in an NA, Ghen has wanted me lynched ever since Day 2 lynch on me failed, it being a shit case notwithstanding

I don't see what will change overnight, except for the fact that I'll have to endure another day of this pointless defending on Monday.

[Jalan]

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

As for re-telling your case, I re-read it, and I've read Hanas' defence. For instance, I disagree that he offered "pointless side cases" You know why? because the only consistent case that has been made, in this game, starting with Day 2, and all the way till now was the case on me-made by trake, elaborated by Ghennan, repeated ad nauseum by just about everyone. Hanas made it clear he disagreed with it. There isn't much you CAN do to defend such association cases--so it's pretty common that people who have to defend against them don't dwell on the defence. I'm sure to some it looked like "derailing". To those of us who didn't think the case on me (and consequently, Hanas, and to a lesser degree, yourself) was worth anything to begin with, it was an attempt to get out of the clusterfuck we've been herded into.

I'll agree that it probably was not a derail. But either way it was a weak "this guy is kinda sorta coasting because I said so" post-and-vote, and he then immediately disappeared, and left his vote there for the rest of the day yet never posted again about his own case. If you make a case, you should apply at least some effort to it and to get others to agree with you, and if not then you should comment and vote according to the other cases in the thread. Hanas did neither, and IMO that was really bad play. That was the essence of my case on him.

But whatever, he's dead, I don't want to keep flogging his corpse here. I don't want my case on him to be misunderstood, either, but I think we've got that sufficiently cleared up now?

[Trake]

Ghennan, on 01 November 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

What is your opinion, Trake?
I'll take lunch in about an hour and do a proper reread of the past 2 days. Right now I've got Ghennan and jalan at about same level of suspicion, with you trailing fairly far behind.

Who are your suspects?

I would be voting you. Simply put, narrowly avoiding lynch so much (particularly Hanas essentially choosing himself as the lynch over Fanderay, in terms of what was possible), just rings alarm bells. Now I don't really like speculating about symps because it's not reliable, but still. That's just hard to overlook. This is also combined with the fact that neither Ghennan nor Jalan have seemed that scummy to me over extended periods.

Really with Ghennan it's just his second vote, and I've thought some of his cases have been a bit flimsy. Unsure on Jalan, he's been hard to read all game, not been very confrontational, though he's definitely turned it on now a bit. Even so, I'm not sure that's exactly scummy, and it's hard to really point at anything else he's done as being scummy either, so really the only thing is general stuff.

No. Fuck you. You started the whole Fanderay issue on day two, and then backed off it. I pushed for a Fanderay lynch day three, and you agreed, and then backed off it. You spent most of day four saying how scummy it was that Fanderay avoided a lynch two days in a row, and then you backed off Fanderay again. You're contributing to Fanderay not getting lynched, and then saying it's suspicious that he isn't getting lynched, and this seems so scummy to me I want to lynch you now.

How did I back off Fanderay day four?

I changed votes once it became apparent that no one else was a possible lynch, because Hanas refused to vote Fanderay. Lock did the same the day before, likewise making the lynch impossible. Am I supposedly behind this?

Or should I just have been more tunnel visioned and not pushed on other suspects?

Possibly. It would've been worse play, but in hindsight might have had a better result.

I'm not going to claim my play has been perfect, because it's not been. But it's pretty ludicrous to suggest that it's some sort of scheme. I'm not blameless in Fanderay not being lynched, maybe he would've been if I'd tunneled in on him more, but there's a lot more going on and it's that which seems suspicious to me.

You really don't think it's odd that the same guy with a total hardon for Fanderay, who then tried to de-rail onto Jalan, yesterday essentially chose to have himself lynched instead of Fanderay? This last piece of evidence is the bit that's really done it for me.

[Jalan]

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

so then all that's left for me is to ask: why the fuck are you guys not voting me yet?

I don't see the point of stretching this any further. I've given you my opinion. Trake wants to lynch me. Jalan thinks i'm scum who forgot to put in an NA, Ghen has wanted me lynched ever since Day 2 lynch on me failed, it being a shit case notwithstanding

I don't see what will change overnight, except for the fact that I'll have to endure another day of this pointless defending on Monday.

Even if it's only marginally probable that we're not 3 RI and a vanilla killer at this point, it's still the best play to let day timeout (or if we run out of discussion, vote night) and continue tomorrow.

Just like with Ultama, I'm sticking to my principles here.

That being said, maybe we can skip the weekend freeze in order to finish this, if you guys think that would work?

[Trake]

I thought weekend break didn't matter if there was a lynch anyhow?

[Jalan]

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

Or should I just have been more tunnel visioned and not pushed on other suspects?

Honestly (frankly? ), I think yes, at least a little. The suspiciousness is that you were unusually passive towards Fanderay (and it should be said, most everyone else, I guess) day 4 when your arguments day 3 and general behaviour so far lead to expectations that you'd be much more pushy on him.

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

You really don't think it's odd that the same guy with a total hardon for Fanderay, who then tried to de-rail onto Jalan, yesterday essentially chose to have himself lynched instead of Fanderay? This last piece of evidence is the bit that's really done it for me.

You mean Hanas yesterday? I didn't really pick up on that.

I'll go give the end of yesterday a re-read before commenting on this, but this intrigues me.

[Jalan]

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

I thought weekend break didn't matter if there was a lynch anyhow?

Hmm, let's ask Khell.

Hey Khell, this:

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

I thought weekend break didn't matter if there was a lynch anyhow?

[Jalan]

^^beautifully symmetric post?

[Fanderay]

Khell's at the movies right now, iirc.

[Trake]

Jalan, on 01 November 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

Or should I just have been more tunnel visioned and not pushed on other suspects?

Honestly (frankly? ), I think yes, at least a little. The suspiciousness is that you were unusually passive towards Fanderay (and it should be said, most everyone else, I guess) day 4 when your arguments day 3 and general behaviour so far lead to expectations that you'd be much more pushy on him.

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

You really don't think it's odd that the same guy with a total hardon for Fanderay, who then tried to de-rail onto Jalan, yesterday essentially chose to have himself lynched instead of Fanderay? This last piece of evidence is the bit that's really done it for me.

You mean Hanas yesterday? I didn't really pick up on that.

I'll go give the end of yesterday a re-read before commenting on this, but this intrigues me.

Possibly yeah, but other people weren't pushing on things I thought ought to be pushed. I also feel people typecast me as overly-aggressive based on early play designed to actually kick the game into life day 1.

On Hanas:

When Hanas voted yesterday, there were three of us on who could vote. Me, him, Ghennan.
You had already voted Hanas.
I had voted Fanderay.

So, what are his voting options here?

Well, assuming none of the people on are going to self vote, the only possible lynches are himself (as you'd already voted him), Fanderay, or you. A lynch on either you or Fanderay would require all three people on to vote him.

He then votes...Ghennan. A lynch that cannot succeed at this point.

This makes himself the only possible lynch.

[Trake]

Fanderay, on 01 November 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Khell's at the movies right now, iirc.

Mod's are away, destroy everything

Spoiler

Khell smells, teeheheh

[Fanderay]

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

Jalan, on 01 November 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

Or should I just have been more tunnel visioned and not pushed on other suspects?

Honestly (frankly? ), I think yes, at least a little. The suspiciousness is that you were unusually passive towards Fanderay (and it should be said, most everyone else, I guess) day 4 when your arguments day 3 and general behaviour so far lead to expectations that you'd be much more pushy on him.

Trake, on 01 November 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

You really don't think it's odd that the same guy with a total hardon for Fanderay, who then tried to de-rail onto Jalan, yesterday essentially chose to have himself lynched instead of Fanderay? This last piece of evidence is the bit that's really done it for me.

You mean Hanas yesterday? I didn't really pick up on that.

I'll go give the end of yesterday a re-read before commenting on this, but this intrigues me.

Possibly yeah, but other people weren't pushing on things I thought ought to be pushed. I also feel people typecast me as overly-aggressive based on early play designed to actually kick the game into life day 1.

On Hanas:

When Hanas voted yesterday, there were three of us on who could vote. Me, him, Ghennan.
You had already voted Hanas.
I had voted Fanderay.

So, what are his voting options here?

Well, assuming none of the people on are going to self vote, the only possible lynches are himself (as you'd already voted him), Fanderay, or you. A lynch on either you or Fanderay would require all three people on to vote him.

He then votes...Ghennan. A lynch that cannot succeed at this point.

This makes himself the only possible lynch.

To be fair, Ghennan was perfectly willing to self-hammer on Day 3 to get a lynch. the only non-suicide lynched possible were Hanas and me. But that doesn't me the 3 ppl online couldn't lynch anyone else. In fact, with 3 votes needed for a lynch, you may have lynched just about anyone.