Oh oh oh, thank you. Now I feel stupid. I didnt get the flavor thing at first. I will blindly blame UKEnglish/USEnglish!

Advice for handling the forums with multiple posts, if you wait like, I think 15 minutes after your post, it won't auto-merge it.

As for being aggressive...I'm all for it, but how you did it came off less aggressive, and more, single minded. You said you were going with your feeling, but you didn't really go for anyone else until the deadline, and it looks really shady at that point.

Also realizing, it's hard trying to both play the game, and point things out in ways that aren't attacking things...hmmmmm.

Ack, etiquette fail. That was really quite rude of me, I'm sorry.

(Sheeeee, please! There are two females ;) )

Actually, I compared your role poem with the rest of the verse we've seen so far, including my own role PM (making a highly scientific sample of 3, but hey). I personally think your claim stands out. Joe's verse has a looser structure, for one. But this isn't an English literature class so I'll refrain from elaborating for the moment.

Additionally, I noticed you seemed to take on a facilitating role in the events of Day 1:

# 61 may have (inadvertently?) set off the train-wreck which was the xybaz disaster.
# 111 draws attention to the end of said train-wreck (after Muttly).
# 141 initiates the end of RVS and unvotes – everyone follows suite.

Then there was the little dance with Rabbit. #164 - #171, then at #207 you suggested the possibility of ending with a no lynch. Violator agreed at #208, and you immediately removed your vote at #209.

I don't know, it seems like too much of a coincidence...

I need to go back and read through Primal's input again before I can comment there. He'd dipped beneath my scope.

Yeah, I was aware, I just failed horribly.

Oh, that feeling hasnt changed. I just think there is some data to now deal with. If someone told me the game ends in thrity seconds pick the scum immediately, I know who I would pick. As more stuff becomes available I may change taht of course, but my gut remains the same, I am simply able to overlook it.

Ha! Not for the Just!!!! Oh, right, none of that.

Here's my current "thought dump" and some replies to comments.

@TwillightBaard: It certainly wasn't a time-wasting maneuver on my part (I was, after all, trying to get the time limit removed and didn't intend on getting into an argument about it.. except maybe with Joe :P) and I really don't think that was Baaz's intention either.. simply because it wouldn't work and be far too risky. First it wouldn't have worked because me and Baaz arguing doesn't stop others from discussing something else or us partaking in other discussions. And it would have been too risky for the reason you gave: it would make us look like mafia and would likely end up in the lynch of either of us (probably me, judging from what happened >.<).

While I'm around the subject: the deadline was still stupid and I hope Joe doesn't drop one on today unless it's actually appropriate.

@Rodzaju: If the other mason is now town vanilla, would there be any particular reason for them not to say they were the mason? As far as I can figure, they wouldn't be any more at risk but would still be a useful claim to share.

@NotFrenchYet: I didn't "turn my keen eye" on anyone else after that because I got a lot of flak after the argument with Baz. I would have done if everyone else had dropped it too, but I didn't because.. (continue at [1], stop at [2])

@NotFrenchYet (continued): I can't recall Baaz making any personal comments that could cause friction to me so I'm guessing you mean the "baarbed" ones I made about him? If so, I think he figured that I don't think of him having those attributes, just that he was displaying them in the discussion. We both dropped it because it wasn't helping.. until you brought it back up.

Yesterday [1]I felt that if I tried to direct attention to anyone, it'd be taken as me trying to deflect attention from myself. I was effectively being pressured out of helping (any attempt to help would have been taken as scummy diversion).[2]

Now it is a new day, I feel like I can actually voice my current thoughts.

NotFrenchYet/pazzer: Bringing back up a discussion that was dropped under the agreement that it was only helping mafia by the people involved is pretty suspicious to me.
TwillightBard: First person to vote for ViolatorX (second vote in the game). Unlikely to mean anything as it was RVS stage but I'm keeping it in mind anyway.
littlerabbit: Revenge vote on ViolatorX. Could be a newbie mistake, though I doubt the other mafia would have allowed it.
muttly13: Seems a little adamant about lynching TwillightBard (in #110). Was this just RVS "roleplay" or an external joke?

Okay, time for bed, I'll post the rest up tomorrow.

Ugh... due to a combination of the forum being stupid and my internet connection momentarily crapping out my huge post just got lost. If 'new post' wasn't a separate window then I could just click back. Damn!
There was a fragment left in my clipboard and I'll do my best to retype it but I can't be bothered to do the whole thing again.

You might be onto something there! Your logic seems pretty sound, either Joe's being a useless mod or Orryyrro didn't quote his PM.

I meant what I said. I thought (and still think) that a day one nolynch was a bad idea and was in favour of lynching someone but when I saw how close to the deadline we were there didn't seem to be any point in changing my vote. There wasn't enough time for another wagon to form so it was either going to be Orryyrro or no one.
Oh and I know Joe in real life spend most of my time jokingly criticising him over ridiculously minor things, it's just what I do.

Hmm. I'm struggling with the other Mason - I can't figure out if it would be a good idea if they revealed themselves at this point... On one hand we desperately need some hard information, but on the other they might be more use in deflecting if they stay anon.

@Xyem

Fair point. For the record:
- I got involved at first because it was the first moment of significant activity, before anyone realised it should proably have been meta-game.
- I brought up the argument for the second time after reading something on the wiki which suggested it might have been a mafia ploy to distance by targetting each other - concern and enthusiasm effectively overrode anything anyone had said about "only helping the mafia".
- Bard has just (#259) referred to it again for that reason, which is why I also mentioned it. Since you took the time to reply to him as well, I'm puzzled as to why you didn't include Bard with me and pazzer.

For the record 2:
I now know, thanks to my research, that targeting posts based on semantics is not a good way to play this game, not least because English is not everyone's native language. Since that's where my suspicions came from, I'm currently happy to let that sleeping dog lie. (It's still possible it'll wake up and bite me in the arse though, as I'm aware my actions created some rope...)

--

In the interests of getting things moving:

Vote Primal, for the moment, because a) I find it interesting that you voted for Orry to put him at L-2 and draw the claim despite knowing that baz could easily have built a similar case for yourself, and b) I'd like to see if Joe reacts to muttly's accidental edit before I push any more on Orry.

I actually slept badly because all of this was fluttering around in my head so much. I won't be staying up that late to go over things anymore..! Dangerous for my health :p

I just reread my post and realised some parts of it are vaguer than they are supposed to be e.g. it should have been "until you brought it back up in an investigation" as pazzer was first to mention it again after it was dropped. As for why I missed TwillightBard, I responded to his post first, then went rereading day 1 for the rest of my thoughts and I didn't get to that part.

pazzer, yourself and TwillightBard have all brought it back up (in that order).
You and TwillightBard have both "used it" to try and determine mafia.
pazzer was only questioning it, but also seemed to ignore/miss the several times it had been explained :/

Hope that clears it up and as I said, I'll continue from the previous post shortly.

Question for Joe:

Just for the sake of clarity, do we have a deadline for today?

Well that's the thing, I'm not sure if he could have built a similar case. If random.org had told him to vote for me, I have a feeling that he might have ended up not being able to justify himself so well.

Orry's claim still seems really suspicious to me, so in the interest of getting an explanation as to why he hasn't been told off for quoting: Vote Orryyrro

A single grey cloud streaks across the heavens, just touching the sun.

Day Two First Votecount
With eleven alive it takes six votes to lynch.

3 - SirPrimalform (cast by Rodzaju, NotFrenchYet and Muttly13)
1 - Orryyrro (cast by SirPrimalform)

Not Voting - xyem, Vitek, Orryyrro, TwilightBard, Bazilisek, LittleRabbit, Pazzer.

SirPrimalform is closest to lynch at L-3

Muttly - careful lad! Make sure you don't post twice in a row without leaving more than ten minutes between them.

Orryyrro has not broken rule #9.

Today's deadline will be formally announced once all players have posted. Expect it to be sometime mid-late november.

Unvote Primal, Vote Orryyrro

@Orry Can you explain this?

I think you're missing the point. He supposedly quoted his PM but as Joe says in his most recent post, Orryyrro hasn't broken rule #9. This must mean that what he posted wasn't really from his PM and I think that's pretty scummy. It may be an honest slip up, but it's a slip up that he would have been told off for were he telling the truth.

Well, yes, now that we have that info from Joe... He could have also changed it somewhat, or posted something from the PM that isnt confidential in Joes eyes. Anyway, I guess I will wait to see Os response. For now...

unvote sirprimalform