Surely there was a better way to get the clues discussed again? I think you've needlessly complicated things, as- even to myself at this point- your claim is far more interesting than any clues which have so far been given.

I must say though amok is acting in a scummy manner, I'm getting more of a jester vibe from him than anything. The ludicrous St. Bernard claim( an unprompted one, too) and odd reasoning seem to scream: Lynch me!

Amok seems like a likely lynch-candidate for day one, but I feel that Red_Baron is quite suspect as well. He has used dodgy logic to justify his votes for Zchinque and amok, and has hopped from JMich to the aforementioned two gentlemen( first amok and then Zchinque) in quick succession. I feel like he's trying to get a lynch-wagon rolling, and for pretty slim reasons as well. So I'm going to Vote: Red_Baron.

Allow me to point out I never went for JMich - and that amok and Zchinque are for the same reason, and I am fine with either. However as already said as amok is currently doing his best to collect votes - I see little reason to add mine before it becomes required and instead I'll be using it to see if something can be gained from Zchinque (I don't expect much, but at least it has let to him voting for me - and a nice collection of others ;) ).

So skipping the jumping quickly from targets, the targets being the two for the same reason as I repeatedly stated myself, thus it leaves your reason to be that I used dodgy logic? Dodgy as in I decided that they would be primary targets for being different by their own admission and the fact that one of them have already confirmed (whether it be a lie or not) that he is not town. Thus my dodgy logic have so far procured an interesting claim and given as more to go on. Your logic of voting me for doing that has done what?

In any case I stand with my notion that we should lynch either amok or Zchinque or perhaps both given the situation on day 2.

Wow, flurry of activity here.

I'm, a little amazed, and dismayed at Amok's sudden claim and call for clues. It sounds like he's trying to get things pushed in one direction while throwing us off a trail. I'm interested in that he's claiming to be clueless, and honestly, his description of his role sounds like a clue-cop...I'm at a loss here. I tend to believe that the easiest lies have veins of truth in them but I can't figure out what could be true or false...bravo.

nmillar's comment that there are 4 scum, I'm just not seeing it. It's possible, but I'd say fairly improbable.

Will read into Baron's posts more at the gym, just wanted to put something quick out there.

@peeps voting amok: Do you think he's scum lying about being neutral, or neutral lying about his role?


@nmillar: Re: Jesskitten. I believe I said that neutral/survivor claims should be scrutinized. In that game everyone collectively went "Survivor, eh? That's jolly good then." and didn't offer it a second thought. I'm generally a proponent of vigging claimed neutrals, not lynching them.

Not sure... it really feels like he's lying about something, presumably something anti-town. I can't see a motivation for his behaviour otherwise, the "claiming at the drop of a hat but still seemingly concealing something" thing.

I disagree with the bolded part of your post.

Allow myself to quote myself

Yeah, I'm kind of tempted to vote amok, just to force a full claim as his "that's all I will say" schpiel does not inspire confidence. I don't believe for a second that his win condition is "Town needs to win, woo!", and his claim that it is so might very well imply something much more sinister. I do think RB is a better lynch option, but I would be willing to go for an amok lynch, if he clearly failed to put all cards on the table once full claim time hypothetically comes.

You disagree because you have a clue which helps identifies one of the killers? Is that not the point of the clues?

Also, it identifies who the alias of the player is, not who it is. To do so we need the likes/dislikes. If I see correctly, we now have two clues to who did the actual killing:

1- a woman
2- english

so we are getting there.

seriously, I fail to see how talking about these clues are hurting town. I am getting a little bit frustrated.

@MOD: Can we please start having regular vote counts and prods where appropriate?

Your frustration seems dubious.

The clue I divulged was simple and concise. I also brought it out into the open with little or no prodding from the peanut gallery. When have I spoken about clues, likes, dislikes hurting the town? On the contrary, I've spoken about withholding of information as negative and on the whole hurtful to town.

I am not frustrated towards you. I like you,

it is the rest....

Well I had gone up to QuadrAlien and discreetly whispered something into a pricked ear. I can't remember what the response was right now....

oh I assure you officer it was nothing sinister!!

And of course you'll want to know who everybody was voting for! Let me think....

Telika had been voted for by nobody
JMich had been voted for by QuadrAlien
Flubbucket had been voted for by P1na
QuadrAlien had been voted for by nobody.
Robbeasy had been voted for by nobody
Vitek had been voted for by nobody.
p1na had been voted for by nobody.
amok had been voted for by SirPrimalform and nmillar
DarkoD13 had been voted for by nobody.
CSPVG had been voted for by nobody.
Twilightbard had been voted for by nobody.
SirPrimalform had been voted for by nobody
nmillar had been voted for by nobody.
Red_Baron had been voted for by Vitek, Zchinque and CSPVG.
and, yes!
Zchinque had been voted for by amok, JMich and red_baron.

meaning that Zchinque and Red_Baron were just FIVE votes away from a majority vote!!! It was thrilling!
While that was going on Telika, Twilightbard, Robbeasy, flubbucket and DarkoD13 were conspicuous in that they had voted for nobody at all!

And there was definitely eight days o'clock at the most before everybody went to bed. I can say that for certain!

Well I have always been a dog person.

Hmm had forgotten amok was voting for Zchinque... makes it double important to consider how much I believe amok's claim. I'll stick with the current selection, but should it seem that amok is a more agreed upon target for lynching he could also still be an option. If nothing else to confirm his claim, thereby perhaps be able to draw some conclusions as to the other not on the list.

....mmmm I've been thinking about this whole clue thingy that has you guys so on edge very deeply (for about 30 seconds), and my conclusion is that it's more fun to have the clues out than to never hear about them. Because that's one more thing to mess with. So I think I'll post my clue after a while, unless someone wants to try convincing me not to.

I should warn that it will be easier to convince me to stay quiet with a funny reason than with a well thought argumental one, because I most probably won't bother trying to understand the reasoning behind the well thought one.