I'm hosting a game!

[johnhughthom]

I'm not really paying attention?

[GeneralHankerchief]

...okay, one and a half. Sigh.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Please note: This reread will only focus on the activities of landlubber, Ishmael, and JHT. I don't think I really need to explain why at this point.

Day 1

lubber lodges the first vote, a joke vote on Csargo. JHT gets a vote from Winston before Visor hardclaims. I do my thing and we go back and forth for a while. lubber doubts the veracity and motive behind Visor's claim and proceeds to get into an argument with Visor. His later point is that Visor's acting way too weird/not typical/outside the norm to be unsuspicious. This appears to be consistent with his later thoughts on khaan and myself.

khaan lodges a random on Ishmael, Ishmael is willing to let Visor live and lodges a "pseudo-random vote" although his reasoning is entirely random:

I don't trust landlubbers. I bet you've never even hunted a great white whale.

He also briefly mentions khaan's random vote as well as an unrelated, meaningless article I linked to in my "argument" with Visor.

Ishmael then switches to Winston in an accusation of bandwagoning on Visor. He adds this as an addendum, which normally I wouldn't comment on were it not for the fact that it references JHT:

EDIT: And of course, the host removed the suggestion to vote from you between the sign-ups player list and the game start player list. Clearly that's a subtle hint that he doesn't want his mafia killed off too soon. johnhughthom, you're next.

Later in the round, lubber switches to Visor mostly because he doesn't buy the claim/doesn't think it's good for the town. John comes in late, randoms Winston, and then unvotes him like two posts later. Lubber says that Visor might be displaying PIS by guessing the number of mafia. Continues arguing with Visor but keeps flying his "good townie" flag by saying it was a productive D1. John chips in with what he'd do if he was third party and got contacted by scum. This was from an argument with Csargo which was only tangential to the main debate going on at the time. John appears to agree with lubber's logic re: Visor but doesn't actually vote.

Visor lynched. Lubber voted Visor, Ishmael voted Winston, khaan and I voted BSmith, john didn't vote (tally doesn't have him listed in any category).

Day 2

Kage killed. khaan makes an oblique reference to Kage's Curse which I'm positive that only I caught (he also votes BSmith in continuation of D1).

Lubber says he's confused by Monty's non-perfect townie behavior. No surprise there. He also brings up Winston going Visor-GH-Visor on D1 when his vote wasn't needed for Visor to be lynched.

Ishmael comes in with a semi-long post on #136. Part 1 is agreeing with Monty that khaan and I are suspicious. Part 2 is agreeing with khaan and I that BSmith is suspicious. He lodges a vote on BSmith using the following reasoning:

Again, this comes off as somebody very deliberately trying to keep their options open.

lol

John pops in at 143 and says there's not much to look into re: yesterday's voting, backed up by good reasoning (scum had lots of time to decide what to do about Visor).

I defend myself for my actions the previous day, Lubber doesn't buy it but votes for BSmith using different reasoning (BSmith's got bad logic re: OMGUS). John votes Monty in the last vote before it ends:

Vote: Monty

Hasn't really made a lot of sense so far, and I'm still waiting for something to become clear.

Or even murky.

BSmith is lynched, courtesy of khaan, Ishmael, and lubber. John voted for Monty along with Csar. I posted but never actually lodged a vote, but probably would have joined in with the BSmith crowd.

Day 3

Csargo died. Monty calls out Ishmael to post more, lubber does the same for john. Hmm.

This is Ishmael's response:

As I mentioned yesterday I've been keeping an eye on him, but I'm just not finding him to be particularly scummy. I think there are definitely worse lynches than him, but there are probably also better ones as well (I'm just not sure who they are, yet).

Which immediately twigs Monty's scum sense. Ishmael asks if Monty thinks he's partnered with khaan, Monty's noncommittal. Lubber votes for john, backing up his earlier calling-out. John shows up but it's basically his usual self (ugh this is what happened in Campground too) so it's hard to keep that line of argument going. Lubber agrees and switches to Ishmael.

khaan and Winston get into their argument over my guilt re: Visor and other things. John comes in after it, doesn't mention it at all, and votes Winston. Ishmael says he thinks lubber is town and then says he thinks I'm the least scummy after lubber. Winston's also off his suspect-o-meter because Winston's acting a lot like lubber now in terms of offering analysis, etc. His order of suspicion at this point is Monty-khaan-john-Winston-GH-lubber. He votes Monty. Ishmael's average post length is also much longer than everyone else's at this point (I don't have any data with which to back this up, just eyeballing it).

Partly because he's the most scummy of the contenders, and partly because I want to see how the votes move in a tiebreaker round.

Winston offers up additional information about Monty PMing him, Ishmael remarks that's something that town Monty does. Not enough to move his vote off him though. Ishmael, Winston, and Monty want to agree on a compromise vote on khaan.

Enter chaos. Monty now pairs Ishmael and lubber as scum after khaan defends himself. I switch over to Monty. Ishmael says he's loving this phase end. khaan switches over to Monty about .00000000038 seconds before deadline. Ishmael brings up the fact that it might actually, defying probability, be me and khaan as a scum pair.

Monty lynched courtesy of me, khaan, and john. Ishmael and Winston (RIP) voted khaan, Monty and lubber voted Ishmael. Lubber says he would've switched to khaan had he been on but offered no reasoning behind the last-second vote.

Day 4 (today)

Winston buys it, as per Monty's prediction. FWIW, he also predicted that the scum pair was either GH/khaan or Ishmael/lubber.

I make my "I have evidence against lubber, vote him, no I'm not telling you" post. Lubber takes umbrage but votes for khaan. khaan plays along with what I'm doing and votes for lubber. The argument over whether voting to save yourself as townie is a good move begins. Lubber starts to get agitated. Lubber starts to get despondent. Maf thinking he might be lynched or townie realizing that if he goes, the town loses? Maf has margin for error this round, town has none. Statistically more likely that he's town.

Ishmael and john remain absent from this.

Lubber starts begging for me to show him evidence of any kind, against anyone. What a good little townie act. THE AWFUL TRUTH about khaan and my affiliation comes out. Lubber's still asking for evidence. We don't give him any, pointing out the logical flaws he's made and ignored over the course of the argument.

This post is interesting:

Well, I only ever insisted on my innocence because I wanted to get you two focused on each other instead of me, having suspected both of you after the Monty lynch. I didn't expect this tangent to get so consuming.

Please explain.

Finally, finally, Ishmael and john come in. Ishmael votes for khaan while citing and disavowing my previously-mentioned "vote lubber" post. He mentions nothing of the previous page-long argument aside from the fact that he's not voting for khaan because of his last-second move yesterday. I addressed this a few posts ago. John makes his post. I question him on it, he says he hasn't been paying attention. It's john so I can't even call him out for it. Damn you, john.

Conclusion

Lubber's been fairly active in the thread, interacting with most people and being very keen on advancing the perception that by-the-book non-scummy play by townies is the way to go about this. He's also grown more and more agitated as this round has progressed but provided reasoning for it earlier on (IRL stuff).

Ishmael has been an infrequent contributor. He makes longer posts than the usual. He commits but he doesn't. He doesn't typically join in arguments unless it's directly addressed at him.

John has been John.

Ishmael and John have never once interacted with or referred to each other in the entire game aside from that one weird instance of Ishmael pointing out how john's name was initially posted on the sign-up sheet as vote:johnhughthom. I find this very interesting. On Winston's D3 suspect list, he put john in the middle, "by default".

I personally think we're looking at an Ishmael-JHT mafia team upon rereading. They haven't really voted with each other, but they haven't needed to. They've come in, said what they've needed to say, and let events occur as they have. That said, I'm more confident in Ishmael being scum than john, simply because of his innate john-ness. That'll be research for another day if we live to see it. But in the meantime let's give ourselves another day to do it.

Unvote: Abstain
Vote: Ishmael

[GeneralHankerchief]

Quick addendum, since I don't want to edit a post that has a vote in it:

On Winston's D3 suspect list, he put john in the middle, "by default".

Should read "On Ishmael's D3 suspect list".

[Ishmael]

It's wonderfully refreshing to wake up and see a lengthy analysis against oneself. Very nostalgic. Anyway, for now I'll quickly sketch out why I'm voting for 'khaan - I'll get around to GH's accusations against myself, but that will have to wait a few hours.

Firstly, here's the position I'm starting from. I consider landlubber to be almost certainly town. If he's not then congratulations are in order and I've almost certainly thrown the game, but at the end of the day I feel confident eliminating him from my list of suspects. Of the remaining three players, two must be scum. As stated earlier I feel I don't have enough evidence to rule on jht one way or another. He might be scum or he might not, but I'd prefer to look at the other players rather than effectively flip a coin. Which leaves 'khaan and GH, of which at least one must be scum, and the one I find most scummy is the former.

I'll give a summary of my reasons for voting him to start with (in case I run out of time writing this up before I have to head off). Firstly, process of elimination - as mentioned above I believe at least one of he and GH must be mafia, and 'khaan is the better fit. Secondly, he has been giving the impression of taking the 'easy' vote most days, whilst building up his townie credentials and justifying his vote by dissecting the arguments of others, rather than putting his own forward. More on this below. Finally, I've been getting flashbacks to Vespasian all game, and that worries me (I don't expect this last point to sway anyone other than myself, obviously).

Now, on to some posts in a chronologically jumbled order:

Vote: Winston Hughes

You were quite rarin' to go on D1 and were quite on board with the Visor lynch. You 'bailed' off it and then switched back later, allegedly to stop a townie lynch, but your phrasing of "has to be" seems very off to me if that was indeed your goal.Since then, you've simply sat on voting for GH without really putting much explanation into it, a tactic I've used myself plenty of times as mafia. It makes you seem less random and like you actually have a goal when you really just want to toss a vote somewhere so people won't accost you.


Also, silly kids these days. I'm *always* scummy.

On the face of it, this seems like a reasonable justification for a vote. However, at this point I feel like Winston had already laid out quite clearly his explanation for voting for GH (I didn't and still don't necessarily agree with his arguments, but he'd definitely made them). In this case 'khaan's argument flips on its head - rather than Winston taking the easy vote without explanation, 'khaan is taking the easy vote with an easy, but flawed justification.

I am now going to proceed to ask you to back that up.

Would you please back that up?

I have now asked you to back that up

I will now vote for landlubber.

Vote: Landlubber

I have now voted for landlubber.

Yes, I know you like the symmetry, but at this point there was no justification given for voting landlubber. That only came retroactively, by attacking landlubber's arguments in response.

Your logic is bad because we said so. Since that seems to be the requirement for actual analysis instead of, say, thinking about it, here, I'll justify my vote for you.

It's fine, I can vote for you because monty is innocent and he said you are one of the potential mafia pairs.

The quoted post is just representative, as there were a fair few posts where 'khaan rebutted landlubber's arguments. I was trying to put my finger on why this whole sequence didn't give me the same vibe of 'townie analysis' I'd attributed to Winston and landlubber, and I think the reason is that 'khaan has for the most part been trying to pick apart the arguments of others (and therefore implicitly justify his vote on landlubber, at least), rather than promote his own cases. Now there's nothing inherently wrong with this - if somebody makes an argument, it needs to be open to scrutiny - but it is almost always easier to find flaws in somebody else's case than to make your own, and so it doesn't give off the same townie sense. Again, this is not a point against 'khaan - it's just stating why I'm not counting these exchanges as a point in his favour.

So is everyone having fun?

As a final aside, this post made me very, very nervous. Honestly, I was half expecting the host to reveal that there were three mafia and the town had lost that phase, just because of how much it came off as 'scum confident of victory.'

[landlubber]

Right, so this is where I'm at after hearing from GH and Ishmael.

GH and Khaan don't like my playstyle. They think it's unhealthy for the metagame. They think I haven't been risky enough. They think my logic is bad. This is all well and good, valid complaints I suppose, but none of it makes me scum. Assuming they're both town, they voted for me as a statement of dissatisfaction toward everyone who made arguments against them, not because they genuinely think I'm scum. That much is clear based on how often GH has criticized my content as too safe, too obviously townie (never mind that Khaan still has a vote on me-- if I'm so obviously town, what good would it be to lynch me?)

Frankly, I couldn't care less about the metagame, and I don't care that you think my playstyle has damaged it. I was never exactly a mafia legend. I played this game because I like arguing with people, not because I wanted to create prevailing wisdom of orthodox and heterodox strategies. I can accept sacrificing myself for the town-- I'd rather die than distract and deflect as a townie. But sacrificing myself for the metagame? Not a chance.

I like Ishmael's argument. It says things that I had thought but couldn't quite express. Yes, yes, there's still the question of his ignorance of JHT, but I had more or less the same reaction when he refused to argue against my vote on him. Am I sure of this? Nope. Am I taking the easy way out? Maybe. But this is where I've landed after a lot of thought.

Unvote, vote:Khaan.

My apologies if this vote irreparably damages the prevailing wisdom of the game. I'm playing how I know to play, and that's all I can do.

[GeneralHankerchief]

GH and Khaan don't like my playstyle. They think it's unhealthy for the metagame. They think I haven't been risky enough. They think my logic is bad. This is all well and good, valid complaints I suppose, but none of it makes me scum. Assuming they're both town, they voted for me as a statement of dissatisfaction toward everyone who made arguments against them, not because they genuinely think I'm scum. That much is clear based on how often GH has criticized my content as too safe, too obviously townie (never mind that Khaan still has a vote on me-- if I'm so obviously town, what good would it be to lynch me?)

Two quick things:

First of all, I never voted you out of any sort of dissatisfaction towards playstyle whatsoever. I voted you for a different reason at the start of the phase which will remain anonymous until the postgame. Secondly, in regards to khaan keeping his vote on you, that was because I specifically requested him to do so (assuming he even agreed with my analysis) for a few hours until both you and Ishmael had the chance to respond. Now that that requirement has been fulfilled, we'll see what happens next.

As for Ishmael, I'm not really going to touch onto his post too much since it was clearly made for your (lubber's) benefit. I'm eagerly awaiting the much-promised Part 2 where he addresses my accusations.

[landlubber]

This post is interesting:

Please explain.

By the beginning of this day, I had begun to think that one of you was mafia who had won the unyielding trust of the other. I doubted you would be so brazen if you were the mafia team, but I really couldn't fathom that both of you would be town (and I still have my reservations). So I appealed to my innocence (acting like a townie, apparently, is ~so 2010~) in an effort to get you two to critically examine each other the way you examine everyone else. It didn't work.

I haven't yet made a decision. I can't bring myself trust GH and Khaan, but Ishmael and JHT just haven't given the town anything to work with, and GH's discovery that they've never really acknowledged each other is a good find. I'll take some time to think it over.

[GeneralHankerchief]

What you have to recognize is that khaan and I were just trolling around at the start of the game. We weren't necessarily taking things seriously, we were just goofing around and having fun. Obviously we wanted town to win, because we're both competitive people who will take any and every opportunity to stomp on some fools who think they can beat us at Mafia, but scumhunting wasn't at the forefront quite yet.

You also need to realize that khaan and I are going to be a package deal in 99% of all situations. We talk on Steamchat nearly every day and have done so for many years now. Are we usually this blatant about it? No. But screw it, this was a small game, it was both of our first games in a while, and we were going to make the most of it.

But then a couple things happened. First of all, we were both left alive. I don't know about khaan, but I know that one of my usual flaws is that when I'm nightkilled, my activity drops way off, sometimes completely. Secondly, we were both under suspicion for what we perceived to be bad, illogical, disproven cases against us. khaan and I will sometimes, especially to each other, take the facade that we don't care, that we're above it all, but the truth is that we care immensely and deeply. We're fiercely protective of our reputations, and even more than that, fiercely protective of what we perceive to be the prevailing wisdom of the greater metagame which we worked for so long and so hard at to help shape.

So when we saw and see bad reasoning thrown around like it's gospel, we reacted. When said bad reasoning was used against us and actually picked up steam, we closed ranks. In the words that I've used to him several times now, the tiger was poked.

I wasn't fully locked in at the start of the game, but I definitely am now (I'm also drunk but that's its own separate issue). I think our goal, even more so than sniffing out scum and stringing them up to a tree, is to re-establish what we perceive to be the natural order of things. And that's bad logic being thrown back in its place, and even more so, the town going out on a limb and taking actual risks to kill the mafia. That's why I've been hounding you in the game as well as my big analysis post for being such a golden-boy townie figure, because by-the-bookness isn't enough in vanilla games. Not at the endgame, not with everything on the line.

[Ishmael]

khaan lodges a random on Ishmael, Ishmael is willing to let Visor live and lodges a "pseudo-random vote" although his reasoning is entirely random:


He also briefly mentions khaan's random vote as well as an unrelated, meaningless article I linked to in my "argument" with Visor.

None of this is particularly consequential, but I'll address it anyway out of completeness. My vote was 'pseudo-random' in the sense that I didn't vote for landlubber randomly, but rather because I wanted to make a comment on his name (amusingly, it was 'khaan's post that had put me in the Moby Dick mindset). On the other hand it wasn't deliberate inasmuch as I had no 'real' reason to be voting for him, and it might as well have been a standard D1 random vote. My comments on the posts of the two of you were for exactly the reasons I stated - I appreciated the reference in 'khaan's, and I found the article you linked interesting. That's it, I'm afraid.

Ishmael then switches to Winston in an accusation of bandwagoning on Visor. He adds this as an addendum, which normally I wouldn't comment on were it not for the fact that it references JHT:

The addendum in question was a light-hearted observation intended to take some of the sting out of my words, since I was worried my accusations might have come off a bit too harshly.

Ishmael comes in with a semi-long post on #136. Part 1 is agreeing with Monty that khaan and I are suspicious. Part 2 is agreeing with khaan and I that BSmith is suspicious. He lodges a vote on BSmith using the following reasoning:

Firstly, I'd like to clarify that I did not at this point say that I found you suspicious. I stated that the confidence of your posting made me nervous, and that you were worth keeping an eye on; the reason being that assured scum tend to be better at manipulating the town and avoiding suspicion, which meant that if you were mafia, you'd be dangerously effective (as evidenced). I acknowledge that I could have been more clear here, but then again I would hope it is obvious that I don't consider people being confident and relaxed to be a scumtell.

As for my vote on BSmith - sure, I agreed with your reasoning at the time, and found BSmith scummy. There is a distinction between leaving room to change your opinions of people and ensuring that if you change your vote, there is no evidence to say that you have shifted your position. My opinion at the time was that BSmith fell on the wrong side of that line, and I was wrong on it, but I don't think it would be fair to say that it was a horrendous misplay.

Csargo died. Monty calls out Ishmael to post more, lubber does the same for john. Hmm.

This is Ishmael's response:



Which immediately twigs Monty's scum sense. Ishmael asks if Monty thinks he's partnered with khaan, Monty's noncommittal. Lubber votes for john, backing up his earlier calling-out. John shows up but it's basically his usual self (ugh this is what happened in Campground too) so it's hard to keep that line of argument going. Lubber agrees and switches to Ishmael.

khaan and Winston get into their argument over my guilt re: Visor and other things. John comes in after it, doesn't mention it at all, and votes Winston. Ishmael says he thinks lubber is town and then says he thinks I'm the least scummy after lubber. Winston's also off his suspect-o-meter because Winston's acting a lot like lubber now in terms of offering analysis, etc. His order of suspicion at this point is Monty-khaan-john-Winston-GH-lubber. He votes Monty. Ishmael's average post length is also much longer than everyone else's at this point (I don't have any data with which to back this up, just eyeballing it).

Not much to say here, since it's mostly just the facts. For completeness' sake I'll point out that I had 'khaan pegged as somewhat more scummy than Montmorency, but as mentioned in my vote post I voted for Monty as he was the only one of the two in contention for lynching at that time. I suspect my post length is in fact larger than my average, given that this is the first game I've played in a while. Also, for the record I didn't realise what a tiebreaker round would entail - I thought it would be a fixed time extension in which votes could only be placed on the tied players, rather than a first past the post system.

Winston offers up additional information about Monty PMing him, Ishmael remarks that's something that town Monty does. Not enough to move his vote off him though. Ishmael, Winston, and Monty want to agree on a compromise vote on khaan.

Enter chaos. Monty now pairs Ishmael and lubber as scum after khaan defends himself. I switch over to Monty. Ishmael says he's loving this phase end. khaan switches over to Monty about .00000000038 seconds before deadline. Ishmael brings up the fact that it might actually, defying probability, be me and khaan as a scum pair.

I didn't change my vote immediately partly because I was thinking things over (and rereading the thread), and partly because I wanted to see Montmorency's reaction to the recent posts. Both of these satisfied me that 'khaan was a better lynch option, and (more importantly) a viable one.

At the time I also still believed that you were town, believe it or not. I might still believe it if it weren't for the fact that since you and 'khaan are a voting bloc, if you aren't his partner then it's game (and I'm an optimist at heart).

Lubber starts to get agitated. Lubber starts to get despondent. Maf thinking he might be lynched or townie realizing that if he goes, the town loses? Maf has margin for error this round, town has none. Statistically more likely that he's town.

I'm sorry, wasn't it about 95% certain that landlubber was scum?

Ishmael has been an infrequent contributor. He makes longer posts than the usual. He commits but he doesn't. He doesn't typically join in arguments unless it's directly addressed at him.

I do have to take some umbrage here. I obviously disagree with your assessment that "he commits but he doesn't," but this is really something that people have to look over my posts themselves to decide. As for not joining in arguments, I feel that you're flat-out wrong here - I got involved with the argument against Visor, I got involved in the argument against you, and I even got involved in the argument against 'khaan this day phase (well, part of it).

Ishmael and John have never once interacted with or referred to each other in the entire game aside from that one weird instance of Ishmael pointing out how john's name was initially posted on the sign-up sheet as vote:johnhughthom. I find this very interesting. On Winston's D3 suspect list, he put john in the middle, "by default".

I personally think we're looking at an Ishmael-JHT mafia team upon rereading. They haven't really voted with each other, but they haven't needed to. They've come in, said what they've needed to say, and let events occur as they have. That said, I'm more confident in Ishmael being scum than john, simply because of his innate john-ness. That'll be research for another day if we live to see it. But in the meantime let's give ourselves another day to do it.

I've not interacted with jht because, in your own words, "John had been John." As mentioned at the time, that's why I had him coming in third in my scum list - because I had nothing on him. There's really not much more I can say here.

[GeneralHankerchief]

None of this is particularly consequential, but I'll address it anyway out of completeness. My vote was 'pseudo-random' in the sense that I didn't vote for landlubber randomly, but rather because I wanted to make a comment on his name (amusingly, it was 'khaan's post that had put me in the Moby Dick mindset).

So why did you vote for lubber then?

Firstly, I'd like to clarify that I did not at this point say that I found you suspicious. I stated that the confidence of your posting made me nervous, and that you were worth keeping an eye on; the reason being that assured scum tend to be better at manipulating the town and avoiding suspicion, which meant that if you were mafia, you'd be dangerously effective (as evidenced). I acknowledge that I could have been more clear here, but then again I would hope it is obvious that I don't consider people being confident and relaxed to be a scumtell.

Part 1 of this statement: "I didn't find you suspicious".
Part 2 of this statement: "Your posting style was in line with what I perceived to be extremely dangerous mafia behavior and I decided to keep an eye on you".
Part 3 of this statement: "I don't necessarily consider the posting style that I just talked about to be suspicious.

As for my vote on BSmith - sure, I agreed with your reasoning at the time, and found BSmith scummy. There is a distinction between leaving room to change your opinions of people and ensuring that if you change your vote, there is no evidence to say that you have shifted your position. My opinion at the time was that BSmith fell on the wrong side of that line, and I was wrong on it, but I don't think it would be fair to say that it was a horrendous misplay.

The difference here is you left yourself way too much of an out. And it's not an isolated case either, it's a recurring pattern as khaan has brought up earlier on.

At the time I also still believed that you were town, believe it or not. I might still believe it if it weren't for the fact that since you and 'khaan are a voting bloc, if you aren't his partner then it's game (and I'm an optimist at heart).

I'm going to pose the same question I posed to landlubber earlier: If you truly believe that khaan is scum and not just your get-out-of-jail free card, who is his partner? You've been dancing around the idea that it's me but you haven't fully committed yet one way or the other, once again falling into the pattern as described above.

I'm sorry, wasn't it about 95% certain that landlubber was scum?

You keep bringing up this post. You're waving it around like a flag in a desperate attempt to call attention to it despite the fact that so much has passed it by. Do you honestly think that somebody like me makes a post like that, knowing that we're in the endgame, at the very start of a phase and there's not a reason behind it? Nothing I ever do in these games is without reason or merit.

As for not joining in arguments, I feel that you're flat-out wrong here - I got involved with the argument against Visor, I got involved in the argument against you, and I even got involved in the argument against 'khaan this day phase (well, part of it).

There's getting involved in arguments, and then there's getting involved. It's extremely easy to make a post or two to comment on the situation and then call it a day. I've done that a lot in the past. It's far harder, as scum, to take the next step and really get your hands dirty, because of the inherent risks involved.

I'd still like you to address khaan's Post 295. I've accepted that I'm going to get very little sleep tonight before work, so I'll be here for some while longer.

[Ishmael]

Did you really have to respond so quickly GH? My typing fingers are about to fall off! At any rate, this will have to be my last response for a little while, although I should be able to get in again sometime tonight.

So why did you vote for lubber then?

I might not have been clear enough here. My vote was not random in the sense that it was picked from an RNG. Rather, I picked 'at random' somebody who I could justify a vote for with more than just "vote: x, because random," which happened to be landlubber. Hence, pseudo-random.

Part 1 of this statement: "I didn't find you suspicious".
Part 2 of this statement: "Your posting style was in line with what I perceived to be extremely dangerous mafia behavior and I decided to keep an eye on you".
Part 3 of this statement: "I don't necessarily consider the posting style that I just talked about to be suspicious.

I think this might once again be a point of communication. Part 1 of the statement, as you put it, is not "I didn't find you suspicious," (which is equivalent to "I found you to not be suspicious") but rather "I didn't find you to be actively suspicious" (in response to the suggestion that I did find you actively suspicious, and therefore being equivalent to saying "I have a neutral read on you"). Part 2 was intended to be read as "your posting style was in line with what I perceived to be extremely dangerous behavior if you were mafia and I decided to keep an eye on you," which obviously changes the tone of the statement. Part 3 is consistent with my intent.

Semantics, I know, but I think it's important here.

The difference here is you left yourself way too much of an out. And it's not an isolated case either, it's a recurring pattern as khaan has brought up earlier on.

I obviously disagree with this interpretation. In all my posts this game I have stated my opinions of people as they stand. I'm not going to pretend certainty on a read when it's only tentative, and I'm not going to hedge my bets when I am truly confident about someone.

Witness, for example, my posts in D3. In the evening my time I observe that I don't find 'khaan to be the most scummy person around. The next morning, after rereading the thread, I change my mind and label him the most scummy. That doesn't square with your accusation that I've been 'leaving myself a way out' in an effort to maintain consistency.

I'm going to pose the same question I posed to landlubber earlier: If you truly believe that khaan is scum and not just your get-out-of-jail free card, who is his partner? You've been dancing around the idea that it's me but you haven't fully committed yet one way or the other, once again falling into the pattern as described above.

I think it is highly probable that if 'khaan is scum, you are his partner. Furthermore, I believe that it is a moot point if you aren't, since in that case the mafia are guaranteed a win.

You keep bringing up this post. You're waving it around like a flag in a desperate attempt to call attention to it despite the fact that so much has passed it by. Do you honestly think that somebody like me makes a post like that, knowing that we're in the endgame, at the very start of a phase and there's not a reason behind it? Nothing I ever do in these games is without reason or merit.

From memory I think I've brought it up twice, and addressing different parts of the post each time. With that said my comment in question was somewhat tongue in cheek. I was considering using the emoticon to make that more clear, but I've been trying to cut back on it.

There's getting involved in arguments, and then there's getting involved. It's extremely easy to make a post or two to comment on the situation and then call it a day. I've done that a lot in the past. It's far harder, as scum, to take the next step and really get your hands dirty, because of the inherent risks involved.

I made my thoughts on the situation known in each case. I must admit it's not my first instinct to go barging into an ongoing debate - that's probably something I should work on when playing Mafia.


Okay, that's me done for now. As I say, I'll try to be back sometime later this evening.

[Ishmael]

Actually, ignore my above arguments. GH deserves the victory just for that post.

[Ishmael]

As for Ishmael, I'm not really going to touch onto his post too much since it was clearly made for your (lubber's) benefit. I'm eagerly awaiting the much-promised Part 2 where he addresses my accusations.

Well, him and jht. I'm obviously not expecting my Shakespearean eloquence to convince the mafia to vote for themselves .

I fully expect Ishmael to post a defense regardless of your availability for the rest of the phase, but I find it interesting that he chose to further his attack on khaan in his limited time as opposed to defending himself. If we assume that there's two scum left and they win if the town lynches wrong tonight, mafia can afford to play it differently from the town. Ishmael went really gunning for the killshot knowing that he had the opportunity to end it this day phase. Even if he failed, his partner still has a chance to turn it around tomorrow. Meanwhile, if Ishmael was townie, he knows that if he dies, it's game over. I think natural instinct as townie, keeping in mind the scenario, would fall towards defending yourself first.

I'm afraid it's rather prosaic, but I addressed my reasons for voting 'khaan first because I thought it would be quicker, and I had to make it to an appointment. Given how long my previous post took to write up (mostly due to constantly mixing up the quote tags), it was the right call.

If I'm just picking one, I personally think it's Ishmael. You spent the entire game lurking and being non-committal.

I obviously disagree with that characterisation - see previous post.

Even after the monty lynch, you wouldn't stake any real claim to the idea of me and GH being scum buddies, by virtue of phrasing it as a question.

Because I still wasn't confident that you were scum buddies - see previous post.

Much earlier in the game, you talk about keeping an eye on me and GH(parroting Monty), and then go on about how we made a good case against Bsmith, which you then apparently disavowed any knowledge of by saying I've never made a case.

Here is the part of my post in question:

Secondly, he has been giving the impression of taking the 'easy' vote most days, whilst building up his townie credentials and justifying his vote by dissecting the arguments of others, rather than putting his own forward.

Looking back, saying that you took the easy vote "most days" was incorrect. My recollection at the time I posted was that you had only voted for BSmith on the one day, rather than two, and I obviously agree that that was a reasonable case, given that I also voted for him.

Oh, and how about that "highly persuasive argument"(your own words!)

Well sure, at first glance I found it persuasive (albeit not enough to completely change my opinion of Winston, as mentioned at the time). That's the point. The argument itself is reasonable, it's just that it was conditional upon a base that, upon going over Winston's posts again, simply wasn't true. I didn't cross-reference Winston's posts at the time because I was busy looking over those of yourself and Monty, but I feel like town 'khaan would have done so before making that case if he were looking to legitimately scumhunt.

Even now, in this round, it took being voted to actually get you to explain anything.

I didn't elaborate on my vote earlier for two reasons. Firstly, I was having a poke at GH for not giving a reason for voting for landlubber, which is why I echoed his post in the way I did (evidently this worked, sort of). And secondly, I'd had a long day and felt I'd be better off going over things in the morning (also true, given this is probably the most I've ever posted in a single phase).

In any case, I recognize that this has been a rather intense day phase, and if any of my arguments got too barbed or personal or what have you, please accept my apologies as this was not my intention. I just really got into the game for the first time in a very long time and wanted to go out there and kick some butt.

The same from me as well. Whatever the result, I hope everybody feels it has been a well-played game, in all senses.

[GeneralHankerchief]

When, O Ishmael, do you mean to cease abusing our patience? How long is that madness of yours still to mock us? When is there to be an end of that unbridled audacity of yours, swaggering about as it does now? Do not the nightly kills placed on the townl—do not the posts made throughout the day—does not the alarm of the people, and the union of all good townies—does not the precaution taken of assembling the survivors in this thread—do not the looks and countenances of this venerable body here present, have any effect upon you? Do you not feel that your plans are detected? Do you not see that your conspiracy is already arrested and rendered powerless by the knowledge which every one here possesses of it? What is there that you did last night, what the night before—where is it that you were—who was there that you summoned to meet you—what design was there which was adopted by you, with which you think that any one of us is unacquainted?

O tempora, o mores! We are all aware of these things; the town sees them; and yet this man lives. Lives! aye, he comes even into the thread. He takes a part in the public deliberations; he is watching and marking down and checking off for slaughter every individual among us. And we, gallant men that we are, think that we are doing our duty to the republic if we keep out of the way of his frenzied attacks.

You ought, O Ishmael, long ago to have been led to execution by command of the townies. That destruction which you have been long plotting against us ought to have already fallen on your own head.

What? Did not that most illustrious man, seireikhaan, the former moderator, in his capacity of a regular townie, put to death Montmorency, tho but slightly undermining the trust in him? And shall we, who are the town, tolerate Ishmael, openly desirous to destroy the whole world with fire and slaughter? For I pass over older instances, such as how Sasaki Kojiro with his own hand slew Subotan when plotting the destruction of a different town. There was—there was once such virtue in this forum that brave men would repress mischievous citizens with severer chastisement than the most bitter enemy. For we have a resolution of the town, a formidable and authoritative decree against you, O Ishmael; the wisdom of the players is not at fault, nor the dignity of this assembled group. We, we alone—I say it openly,—we, the town, are wanting in our duty

The town once decided that Reenk Roink, the chief of police, should take care that the republic suffered no injury. Not one night elapsed. There was put to death, on some mere suspicion of disaffection, White_eyes:D, a man who had borne the most unblemished reputation for many day phases. There was slain Beefy187, a man of town status, and all his allies.. By a like decree of the senate the safety of the republic was entrusted to Kommodus, the the famous mafia hunter. Did not the vengeance of the town, did not execution overtake Andres, a man of the people, and Dutch_guy, the lurker, without the delay of one single day? But we, for these four days, have been allowing the edge of the town’s authority to grow blunt, as it were. For we are in possession of a similar decree of the town, but we keep it locked up in its parchment—buried, I may say, in the sheath; and according to this decree you ought, O Ishmael, to be put to death this instant. You live,—and you live, not to lay aside, but to persist in your audacity.

I wish, O conscript fathers, to be merciful; I wish not to appear negligent amid such danger to the state; but I do now accuse myself of remissness and culpable inactivity. A camp is pitched in Ishmael’s inbox, two clicks away from this very thread, in hostility to the town; the number of the innocent decreases every day; and yet the general of that camp, the leader of those enemies, we see within this forum—aye, and even in the thread—planning every day some internal injury to the town. If, O Ishmael, I should now order you to be arrested, to be put to death, I should, I suppose, have to fear lest all good men should say that I had acted tardily, rather than that any one should affirm that I acted cruelly. But yet this, which ought to have been done long since, I have good reason for not doing as yet; I will put you to death, then, when there shall be not one person possible to be found so wicked, so abandoned, so like yourself, as not to allow that it has been rightly done. As long as one person exists who can dare to defend you, you shall live; but you shall live as you do now, surrounded by my many and trusty guards, so that you shall not be able to stir one finger against the town; many eyes and ears shall still observe and watch you, as they have hitherto done, tho you shall not perceive them.

For what is there, O Ishmael, that you can still expect, if night is not able to veil your nefarious meetings in darkness, and if private messaging can not conceal the voice of your conspiracy within their confines—if everything is seen and displayed? Change your mind: trust me: forget the slaughter and conflagration you are meditating. You are hemmed in on all sides; all your plans are clearer than the day to us; let me remind you of them. Do you recollect that only a few posts ago I said in this thread that you and John had barely acknowledged each other? Was I mistaken, Ishmael, not only in so important, so atrocious, so incredible a fact, but, what is much more remarkable, in the very day? I said also in the thread that you had at times attacked people for being noncommital about things while you yourself were guilty of the same crime. Can you deny that on that very day you were so hemmed in by my arguments and my vigilance that you were unable to stir one finger against the town; when you said that you would be content with the flight of the rest, and the slaughter of us who remained? What? when you made sure that you would be able to seize the discussion on Day 3 by a nocturnal attack, did you not find that that nobody would listen to you, by my arguments, by my watchfulness and care? You do nothing, you plan nothing, you think of nothing which I not only do not hear, but which I do not see and know every particular of.

Listen while I speak of this day past. You shall now see that I watch far more actively for the safety than you do for the destruction of the town. I say that you came into the thread (I will say nothing obscurely), that you completely and utterly ignored all of the prevailing arguments in order to make your own post and then exit; that your accomplice in the same insanity and wickedness did the same, too. Do you dare to deny it? Why are you silent? I will prove it if you do deny it; for I see here in the town one man who did that with you.

O ye immortal gods, where on earth are we? in what forum are we posting? what metagame is ours? There are here,—here in our body, O conscript fathers, in this the most holy and dignified assembly of the whole world, men who meditate my death, and the death of all of us, and the destruction of this town, and of the whole world. I, the scumhunter, see them; I ask them their opinion about the game, and I do not yet attack, even by words, those who ought to be put to death by the sword. You were, then, O Ishmael, at the thread this day; you divided the posts into sections; you settled what every one was to say; you fixed what you would and would not respond to, whom you were to take with you; you portioned out the divisions of the town for conflagration; you undertook that you yourself would at once kill the remaining townies, and said that there was then only this to delay you,—that I was still alive. Your scum partner was found to deliver you from this anxiety, and to promise that very night, before daybreak, to slay my ally in the thread. All this I knew almost before your meeting had broken up. I strengthened and fortified my case with a stronger argument; I refused admittance, when they came, to those whom you sent in the morning with weak cases, and of whom I had foretold to many eminent men that they would come to me at that time.

As, then, this is the case, O Ishmael, continue as you have begun. Leave the city at least; the gates are open; depart. That mafia camp of yours has been waiting too long for you as its general. And lead forth with you all your scumbuddies, or at least as many as you can; purge the town of your presence; you will deliver me from a great fear, when there is a wall between you and me. Among us you can dwell no longer—I will not bear it, I will not permit it, I will not tolerate it. Great thanks are due to the immortal gods, and to this very El Barto, in whose thread we are, the most ancient protector of this city, that we have already so often escaped so foul, so horrible, and so deadly an enemy to the town. But the safety of the town must not be too often allowed to be risked on one man. As long as you, O Ishmael, plotted against me while I was still alive, I defended myself, not with a doctor or roleblocker, but by my own private diligence. When, in the next day phase, you wished to slay my ally when I was actually buckling down, and your competitors also, in the thread, I checked your nefarious attempt by the assistance and resources of my own friends, without exciting any disturbance publicly. In short, as often as you attacked me, I by myself opposed you, and that, too, tho I saw that my ruin was connected with great disaster to the town. But now you are openly attacking the entire town.

You are summoning to destruction and devastation the temples of the immortal gods, the houses of the city, the lives of all the citizens—in short, all the thread. Wherefore, since I do not yet venture to do that which is the best thing, and which belongs to my office and to the discipline of our ancestors, I will do that which is more merciful if we regard its rigor, and more expedient for the game. For if I order you to be put to death, the rest of the conspirators will still remain in the thread; if, as I have long been exhorting you, you depart, your companion, that worthless dregs of the game, will be drawn off from the town, too. What is the matter, Ishmael? Do you hesitate to do that when I order you which you were already doing of your own accord? The townie orders an enemy to depart from the game via lynch. Do you ask me, Are you to go into banishment? I do not order it; but, if you consult me, I advise it.

For what is there, O Ishmael, that can now afford you any pleasure in this game? for there is no one in it, except that band of profligate conspirators of yours, who does not fear you,—no one who does not hate you. What brand of domestic baseness is not stamped upon your life? What disgraceful circumstance is wanting to your infamy in your private affairs? From what licentiousness have your eyes, from what atrocity have your hands, from what iniquity has your whole body ever abstained? Is there one youth, when you have once entangled him in the temptations of your corruption, to whom you have not held out a sword for audacious crime, or a torch for licentious wickedness?

What? when lately by the PM from the host indicating you were mafia, did you not even add another incredible wickedness to this wickedness? But I pass that over, and willingly allow it to be buried in silence, that so horrible a crime may not be seen to have existed in this thread, and not to have been chastised. I pass over the ruin of your fortune, which you know is hanging over you against the ides of the very next phase; I come to those things, but to the welfare of the town and to the lives and safety of us all.

Can the light of this life, O Ishmael, can the breath of this atmosphere be pleasant to you, when you know that there is not one man of those here present who is ignorant that you, on this very day, posted in the thread; that you had prepared your hand for the slaughter of the townies and chief men of the thread, and that no reason or fear of yours hindered your crime and madness, but the fortune of the town? And I say no more of these things, for the are not unknown to every one. How often have you endeavored to slay me, both as mafia and as acting townie? How many shots of yours, so aimed that they seemed impossible to be escaped, have I avoided by some slight stooping aside, and some dodging, as it were, of my body? You attempt nothing, you execute nothing, you devise nothing that can be kept hid from me at the proper time; and yet you do not cease to attempt and to contrive. How often already has that dagger of yours been wrested from your hands? How often has it slipped through them by some chance, and dropped down? And yet you can not any longer do without it; and to what sacred mysteries it is consecrated and devoted by you I know not, that you think it necessary to plunge it in the body of the townie.

But now, what is that life of yours that you are leading? For I will speak to you not so as to seem influenced by the hatred I ought to feel, but by pity, nothing of which is due to you. You came a little while ago into the thread; in so numerous an assembly, who of so many friends and connections of yours saluted you? If this in the memory of man never happened to any one else, are you waiting for insults by word of mouth, when you are overwhelmed by the most irresistible condemnation of silence? Is it nothing that at your arrival all those seats were vacated? that all the men of innocent standing, who had often been marked out by you for slaughter, the very moment you sat down, left that part of the benches bare and vacant? With what feelings do you think you ought to bear this? On my honor, if all feared me as all your fellow townies fear you, I should think I must leave the thread. Do not you think you should leave the thread? If I say that I was even undeservedly so suspected and hated by my fellow townies, I would rather flee from their sight than be gazed at by the hostile eyes of every one. And do you, who, from the consciousness of your wickedness, know that the hatred of all men is just and has been long due to you, hesitate to avoid the sight and presence of those men whose minds and senses you offend? If your parents feared and hated you, and if you could by no means pacify them, you would, I think, depart somewhere out of their sight. Now, the town, which is the common parent of all of us, hates and fears you, and has no other opinion of you, than that you are meditating parricide in her case; and will you neither feel awe of her authority, nor deference for her judgment, nor fear of her power?

And she, O Ishmael, thus pleads with you, and after a manner silently speaks to you: There has now for many years been no crime committed but by you; no atrocity has taken place without you; you alone unpunished and unquestioned have murdered the citizens, have harassed and plundered the allies; you alone have had power not only to neglect all laws and investigations, but to overthrow and break through them. Your former actions, tho they ought not to have been borne, yet I did bear as well as I could; but now that I should be wholly occupied with fear of you alone, that at every sound I should dread Ishmael, that no design should seem possible to be entertained against me which does not proceed from your wickedness, this is no longer endurable. Depart, then, and deliver me from this fear—that, if it be a just one, I may not be destroyed; if an imaginary one, that at least I may at last cease to fear.

If, as I have said, the town were thus to address you, ought she not to obtain her request, even if she were not able to enforce it? What shall I say of your having given yourself into custody? what of your having said, for the sake of avoiding suspicion, that you were willing to dwell in the thread?

Since, then, this is the case, do you hesitate, O Ishmael, if you can not remain here with tranquillity, to depart to some distant land, and to trust your life, saved from just and deserved punishment, to flight and solitude? Make a motion, say you, to the town (for that is what you demand), and if this body votes that you ought to go into banishment, you say that you will obey. I will not make such a motion—it is contrary to my principles, and yet I will let you see what these men think of you. Be gone from the living, O Ishmael; deliver the town from fear; depart into banishment, if that is the word you are waiting for. What now, O Ishmael? Do you not perceive, do you not see the silence of these men; they permit it, they say nothing; why wait you for the authority of their words when you see their wishes in their silence?

But as to you, Ishmael, while they are quiet they approve, while they permit me to speak they vote, while they are silent they are loud and eloquent. And not they alone, whose authority forsooth is dear to you, tho their lives are unimportant, but the townies too, those most honorable and excellent men, and the other virtuous citizens who are now surrounding the thread, whose numbers you could see, whose desires you could know, and whose voices you a few minutes ago could hear,—aye, whose very hands and weapons I have for some time been scarcely able to keep off from you; but those, too, I will easily bring to attend you to the gates if you leave these places you have been long desiring to lay waste.

And yet, why am I speaking? That anything may change your purpose? that you may ever amend your life? that you may meditate flight or think of voluntary banishment? I wish the gods may give you such a mind; tho I see, if alarmed at my words you bring your mind to go into banishment, what a storm of unpopularity hangs over me, if not at present, while the memory of your wickedness is fresh, at all events hereafter. But it is worth while to incur that, as long as that is but a private misfortune of my own, and is unconnected with the dangers of the game. But we can not expect that you should be concerned at your own vices, that you should fear the penalties of the laws, or that you should yield to the necessities of the republic, for you are not, O Ishmael, one whom either shame can recall from infamy, or fear from danger, or reason from madness.

Wherefore, as I have said before, go forth, and if you wish to make me, your enemy as you call me, unpopular, go straight into banishment. I shall scarcely be able to endure all that will be said if you do so; I shall scarcely be able to support my load of unpopularity if you do go into banishment at the command of the town; but if you wish to serve my credit and reputation, go forth with your ill-omened band of mafia; betake yourself to JHT, rouse up the abandoned citizens, separate yourself from the good ones, wage war against your town, exult in your impious banditti, so that you may not seem to have been driven out by me and gone to strangers, but to have gone invited to your own friends.

Tho why should I invite you, by whom I know men have been already sent on to wait in arms for you at the town square; who I know has fixed and agreed with the authorities upon a settled day; by whom I know that that silver eagle, which I trust will be ruinous and fatal to you and to all your friends, and to which there was set up in your house a shrine as it were of your crimes, has been already sent forward. Need I fear that you can long do without that which you used to worship when going out to murder, and from whose altars you have often transferred your impious hand to the slaughter of citizens?

You will go at last where your unbridled and mad desire has been long hurrying you. And this causes you no grief, but an incredible pleasure. Nature has formed you, desire has trained you, fortune has preserved you for this insanity. Not only did you never desire quiet, but you never even desired any war but a criminal one; you have collected a band of profligates and worthless men, abandoned not only by all fortune but even by hope.

Then what happiness will you enjoy! with what delight will you exult! in what pleasure will you revel! when in so numerous a body of friends, you neither hear nor see one good man. All the toils you have gone through have always pointed to this sort of life; your lying on the ground not merely to lie in wait to gratify your unclean desires, but even to accomplish crimes; your vigilance, not only when plotting against the sleep of husbands, but also against the goods of your murdered victims, have all been preparations for this. Now you have an opportunity of displaying your splendid endurance of hunger, of cold, of want of everything; by which in a short time you will find yourself worn out. All this I effected when I procured your rejection from the consulship, that you should be reduced to make attempts on your town as an exile, instead of being able to distress it as townie, and that that which had been wickedly undertaken by you should be called piracy rather than war.

Now that I may remove and avert, O fellow townies, any in the least reasonable complaint from myself, listen, I beseech you, carefully to what I say, and lay it up in your inmost hearts and minds. In truth, if my town, which is far dearer to me than my life—if all the Gameroom—if the whole town were to address me, “GeneralHankerchief, what are you doing? will you permit that man to depart whom you have ascertained to be an enemy? whom you see ready to become the general of the war? whom you know to be expected in the camp of the enemy as their chief, the author of all this wickedness, the head of the conspiracy, the instigator of the slaves and abandoned citizens, so that he shall seem not driven out of the city by you, but let loose by you against the town? Will you not order him to be thrown into prison, to be hurried off to execution, to be put to death with the most prompt severity? What hinders you? Is it the customs of our ancestors? But even private men have often in this town slain mischievous citizens. Is it the laws which have been passed about the punishment of innocent citizens? But in this town those who have rebelled against the innocents have never had the rights of citizens. Do you fear odium with posterity? You are showing fine gratitude to the people which have raised you, a man known only by your own actions, of no ancestral renown, through all the degrees of honor at so early an age to the very highest office, if from fear of unpopularity or of any danger you neglect the safety of your fellow townies. But if you have a fear of unpopularity, is that arising from the imputation of vigor and boldness, or that arising from that of inactivity and indecision most to be feared? When this thread is laid waste by war, when arguments are attacked and cases in flames, do you not think that you will be then consumed by a perfect conflagration of hatred?”

To this holy address of the town, and to the feelings of those men who entertain the same opinion, I will make this short answer: If, O conscript fathers, I thought it best that Ishmael should be punished with death, I would not have given the space of one hour to this man to live in. If, forsooth, those excellent men and most illustrious players not only did not pollute themselves, but even glorified themselves by the blood of Seamus Fermanagh, and Sasaki Kojiro, and Sigurd, and many others of old time, surely I had no cause to fear lest for slaying this parricidal murderer of the citizens any unpopularity should accrue to me with posterity. And if it did threaten me to ever so great a degree, yet I have always been of the disposition to think unpopularity earned by virtue and glory not unpopularity.

Tho there are some men in this body who either do not see what threatens, or dissemble what they do see; who have fed the hope of Ishmael by mild sentiments, and have strengthened the rising conspiracy by not believing it; influenced by whose authority many, and they not wicked, but only ignorant, if I punished him would say that I had acted cruelly and tyrannically. But I know that if he arrives at the camp of scum to which he is going, there will be no one so stupid as not to see that there has been a conspiracy, no one so hardened as not to confess it. But if this man alone were put to death, I know that this disease of the town would be only checked for a while, not eradicated forever. But if he banishes himself, and takes with him all his friends, and collects at one point all the ruined men from every quarter, then not only will this full-grown plague of the town be extinguished and eradicated, but also the root and seed of all future evils.

We have now for a long time, O conscript fathers, lived among these dangers and machinations of conspiracy; but somehow or other, the ripeness of all wickedness, and of this long-standing madness and audacity, has come to a head. But if this man alone is removed from this piratical crew, we may appear, perhaps, for a short time relieved from fear and anxiety, but the danger will settle down and lie hid in the veins and bowels of the thread. As it often happens that men afflicted with a severe disease, when they are tortured with heat and fever, if they drink cold water, seem at first to be relieved, but afterward suffer more and more severely; so this disease which is in the thread, if relieved by the punishment of this man, will only get worse and worse, as the rest will be still alive.

Wherefore, O conscript fathers, let the worthless be gone,—let them separate themselves from the good,—let them collect in one place,—let them cease to plot against the townies in their own thread,—to surround the tribunal of the innocents,—to besiege the cases with poor logic,—to prepare brands and torches to burn the arguments; let it, in short, be written on the brow of every townie, what his sentiments are about the republic. I promise you, this, O conscript fathers, that there shall be so much diligence in us the townies, so much authority in you, so much virtue in the thread, so much unanimity in all good men that you shall see everything made plain and manifest by the departure of Ishmael,—everything checked and punished.

With these omens, O Ishmael, be gone to your impious and nefarious war, to the great safety of the republic, to your own misfortune and injury, and to the destruction of those who have joined themselves to you in every wickedness and atrocity. Then do you, O Gameroom, who was consecrated by TosaInu with the same auspices as this forum, whom we rightly call the stay of this Gameroom and website, repel this man and his companions from your threads,—from the arguments and cases of the game,—from the lives and fortunes of all the citizens; and overwhelm all the enemies of good men, the foes of the town, the robbers of peace, men bound together by a treaty and infamous alliance of crimes, dead and alive, with eternal punishments.