Gadzooks there's a lot to get through. There are some interesting bits and bobs here and there, though.

So Brand etc. There's probably the most oddness around him. I know some of this will be repeating stuff others have said, but I'm trying to consolidate things a bit in my mind.

  On 7/5/2015 at 10:20 PM, Brickelodeon said:

I do believe that you meant to say "...alone and (Serial killer) kill the rest of us." That would make much more sense. Perhaps you got things mixed up and forgot that the vigilante is supposed to be good... It was probably just an honest mistake, but I'm willing to reach pretty far on the first day.

So this happened. You said you weren't defending him but were trying to "throw suspicion on him", but the the bit where you say "it was probably just an honest mistake" sure sounds like a defence to me. So why are you telling Cranebeinn what he meant to say? And when asked about the throwing of suspicion, apparently it's so that others scrutinise him, not to... throw suspicion on him, as everyone else here would probably understand it.

Then there's this:

  On 7/6/2015 at 2:04 AM, Brickelodeon said:

I am disturbed by how there are only 4 or 5 of us actually discussing things... Drop the fluff everyone. I want to hear your opinion. If everyone is lazy, the corrupted are sure to win. Speak up!

Which Agnar and Dragstyrr have also pointed out as being quite scummy, and I'm inclined to agree with them. I still wonder what you're doing contacting people; you said in the quoted PMs that you obviously wouldn’t be PMing Pudding if you thought he were scum - at this early stage? It’s pretty early to have such a confident read. Recently you mentioned that Lodmund was defending his "scumbuddy" (Tarben) and I can't keep up with whether you actually think Tarben is scum or not.

Other stuff:

  On 7/6/2015 at 12:11 AM, Hinckley said:

If we were voting right now, I'd vote for Mist. However, let me play Loki's advocate and point out that Mist is normally, metagamingly Commander Cuckoo Pants.

Mist being metagamingly Commander Cuckoo Pants doesn’t explain away what appeared to be a slip of the tongue, and doesn’t get him off the hook.

  On 7/6/2015 at 5:27 PM, Dragonfire said:

One other thing: I looked at Mist's past games and it seems she has never been Scum. Nobody knows her Scum-game. So if she is Scum, she is probably going to be acting the same as usual.

Or be doing a really bad job of it.

You know what? I think I'll go ahead and Vote: Mist (Mencot). I find the whole Brand-Tarben-Pudding debacle so topsy-turvy and complicated that I just can't seem to get my head around it and determine who is scum, if any of those involved (it could be that the Scum are sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn and watching us fight). Mist is the only person who has done something worthy of a vote in my book. I'm open to changing my vote should anything else more suspicious come to the table, or for the purpose of granting us a lynch.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:18 PM, Pandora said:

Mist being metagamingly Commander Cuckoo Pants doesn’t explain away what appeared to be a slip of the tongue, and doesn’t get him off the hook.

Or be doing a really bad job of it.

Trust me, if I were scum I would had done a better job then this what has happened here today.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:40 PM, Dragonfire said:

You know what? I think I'll go ahead and Vote: Mist (Mencot). I find the whole Brand-Tarben-Pudding debacle so topsy-turvy and complicated that I just can't seem to get my head around it and determine who is scum, if any of those involved (it could be that the Scum are sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn and watching us fight). Mist is the only person who has done something worthy of a vote in my book. I'm open to changing my vote should anything else more suspicious come to the table, or for the purpose of granting us a lynch.

Haha give me something "real and worthy" so I can defend myself against because that is just ridiculous.

I don't tend to vote for persona that make copy paste mistakes but I know people has been lynched for less on day one.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:42 PM, Mencot said:

Haha give me something "real and worthy" so I can defend myself against because that is just ridiculous.

I voted you based on what I call a Freudian slip. I agree, there's not much you can defend yourself with. All you can do is deny it. As I said, right now it's the most suspicious thing I've got to go on.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:40 PM, Dragonfire said:

You know what? I think I'll go ahead and Vote: Mist (Mencot). I find the whole Brand-Tarben-Pudding debacle so topsy-turvy and complicated that I just can't seem to get my head around it and determine who is scum, if any of those involved (it could be that the Scum are sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn and watching us fight). Mist is the only person who has done something worthy of a vote in my book. I'm open to changing my vote should anything else more suspicious come to the table, or for the purpose of granting us a lynch.

If any are scum, what's the possibility on two of them being scum and then intentionally shifting blame to just cause a ruckus so we give up on figuring them out and go for an easier target. Not defending or accusing anyone at this point.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:59 PM, KingoftheZempk said:

If any are scum, what's the possibility on two of them being scum and then intentionally shifting blame to just cause a ruckus so we give up on figuring them out and go for an easier target. Not defending or accusing anyone at this point.

So you think Brand and Tarben are both scum and engineered this all? Interesting perspective. Your concern about defending/accusing people is also noted.

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:08 PM, Dragonfire said:

So you think Brand and Tarben are both scum and engineered this all? Interesting perspective. Your concern about defending/accusing people is also noted.

Do you have any reason for picking Brand and Tarben specifically out of the three? Were you just using them as an example, or do you think they’re scum and Pudding-Head isn’t?

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:08 PM, Dragonfire said:

So you think Brand and Tarben are both scum and engineered this all? Interesting perspective. Your concern about defending/accusing people is also noted.

Not sure if I believe my own theory, but mainly an idea to throw out there. Also it's a way they could divide a vote. If they divided the vote enough (although risky) scum could have a no lynch based on an even tally.

I'm a business man. I try to look at the options and what's the best investment. I'd hate to put the cart before the horse, so that's why I'm stating I'm not accusing or defending anyone at this point.

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:24 PM, Ranger of the Forest said:

Do you have any reason for picking Brand and Tarben specifically out of the three? Were you just using them as an example, or do you think they’re scum and Pudding-Head isn’t?

I was interpreting Kaupmad's comment, not stating my own opinions. I believe that Kaupmad was implying that those two were scum.

Personally, I have no real read on either Pudding or Tarben, save that I don't think Tarben is the scum traitor. Brand is mildly suspicious IMO.

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:27 PM, KingoftheZempk said:

Also it's a way they could divide a vote. If they divided the vote enough (although risky) scum could have a no lynch based on an even tally.

Not gonna happen on Day One. With all those accusations flying around, scum trying to divide a vote would be obvious. People would spot who was pushing for a no-lynch.

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:28 PM, Dragonfire said:

I was interpreting Kaupmad's comment, not stating my own opinions. I believe that Kaupmad was implying that those two were scum.

Personally, I have no real read on either Pudding or Tarben, save that I don't think Tarben is the scum traitor. Brand is mildly suspicious IMO.

Ah, alright then. I didn’t originally get that interpretation from what he said, but that would make sense. Thanks for clarifying

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:50 PM, Mencot said:

I don't tend to vote for persona that make copy paste mistakes but I know people has been lynched for less on day one.

Wait, are you admitting your copy/paste-d that from somewhere or what?

Unless, I am hopelessly bad at remembering (and my apologies, but it takes forever for me to open the annals) I don't think Traitor was a role that was ever used before in Ragnarok. I would find it a bit strange if it were used now. There always is the possibility, but I would lean towards there not being one.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:04 PM, Brickelodeon said:

Ahh well. If you guys think me to be scum, vote me off. I can assure you that I am town here, but it's not like saying that will help at all. I re-read a few things, and I think I can see where I don't make sense in a few places. I guess I have equated being suspicious of someone and outright thinking that someone is scum are two different things, but I guess they aren't. I still hold that Tarben has acted strangely, and I think it's very likely that he is the traitor. That said, all the proof I have is out there for you to look at. I also say that Lodmund jumped on my bandwagon rather quickly, and simply passing off Tarben's actions as "being playful" is suspicious in my book. The PMs are out there for everyone to look at. You decide, was I just discussing the game, or did I have darker intentions? Pudding seems to think the latter, but I will still say that I was just telling him who I was suspicious of and giving reasons for my suspicion.

Help me understand something. You messaged Tarben, and he sent you what was essentially a one-sentence response saying, "I'm scum." From that one message, what made you think that he was a townie traitor looking to get recruited? In my mind, "I'm scum" and "I'm a traitor, please recruit me" are fairly unrelated. If he thought you were scum and capable of recruiting him, what could he possibly have gained by telling you that he was scum? Why not say he was a traitor?

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:24 PM, Ranger of the Forest said:

Do you have any reason for picking Brand and Tarben specifically out of the three? Were you just using them as an example, or do you think they’re scum and Pudding-Head isn’t?

I think you make a good point here. I find it hard to believe that this is some kind of con set up by Tarben and Brand, and even harder to believe that Pudding Head wouldn't be involved in that. This four-page, repetitive argument only came about because Pudding Head revealed the messages to the meadhall at large. If this is a con, who's doing the bussing? Pudding Head or Tarben? Both of them? Brand?!? Maybe I'm being naive here, but I think this argument is too petty and convoluted to be fake.

Helvetica, it's true that Brand's been odd since the beginning. His first comment of the day reads like this:

  On 7/5/2015 at 5:41 PM, Brickelodeon said:

Leave the watching to Heimdall. I'm watching you, and only you, Pudding-head. The amount of suspicious-ness you throw on others directly reflects the amount of guilt you have inside. I think you are compensating for something...

What? I suppose this was during the time when he was PMing you and asking advice regarding Tammo.

Why so convinced Shweiny here is scum or "guilty?"

And if it was just supposed to be a joke, it certainly doesn't seem that way.

Again, other people have pointed them out, but these three just make him so suspicious.

Even if my son is loyal, I would still think Brand is most likely scum.

  On 7/5/2015 at 10:20 PM, Brickelodeon said:

I do believe that you meant to say "...alone and (Serial killer) kill the rest of us." That would make much more sense. Perhaps you got things mixed up and forgot that the vigilante is supposed to be good... It was probably just an honest mistake, but I'm willing to reach pretty far on the first day.

  On 7/5/2015 at 11:23 PM, Brickelodeon said:

My comment is meant to throw suspicion on him, not defend him...

I could have phrased it better I guess. I was trying to say that scum would see the vigilante as a bad thing, and therefore would mix SK and vig up...

  On 7/6/2015 at 12:43 AM, Brickelodeon said:

Both, in this case. Like I said, I'm willing to reach pretty for on day one. This, so far, is the best lead I have, so I'm both suspicious of him and trying to cast suspicion on him so that other can scrutinize with me and maybe find something that I missed.

That "c"

Vote: Brand (Brickelodeon)

May as well place my vote.

At this point, I think he's the most suspicious.

Mist is good too.

Sure it's petty and vindictive, sure I've got no good reasons other than 'I think'. Sure twisty minded people can twist it to read it as something it's not and conclude wrong headed things about me. I don't care.

Vote: Brand(Brickelodeon)

  On 7/6/2015 at 7:50 PM, TheLazyChicken said:

I'm in the middle, I don't really know if you could be a scum traitor trying to find the other scum members which could be likely or if you're just a bored townie.

"You could be scum - that's likely

You could also be town - that's likely too"

:skeptic:

Vote: Lambi (TheLazyChicken)

This is most likely a scum strategy to seem helpful while not saying anything.

  On 7/6/2015 at 8:40 PM, Dragonfire said:

You know what? I think I'll go ahead and Vote: Mist (Mencot). I find the whole Brand-Tarben-Pudding debacle so topsy-turvy and complicated that I just can't seem to get my head around it and determine who is scum, if any of those involved (it could be that the Scum are sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn and watching us fight). Mist is the only person who has done something worthy of a vote in my book. I'm open to changing my vote should anything else more suspicious come to the table, or for the purpose of granting us a lynch.

I don't really think Mist is scum. I mean, she could be, but if she is I don't think that what she said is a scumtell, is what I mean. It seems like she was just doing what she usually does, and I hate to metagame, but it's really not that odd.

  On 7/6/2015 at 9:30 PM, Dragonfire said:

Not gonna happen on Day One. With all those accusations flying around, scum trying to divide a vote would be obvious. People would spot who was pushing for a no-lynch.

Is it even possible that we could end today with a no-lynch? No, I'm not supporting it, in case anyone wants to ping me for doing that, I'm just wondering, based on the circumstances we're in in the story.

I'll do Vote: Brand(Brickelodeon). He's reading an incredible much into something that I don't think is even there in the first place. It doesn't seem that he's willing to let any of us dissuade him from targeting Tarben, and since I'm inclined to think a fair bit of us are good townies, that pings him as scum for me.

  On 7/6/2015 at 10:13 PM, Chromeknight said:

Sure it's petty and vindictive, sure I've got no good reasons other than 'I think'. Sure twisty minded people can twist it to read it as something it's not and conclude wrong headed things about me. I don't care.

Vote: Brand(Brickelodeon)

You no longer think Jarl is a Serial Killer?

My defense rests in the PM conversation I had with Tammo. Go back and look at it. I can legitimately say that I find his behavior distractingly odd, and I don't think a normal townie would say crazy shit like that for no reason. You all know Tarben well, he doesn't do anything without a reason. There has to be a method to his madness. I don't know if it's a good method or a bad one. Like I said before, I really like Pudding's idea that he could be the traitor fishing for the scum team. There are other possible reasons, I'm sure, that's why I'm not voting for him yet.

  On 7/6/2015 at 10:19 PM, Tamamono said:

I don't really think Mist is scum. I mean, she could be, but if she is I don't think that what she said is a scumtell, is what I mean. It seems like she was just doing what she usually does, and I hate to metagame, but it's really not that odd.

But if you're really going to metagame, don't you think Mist would be all "I'm not a puppy!

Blergety, Blergety! "

In a situation where he was being accused and something befuddling is being said like what Brand is saying? Your inadequate metagaming seems a bit like a defense of Mist.

  On 7/6/2015 at 10:44 PM, Brickelodeon said:

My defense rests in the PM conversation I had with Tammo. Go back and look at it. I can legitimately say that I find his behavior distractingly odd, and I don't think a normal townie would say crazy shit like that for no reason. You all know Tarben well, he doesn't do anything without a reason. There has to be a method to his madness. I don't know if it's a good method or a bad one. Like I said before, I really like Pudding's idea that he could be the traitor fishing for the scum team. There are other possible reasons, I'm sure, that's why I'm not voting for him yet.

It was pre-game. Literally no reason for anything pre-game. Sit down.

  On 7/6/2015 at 10:44 PM, Hinckley said:

But if you're really going to metagame, don't you think Mist would be all "I'm not a puppy!

Blergety, Blergety! "

In a situation where he was being accused and something befuddling is being said like what Brand is saying? Your inadequate metagaming seems a bit like a defense of Mist.

That's a really excellent point, but I still don't really see it as a reason for her being scum.

And trust me, I'm not the type to try to defend my teammates, especially when I'm under scrutiny (somehow) as well.

After several attempts to understand this whole Brand/Tarben/Pudding-Head thing a few thoughts come to mind. Two of them could be scum trying to set up the third for a lynch or one is doing a very lousy imitation of scum floundering, or one or more is attempting to divert attention away from Mist who at this point has made two slip of the tongue and gone mostly unnoticed. This needs to be addressed. Yes if one metagames then Mist's behavior isn't really any different, however, I do not recall an instance of the slip of the tongue before.

I think the best bet is for today to:

Vote: Mist (Mencot)

Yes the trio of Brand/Tarben/Pudding-Head require further watching but Mist's two slip ups are better evidence for a Day 1 lynch.

  On 7/6/2015 at 11:12 PM, Lady K said:

one is doing a very lousy imitation of scum floundering,

Why would one want to imitate floundering Scum?

Vote: Brand(Brickelodeon)

This has been a weird day and way too convoluted. Granted it is the first day and whenever one is under scrutiny one would be defensive, but he's been a little, for lack of better words, aggressive.

  On 7/6/2015 at 10:41 PM, Hinckley said:

You no longer think Jarl is a Serial Killer?

I suggested he might be based on something he said.

Others pointed out that the evidence in what he said was so slight they couldn't see it.

In the end, it wasn't the specific accusation but the responses to it that were interesting.

Jarl wasn't defensive or counter accustiory. He just ignored it, then calmly denied it. There was no panic about being 'found out'.

So no, I don't think he is.

I have no idea how to make sense of this. The Brand/Tarden debacle is clearly interesting, but is incredibly mind-boggling in the defenses coming from Brand. The one statement I especially don't understand is the one saying he does not read Tarden to be scum, but does find him suspicious. Not only is that a difficult claim to follow, it makes me wonder why he brought up Tarden as a possible lynch if he only finds him "suspicious", after taking a fairly obvious joke as a legitimate claim. How do you believe a scumclaim to be true, but then insist that you don't scum read them? It just does not make sense to me. Nonetheless, right now I only get a sense of naïvety from Brand, but am willing to look into him going further.

The Mist scenario is interesting too. I don't necessarily know how reasonable it is to make a lynch given her past, but metagaming has proven many times to be dangerous.