The Casino - Game Over - SK Wins

[bluebambue]

What is Rose's Role/alignment?

[wam]

I am assuming that unique was town but can that be confirmed please?

I will hold off analysis till we get those answers.

[Snark]

Town - Cocktail Waitress. You know all the ins and outs of the casino. After years of running about, handing people their drinks and chatting about life at the casino, you've grown to know the customers quite well, individually. Social as you are, you like to help them get to know each other. Every night you may send the mods the names of two people you'd like to introduce. Either you find out if your targets are already friends (you get a message saying "same alignment" or "not the same alignment"), or you'll actually have them get along (your targets get a one-day private chat). You will be informed which of the actions you have taken.

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.

Town - Dealer. You’ve got all the class typical of a blackjack dealer. You run a smooth operation, and you don’t put up with any nonsense at your table. You’ve seen all types of players try their luck with the cards and play many exotic strategies, but the one thing they all love to do is double down. Every night you may send the mods the name of a person you’d like to deal in. Either your target wins the double down (you doctor your target) or your target loses and becomes bankrupt (you kill your target). You will be informed which of the actions you have taken.

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.

8 alive, 5 to lynch. Deadline at 4pm EDT on August 13.

[Adam H]

I'm still most suspicious of wam, New User, and roband, in that order. Other than that, there's really not much more for me to say.

[wam]

Ok I have done a read through wiht the new knowledge gained and nothing really stuck out at me.

The one observation I will make is that the opinion piece from CJ was rather out of character.

[bluebambue]

Roband: had that disagreement with USN, but I don't think it was particularly major. I just did a read through, and haven't really gotten a good read on him. My gut says slightly scum, but I don't have a reason.

Adam: Is the second person (after myself) to put down a vote. Votes for wam due to lurking and a disagreement over the possibility of insane roles. Then votes for USN after their tiff, then revotes for wam because "almost entirely because of roband and New User sticking up for him indirectly." I find it odd that in his initial post where he votes wam, he doesn't mention fshfood for lurking, despite that being a major reason for voting for wam. I think it is unlikely that both Adam and wam are scum.

New User: They seemed to have sensible posts. As USN thought they seemed like town and USN flipped town, I am inclined to believe her. USN is more experienced than I.

Lynx: didn't have much to say. Should post more

Fshfood: had one really contentful post where they vote USN. I thought it was a useful post. Barely posts otherwise.

wam: didn't post too much. Was defended by Roband and New User, but I don't really think that means anything except that Roband and NU think they're town. In addition, my night action gave me a hint (that is not garuanteed) that wam did not carry out the kill. As such, it will take more for me to be convinced they are scum. I am not going to claim what my power(s) are, so I realize that everyone will have to take this with a grain of salt.

cjq: is acting like scum, but peoples' meta data says he always acts like scum. No opinion.

[fshfood]

Bleh .. another goose-egg as town on D1/N1.

Right now, I am probably most suspicious of CJ, but he always seems scummy to me. The post with all the analysis to me either says a town trying to change meta after being called out by several people, or maybe an indie survivor, especially after the "please get off my bandwagon comment."

Blue - feeling town to me

NU - seeming like his normal, logical self .. leaning town.

wam - I'm leaning town here. I thought it was interesting that he was calling Rose out to claim right before deadline. Scum could have just let it go and not even tried.

lynx - never made it back for the vote, right? I'm getting a little suspicious of him, but I understand busy, too.

roband - hmmmm ... I really don't know. I get some slight pings on him, and I know that US was leaning towards him as scum, and now she was Nk'd.

Adam - has been jumping around a lot. leaning scum.

ninja'd by Blue ..

Yes, I know I need to get more posts in here. I will try and remedy that. I'm going to do another read-through and probably sleep on it and see what I think tomorrow.

[New User]

The "I'll take what I can get" in the flavor text makes it look like UniqueScreenname was killed by a Serial Killer; maybe I'm looking into it too much.

Adam H, can you explain what you meant by me sticking up for wam indirectly? The only thing I remember saying about wam was that he hadn't contributed, early in the first day. The only thing I noticed is this

After rereading, it now seems that wam is less scummy than I previously thought. A lot of my suspicion was based on other players jumping on CJ to "save" wam, which isn't really fair to wam.

Is there something else I'm missing? Am I indirectly sticking up for wam by voting for someone other than wam?

[cjquines]

Rose and USN were townies? More later.

[roband]

Morning all. 8 left alive, leaving us at 5,2,1 or 6,3 IMO.

If we have an indie, the either don't have a kill or one of the kills was blocked. It could be USN managed to doctor someone last night, which would be handy.
But actually, that would indicate that USN targetted someone who she thought was scummy (yesterday someone suggested using the power as a semi-potent vig) - but they were also targetted by someone trying to kill them and USN ended up doctoring them.
Or maybe that's massively convoluted and didn't happen.

I can understand why people are suspicious of me - I disagreed with how USN acted yesterday. But I stand by what I said.

Things just got busy, more later.

[New User]

Here's my thoughts so far. From scummiest to towniest.

cjquines - little content on the first day. After being called out for it, he made a post like this one that summarized his opinions of each player. It's good that he made an actual contribution, but it was so obvious. He even pointed this out by saying "please get off my bandwagon" or some such comment. Voted for Rose.

lynx - apparently he was busy with real life stuff, which is understandable. He made a vote against fshfood based on inactivity, but then quickly unvoted when it was pointed out that he was just as inactive. Didn't have a vote at the end of the day. Still, he made more of an effort than cjquines, in my opinion.

fshfood - little activity at first, but that changed later. Suspected USN when I personally thought she looked like the towniest player. I know that's just a difference of opinion. Unvoted USN at the end of the day, when it was clear that USN wouldn't be lynched. fshfood said she would vote for Rose, but didn't want to bring her too close to the hammer without giving her a chance to roleclaim. This seems like a towny thing to do on the surface, but looking at it from the perspective of fshfood as scum, it could be that she was unsatisfied with USN's power role and would rather have someone else claim so she can decide which is a better target for the night kill. Also, since Rose was leading in votals at the time, fshfood could have refrained from voting, expecting Rose to be lynched anyway and keeping her name off the final vote list. This would be especially significant if her scummate was already voting for Rose.

Adam H - seems to be giving cjquines more leeway than I am comfortable with. In fact he is pretty much defending cjquines. Looking back at the voting patterns, Adam voted for wam, for what seemed to be a legit reason. Rose then voted for wam for inactivity, but let's ignore that for now since Rose wasn't very active herself. Next, I voted for cjquines, for what I again consider a legit reason, of course. roband makes a post that mirrors my thoughts of cjquines and votes for him also. wam then changes his vote to cjquines, saying he would rather see him lynched than Adam. Later, Adam says that roband and I were indirectly sticking up for wam, and accuses the votes against cjquines as nothing more than a tactic to get attention away from wam. Sorry, Adam H, but that is incredibly poor reasoning in my opinion. I think the votes against cjquines are every bit as justified as your vote against wam, and more so than Rose's vote against wam.

wam - said of Rose "I think she is acting scummy but will probably turn up town." That doesn't make sense to me, unless he already knows Rose's alignment. Disagreement with Adam H over USN's guilt, role sanity, and other things. I doubt that both are scum. His defense vote at the end of the day is reasonable, I suppose, but it's only reasonable to keep himself from getting lynched. I mean, it doesn't really say whether he's town or scum, just that he was protecting himself. If he's town, he presumably would want to save himself instead of Rose, even if he thought she was town because he couldn't be sure. If he's anti-town, he wanted to save himself for obvious reasons.

roband - the "I want to lynch anyone who is trying to kill me" thing is pretty obvious. So obvious, I don't know what to think of it. He got into a minor conflict with USN, but it amounted to nothing. I already said I thought it was pretty silly. He voted for cjquines, pointing out all the contentless posts from him. That's also my train of thought, but later he says that he wasn't voting for cjquines purely for his inactivity but for his use of the word "lurk" when describing his own behavior. Again, I don't know what to think of that. I guess I have a neutral read on roband.

bluebambue - generally towny content the entire game. Along with USN, I haven't suspected her of scummy behavior at all, really.

[New User]

wam: didn't post too much. Was defended by Roband and New User, but I don't really think that means anything except that Roband and NU think they're town.

Wait, what does this mean? Again, I'd appreciate if someone would point out where I defended wam.

[Snark]

wam accidentally read a spoiler and is in the process of being replaced.

Votals: None!

Deadline in 3 days, 6 hours, 47 minutes.

[bluebambue]

wam: didn't post too much. Was defended by Roband and New User, but I don't really think that means anything except that Roband and NU think they're town.

Wait, what does this mean? Again, I'd appreciate if someone would point out where I defended wam.

Sorry, I just saw that Adam thought so and so decided it must be true.

[fshfood]

I am in a conference today and flying home tonight (barring the bad weather here messing with my flight) but I wanted to respond to NU, and im on my phone so apologies if formatting or anything is weird. I believe I put my reasoning on my vote on US, which like you said, difference of opinion. I unvoted after her claim. Yes, I probably could have voted for Rose, but I was sitting at the airport posting from my phone and my flight was boarding do I really couldn't figure out where votals were at. I guess that's a believe me or not thing, lol. That being said, i don't think I'll be able to get much posted today, but will try and get on if my layover allows it.

[Adam H]

Later, Adam says that roband and I were indirectly sticking up for wam, and accuses the votes against cjquines as nothing more than a tactic to get attention away from wam. Sorry, Adam H, but that is incredibly poor reasoning in my opinion. I think the votes against cjquines are every bit as justified as your vote against wam, and more so than Rose's vote against wam.

I just disagree. I think cj's behavior is indicative that he is cj, not scum.

With 1 day to the deadline, and wam leading the votals by 1, New User and Roband voted cj without mentioning wam or anyone else, their reason being that cj was being same old unhelpful cj. That's fine, but it still reeks to me.

[roband]

Adam, I don't even need to look back at my post. I know why I voted cj.

I also made it damn clear why. My post was a "post by post" analysis - I voted cj based on the post he made which was poorly worded. This all happened BEFORE any votes on wam.

I can't remember my opinion of you on D1, but I'm not liking your posting right now.

[Adam H]

Sorry, I should have made it clear that when I said "they voted cj because cj was being same old unhelpful cj," I'm stating what it looks like to me. I know that's not the reason you gave.

I realize that votes against cj can be justified. They can be justified very easily. It's like stealing candy from a baby, IMO.

[roband]

That's not the bit I have a problem with.

It's the bit where you say that you don't care what our reasons are, it still reeks. I think that you're wrong for being suspicious, even though it's been well explained (from me, at least)

[Adam H]

I'm really not sure what the problem is.

-I think wam is scum. Wam is somewhat close to being lynched.
-You vote cj, who is an undeniably easy target. Wam is no longer in the lead to be lynched. I fundamentally disagree with your analysis (you say cj is likely to be scum, I say he is not).
-Therefore I am suspicious of you.

I think you're just trying to annoy me, which seems like a scum-roband thing to do. (It's kind of working).

Vote: Roband

[roband]

No. You are fundamentally wrong.

You vote cj, who is an undeniably easy target. Wam is no longer in the lead to be lynched.

I didn't know this. I hadn't read any votes on wam yet. My vote for cj was based on his stupid-arse post which DESERVED A VOTE. It was as much to make him come back and post properly as it was because it was scummy.

You're trying to create reasons for my vote, which are plainly false.

I'm not trying to annoy you, I'm too busy being annoyed BY you.

[bluebambue]

Realized I forgot to respond to this:

The "I'll take what I can get" in the flavor text makes it look like UniqueScreenname was killed by a Serial Killer; maybe I'm looking into it too much.

The flavor for the first kill also had a note saying 'you ain't seen nothing yet'. I think the flavor supports a kill done by the same people as the first kill, ie scum.




I'm not quite sure what to make of the Adam/Roband argument. I'm leaning on siding with Roband, but that may just be due to the fact that I already think Adam is scum. I will try to think through it better this evening when I have the time.

[roband]

Voting is between fshfood and lynx for me right now. Will post to explain properly later.

AdamH has me riled up, but I think he's just wrong - not trying to mislead.

[fshfood]

I have a quick break before my next session starts.

I'm just thinking that wam/replacement now looks pretty suspicious to me. He was trying to bring the sanity issue into question and alluded to his powers making it so. There were no sanities given on death for US or Rose, so I'm thinking now that was a red herring on his part, and puts his truthfulness into question.

I will refrain from a vote until either I get home, or until wam's replacement gets on and has a chance to post and respond .. whichever comes first.

[Adam H]

No. You are fundamentally wrong.

You vote cj, who is an undeniably easy target. Wam is no longer in the lead to be lynched.

I didn't know this. I hadn't read any votes on wam yet. My vote for cj was based on his stupid-arse post which DESERVED A VOTE. It was as much to make him come back and post properly as it was because it was scummy.

You're trying to create reasons for my vote, which are plainly false.

I think you are scum. Obviously either I am fundamentally wrong or you'd pretend that I'm fundamentally wrong anyways.

And even if it's true that you didn't know wam had two votes on him, you shouldn't expect me to believe it.

[Snark]

Votals:
roband - 2 - (Adam H)

Deadline in 3 days, 42 minutes.

FYI: wam will be modkilled at D2 end if no replacement is found.

[lynx]

Okay I'm now here and have read through. I'm really sorry for not having posted much, I've been slacking and not checking as much as I should.
I've read through the thread, and my thoughts are as follows:

1. New User
Logical and rational as always (liked the player analysis), but has been pushing a CJ lynch quite hard. While I can see him (CJ) being scum, NU has been pursuing him very doggedly and I'm just not sure the evidence is quite all there. Tentatively leaning town.
2. roband
He's been picking fights all game, but not defending himself very well. He seems happy to bicker and I'm worried it'll distract town in the long-run. Leaning scum.
5. bluebambue
I've been impressed so far. She's given me very few reasons to doubt her towniness, and appears to be scum-hunting by picking up on slips. Leaning town.
6. wam
I can see why he wouldn't want to be lynched, but as Adam said D1, "If [he] were town, [he] should looove for Rose and her scummate to lynch [him] at the last minute, since when [he] came back town tomorrow we'd have 2 scum in the bag". Then again, he voted for Rose and I couldn't be sure she wasn't scum either. It's definitely best we mis-lynched her now rather than later when there's more at stake. Neutral.
7. Adam H
Been very aggressive, suspicious of many players and vote-hopping a fair bit. Looks like town Adam H to me, but I still need a lot more convincing. Tentatively leaning town.
8. fshfood
She has been more active recently (as I will hopefully also be), and has been contributing to the effort. Neutral but definitely doing better.
10. cjquines
It's hard to tell with his meta, as he always plays a bit scummy and a bit jester-y. I liked his analysis post, but lots of his content appears to be one-line placeholder or joke posts. I can't get a read without more content. Neutral.

NU, care to explain how that note could signify an SK? I thought the note was interesting but didn't read that in it!

[New User]

I thought the note could mean a serial killer because it uses obvious singular pronouns. fshfood pointed out that there was also a note on the body in the D1 flavor text, which I didn't notice before. Also, it's my understanding that SK usually kills with a knife, and mafia usually with a gunshot, right? Is that pretty normal? Anyway, there really is no way of knowing. I could just be overthinking this, again.

As for Adam's behavior, I agree with roband that it's annoying. I'm not going to so easily dismiss it. I have a bit of a problem with Adam H in this game, because it seems to me that a large part of his game has been using meta-info. He disdains the votes against cjquines, saying that cj is acting like he always does and is therefor likely to be town. He then voted for roband, saying that roband's behavior is typical of scum-roband. The problem I have with all this is, I cannot agree with Adam H. I don't have the same perspective as he has on these players. I already addressed this in D1, but I'll restate it here. My meta read of cjquines is that he has acted like this before, in the one game I played with him in which he was scum, so in that case even if I do agree with Adam that cj is acting like he always does, I'd be agreeing that he's acting like scum which is contradicting Adam. I don't have enough of a meta read on roband to know if annoying Adam is what scum roband would do, so I can't agree with Adam's vote. Adam is putting me in a position in which I cannot agree with him.

In response to fshfood, not that I'm trying to defend wam here (Adam), but I just want to say that if there are any insanities, they might not be revealed to the player. I mean, if I was told by the moderator that I'm a cop (well, 50% cop in this game I guess) then I might not be told if I'm insane. After all, that would pretty much defeat the purpose of the sanity modifier. Since an insane cop always gets the opposite result of the sane cop, a cop who knows he is insane is essentially a normal cop. My point is, the only way insanity would make sense is if the player is not told about it. And since the information revealed to us about Rosewinsall and UniqueScreenname looks like it was just copy/pasted from the role PM, maybe we are just as (un)informed as they were. Wouldn't be funny if UniqueScreenname was actually an insane vigilante who protected her "victims", and also an insane doctor who killed her "patients"? Of course, if it was something about wam's role that made him believe there are insane players, we'll find out if wam is modkilled. Not that I want that to happen; I think it's a shame when any player must be modkilled when a replacement will suffice.

Also to lynx, who do you think is scummy? I'm asking you in particular since you didn't have a vote at the end of the day.

[bluebambue]

I have a quick break before my next session starts.

I'm just thinking that wam/replacement now looks pretty suspicious to me. He was trying to bring the sanity issue into question and alluded to his powers making it so. There were no sanities given on death for US or Rose, so I'm thinking now that was a red herring on his part, and puts his truthfulness into question.

I will refrain from a vote until either I get home, or until wam's replacement gets on and has a chance to post and respond .. whichever comes first.

This isn't major, but I find it a bit odd that both you and Adam think that wam thinking there may be insanities. Especially since that remark was some time ago, though if you're doing a read through from the beginning it makes sense that you pick that out and nothing else. I agree that with the level of complexity with our roles, it isn't likely. I just don't think speculating that there may be different sanities is a huge scumtell.

What has wam done to seem scummy beside that remark? I think the only other thing is lurking, which others are also guilty of.

I have read the Adam/Roband disagreement again, and it just seems sort of silly. I think it is based off of a differing opinion of what cjq's meta is and how much of a role that he always does scummy stuff should be taken into account.

[fshfood]

Ok .. I am now stuck in Charlotte with a 6-hour flight delay. After fighting flight delays all afternoon, I really don't have the energy to do much here, and I'm probably not thinking clearly. Blue, my main concern is if wam is not telling the truth .. town doesn't usually have reason to be deceptive. So, when you find someone lying, to me that is a huge scum tell.

NU -- Have you ever played in a game that hasn't revealed sanity upon death? That's a big issue for later if they are not. If we are going off a cop/watcher/tracker/etc, and are trying to decide whether to listen to a deceased townie, then it is a big deal if they are insane, but we don't know that. And if wam is hinting at sanity being an issue, but there really is no problem .. that is wine, and to me that is a scumtell.

Is sanity revealed on death, if it is something other than sane?

Also, are votals correct .. 2 on Roband with just Adam voting?

Ok. I will be back to this tomorrow after I actually get home and get some sleep.

[Snark]

Is sanity revealed on death, if it is something other than sane?

Full role reveals are made the morning following death.

Full includes sanities. If nothing more than a role pm quote is given, they were sane.

Also, are votals correct .. 2 on Roband with just Adam voting?

Votals are correct.

[bluebambue]

Votals are correct.

Well, that's odd. I don't think Adam got double weighted votes yesterday. Maybe his night power gives double weighted votes the following day?

This seems like it would more likely be a scum power, as they have smaller numbers and have more of a need to push a vote through rather than discuss and choose the scummiest player. However, I am not sure.

[cjquines]

Why do you think Rose was lurking? Also, Adam H, and Roband, look, Roband has justified his vote. There is no reason to argue over. If one player is acting scummy, and the other not so, but a threat to the progress of the town, who do you think is better to vote? It is the person who is the threat to the progress of the town.

NU, on the singular pronouns: Possibly. But then it must mean that the mafia withheld their NK. I think the flavor is trying to mislead us.

On my meta: I see this is a game of meta-info. Use my meta-info as you wish.

That's all I can say. Most scummy in my list is Adam H, for continually pressing Roband when he already justified his vote.

[Snark]

Votals:
roband - 2 - (Adam H)

Deadline in 2 days, 3 hours, 26 minutes.

FYI: wam will be replaced by Adacore on 4pm EDT, August 12 if no other replacement is found before then.

[New User]

I'm kinda busy this weekend. Party weekend.

In fact I must say I'm rather drnuk.

I don't think I'm in the right mind to place a vote right now.

Hope I'll be okay by the deadline. Tomorrow, right? (you don't know how hard it was to type/proofread this)

[Snark]

Votals:
roband - 2 - (Adam H)

Deadline in 23 hours, 51 minutes.

Adacore has replaced wam.

[bluebambue]

Hi Adacore. I look forward to your thoughts.

I'm waiting to vote for Adam until Adacore posts.

[Adacore]

Confirm

Reading the thread now. Should have a content-post in a few hours, I hope.

[Adacore]

First off, I have read the important rule.

I'm going to try and do this as if I'd been playing since the beginning, writing this post as I go along reading the thread, then maybe re-reading later, in a few hours, and posting again with analysis from that.

Right, firstly some basic game setup spec. Everyone has two powers, with a 50% chance of each. I think those powers are likely to be related, and largely opposed in some respect, to make using them a 'gamble', fitting the flavour. There are a couple of obvious ways this could work:

- Something happens vs something doesn't happen. The something could be any role power, and this basically just makes a 50% effective power role. No real downsides to the gamble, so I don't think this is a very likely implementation for many roles. I suspect all/most of the roles do something, even if it's not a major power, with both the X and Y action.

- Something happens vs the opposite of that happens. For example, doctor / vigilante - I think this is much more likely, but I can't think of that many obvious pairs. If I were making this game, I'd put an vig / doctor in. [Re-reading edit: Ah, and I see USN claimed it.]

As others mentioned, the scum factional kill is likely (but might not be) an X or Y type power as well. This could mean we'll have a 50% effective SK and a 50% effective scumkill. If scum don't have a reliable kill, they'll probably have a few good powers to make up for it, or start with more players than we'd expect.

The 50% effectiveness thing also means that a cult/recruit power is more likely than it would otherwise be in a small turbo game, but I'd still be surprised if there was one.


From Day 1:

I'm getting a fairly strong town read from USN (which completely jarred with what everyone else was saying D1 about finding her scummy), and I believe her doctor/vig claim. As a note, I think the correct way to play that role is as a vig, with the added bonus that if you mis-target a town player, and end up getting doctor instead, the scum can't kill that player. [Re-reading edit: But it doesn't matter anymore, because she's dead.]

Also finding bluebambue and New User pretty townie.

Literally everyone else is pinging for me, but I've been out of mafia for ages, and the only people here I think I've played with before are roband and maybe Adam H, so maybe that's just their style. cj struck me as the scummiest, but I'm not confident on that. Everyone seems to think he normally reads anti-town, and I have no meta on him.

From Day 2:

From Rose's role PM, it seems like the X/Y powers aren't as closely related as I thought they would be.


roband seems to have forgotten the basic game mechanic of 50% X/Y, with speculating on the number of kills - assuming that a single kill means a single anti-town killing power. Granted, if we take from the flavour that the kill was the scumkill, it's more likely than it was D1 that the kill is reliable, but it's still by no means certain.

Adam having a double vote is more wine than anything else - it could be from his power, or from someone else's power, and it could be either an 'X' effect he / someone else wanted, or the other 'Y' effect. I suppose it's slightly more likely that a scum player would target another scum player with a vote increase power, but it doesn't really ping that hard to me.

Adam and roband's argument doesn't strike me as all that scummy in itself, unless they're trying to distance as scum, but I don't think they'd be so blatant about that if so. Feels more like two townies arguing than anything else. If I had to call one of them as scum, it'd probably be roband, but it'd be close.

cj still seems pretty scummy to me, New User is nearly certain to be town in my book, from D2 posts, and bluebambue is seeming pretty townie too. No real read on lynx at all.

fshfood's play, both in posting style and voting pattern has struck me as really scummy so far. Possibly that's because of her travel stuff, but the style of 'brief rolespec then one long analysis post near day end', combined with the suspicion from USN, combined with voting the person I thought was the most townie on D1, plus the "Bleh .. another goose-egg as town on D1/N1" comment all ping really hard for me.

Current ranked suspicion list (from most to least suspicious):

1 fshfood
2 cjquines
3 roband
4 Adam
5 lynx
6 bluebambue
7 New User

I hope I'll be able to do more analysis and a re-read later. From what I've seen, I'm going to throw down a vote for fshfood, but might change that for cjquines.

vote: fshfood

To answer the question I noticed directed at wam, I can see how wam could've read the insane/sane thing from the role PM, but I wouldn't read it that way. I think he was trying to say that his/my role has an effect of the X vs opposite of X type (which heavily informed my speculation above), extended that to 'sane cop vs insane cop', then got stuck with thinking in terms of sanities being opposite.

[bluebambue]

Vote: Adam H

I agree that fshfood's posting pattern is odd, but appears to be due to legitimate travel concerns. As such, I don't think it is a particularly strong scum tell.