Gosh guys; dusk is quickly approaching and I fear a lot of innocent blood will be spilled on this night. I see that there are only 13 votes cast so far but I wouldn't be surprised if some of us are not voting because we don't know who to vote for.
I have no idea who to vote for at this point either... I am leaning more towards Cassie being innocent and it was all set up by Ginz. And yes I wouldn't know if I was either spied on or detective'd on that night.
Post by Layla "Nimbus" Karimi on Jan 16, 2015 10:35:58 GMT -5
I'm still leaning more towards Cassie being innocent too. I've been trying to explain my reasoning why since yesterday afternoon, but every time I try to organize my thoughts... *rubs temples* Okay, let's try this again.
I did some really thorough analysis of everything Cassie said yesterday, and it lines up pretty solidly with what I'd imagine the thought process of a Detective in her situation to be. She started by pointing out that she was controlled by the Sorcerer on Night 1, as stated on Day 2, and making a not yet fully explained guess as to why Ginz might know she visited Christos, as well as singling out Pixie as someone we might want to look into without making her accusation sound certain. This could be a guilty party scrambling to transfer blame, but it sounds to me more like a Detective who had Pixie come up as suspicious and is trying to figure out why Ginz is accusing her while simultaneously defending herself. As accusations continued being made toward her, she more thoroughly explained her suspicions, and considered and mentioned a few other possibilities regarding what Ginz might have been doing that night as well. And when everyone was still voting against her, she took the ultimate risk of revealing herself as a high-profile target to lay bare exactly what had happened on her end and why we should think twice before executing her -- an explanation which also fit with her earlier accusation of Pixie. And you know what? Even before Cassie declared herself the Detective and fully explained her thought process, I was comparing details on what had been said so far and the first likely scenario I ended up with was that Cassie was the Detective and Ginz the Sorcerer. The scenario (if anyone is confused) is as follows:
Fluffle is the Detective, and Ginz is the Sorcerer. Fluffle went to investigate someone the first night and was instead sent by Ginz to detect Christos, on the same night he was doused. She later used the fact that he was known to have been doused that night to implicate Fluffle, whom she knew had visited Christos. Fluffle, by the fact that he was doused and certainly not by her, knows that Christos was visited by at least 2 people. Ginz would have even been telling what she thought was the truth, since she does not know what Fluffle did when she was sent to Christos. The second night, Fluffle investigated Pixie, who came up suspicious.
I know it's not hardcore proof, but, well... At this point, I think it's the most evidence we're going to get. And I for one really don't want to start us off by executing the Detective, as seems to be a likely case.
...Of course, this doesn't change the fact that we need to choose someone to execute or Ranumgen will choose for us. So, where does Ginz fall into this? Is there anyone, other than perhaps Pixie, whom we can implicate? To most easily outline my thoughts on the matter, here are the other likely scenarios I came up with:
Scenario 2: Fluffle is the Arsonist, and Ginz is the Spy. Fluffle doused Christos the first night, and Ginz “watched” him and noted Fluffle’s visit, which was revealed the next day by Christos to be a dousing. Fluffle doused Ginz the second night in hopes of silencing her before she could reveal Fluffle’s guilt(Only works if Fluffle somehow managed to figure out that Ginz saw her, which is unlikely), and is trying to throw blame at both Ginz and Pixie in hopes of getting it off of herself. She randomly claimed that Christos was visited by 2 people for the same reason, in the hopes that any argument Ginz could provide might be considered a lie. This seems unlikely, however, because it adds more complications to the web of lies/truth than it does actual aid.
Scenario 3: Fluffle is the Arsonist, and Ginz is the Sorcerer. Fluffle went to douse someone the first night and was instead sent by Ginz to douse Christos. Later Ginz used that fact to implicate Fluffle, who tried to divert suspicion by calling out Ginz’ sorcery and trying to implicate Pixie as well in the process. She claimed there were 2 visitations to undermine the certainty of Ginz’ accusation, on the gamble that the Spy would not have visited Christos that night. See Scenario 2; Fluffle is unlikely to have known whether Ginz was the Sorcerer or Spy.
Scenario 4: Fluffle is the Detective, and Ginz is the Spy. Mostly the same as Scenario 1, but instead of being the one to send Fluffle after Christos Ginz was instead spying on Christos and saw Fluffle visit him. This does not explain why she would only implicate one person when two people ended up visiting Christos.
Scenario 5: Ginz is the Retributionist, and Fluffle is her innocent target (the Detective, as she would have no reason to falsely claim this role as an innocent). Fluffle was sent by a third-party Sorcerer to someone on the first night, but this has no true bearing on the situation. When Ginz saw that she was likely to be executed, she accused her target of one of the deadliest roles in a last-ditch attempt to gain her retribution. Fluffle, who had on the second night investigated Pixie and found her suspicious, attempted to prove her innocence and implicate Pixie at the same time. Her claim that Christos had 2 visitations was a matter of guesswork, because she suspected that Ginz was accusing her under Scenario 1’s situation.
Scenario 6: Ginz is some wicked/deadly/Mafia role, and Fluffle is the Detective. Same as Scenario 5, but Ginz had no reason to accuse Fluffle specifically -- she simply needed to take blame off of herself. Perhaps the Retributionist (who has Fluffle as a target) approached her when he/she saw that Ginz was in hot water and made the suggestion?
So, in essence, not only does Fluffle still seem to be more likely innocent than guilty, but (assuming she is in fact innocent) Ginz seems more likely to be guilty as either the Sorcerer or Retributionist. Granted, there are more possible scenarios, but the more I delve into those the more vague and muddled everything gets.
Aah, one more thing: Remember how this whole debate started because a bunch of people were accusing Ginz without explaining why? We, ah, should probably figure out why that was. Did someone have reason to suspect Ginz, perhaps of being the Sorcerer, or was this a random vote train (possibly started by mafiosos) that happened to correlate with someone who may or may not have actually been a wicked neutral?
About: Reportable: the FreeBlogz community's most trustworthy source for all breaking and scandalous forum news. Written by yours truly, Rhya Terr, former star journalist of the NTWF Journal. Unlike my former employer, I am concerned only with the truth, not pandering to the Mods. I will not be silenced!
Most Recent Entry: Mods cover up death of... [click to view]
Jan 16, 12:30pm
Mods cover up death of undercover detective: accident, or crime?
So, as you all probably know, this morning our forum was rocked by yet another death-- that would be the third death in just a few days, following the murders of Li Ou and Alyssa Terine. Unlike those deaths, in this case, the Mods will not even cop up to it being a murder at all. Rather, they're calling it an "accident"-- claiming that Cassie Puff was "unfortunately but accidentally" killed after being trampled in a protest that was held by concerned forumers about the Mods' general inefficiency in catching Ms. Ou and Ms. Terine's killers. The protest, held outside ModSquad, started out peaceful but quickly devolved into chaos after a statement from Oran G. Tiger wherein she once again stressed that at the moment, they have no reason to think the forum at large is in any danger... and that they're still looking at the deaths as isolated incidents that are not linked to each other-- nor the fire at Stalbucks. This caused the crowd's tempers to boil, and in the ensuing chaos before the Mods could break up the scene, Ms. Puff died.
The Mods say she was killed in the ruckus. As someone who was AT this protest, I'm not so sure. I won't deny the scene was chaotic. I won't deny there was a lot of yelling and movement. However, I don't think things were SO chaotic where a person could just fall and be trampled as the Mods claim. Rather, I think somebody (or somebodies!!) deliberately targeted Ms. Puff, hoping they could get away with it because of the chaos at hand. And you know what, so far, it seems as if they have.
Why would Ms. Puff be a target, you ask? Well, although the Mods are staying mum as to personal information about her, including her employment, I happen to have hacked the Mods' records have an anonymous source who told me that Ms. Puff was indeed an undercover detective in their employment. A detective who, based on a note I found in Ms. Puff's jacket pocket, the Mods like the abominable Oran G. Tiger were IGNORING the leads of in favour of claiming that all these murders were but random isolated incidents.
MS. PUFF'S DEATH WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT. DO NOT LET THE MOD CONSPIRACY AND COVER-UP SOLDIER ON! I have no idea yet why the Mods would want to be involved in such dark things like that. And to reveal much more at this point would be compromising my sources. So, I'll copy here only what I found in Ms. Puff's jacket pocket. The Mods will probably try to claim it isn't even real. Or they'll come after me for 'tampering with a crime scene'. I don't care about either of these things.
It IS real. And I think its implications are truly terrifying: