In post 168, Bulbazak wrote: In post 164, xyzzy wrote:a better wagon will definitely come up because a dumb vague claim isn't enough to lynch someone on
anywho: it occurs to me that starting on day 2 and beyond, if we have a choice between lynching two people and one of them has hammered someone, we should lynch that person, because if they happen to both be scum, the one who theoretically might have the maximum amount of cocaine is the one to go with
Gut is telling me there's something incredibly wrong here, but I don't have the deep theory background to figure out what it is.
Maybe because it's a lame not-even-insightful mechanics post on page 7, lagging behind the rest of the game. That's how it looks to me.
Reasons; Analysis; Commentary: do you have them?
In post 226, Spiffeh wrote:I obviously realize that
I more have a problem with him abandoning the vote on me when I'd done nothing to really address it to chase something that can easily be explained by inexperience and doesn't even look all that scummy to me regardless
Why would it matter if you addressed his vote? If I don't address yours, will you keep it forever (it's a shitty vote btw)? How is what whemestar did explained by inexperience (besides the fact he's a noob)?
@hito, hmm perhaps "probable lylo" is incorrect the more I think about it, but assuming a roughly even distribution of coke and assuming scum keep their share, the earliest possibility of outright losing is when 8-10 kgs worth (ballpark estimate obviously) is drained from dead people, since it will be taken by scum from NKs and consolidated in (hopefully) town hammerers.