Mini 1406: Sherlock Mafia (Game Over)

[Herodotus]

Regarding Hydras, I'm happy to play in a game with them. But I find both of the following actions by hydras to be anti-town at best:

1. Waiting to post until you have discussed with your partner. Sometimes it might be reasonable to withhold a vote until you agree. And sharing role information unprompted without talking about it might not be a good idea. But if you don't tell us who you think is scum, you are not acting in the interests of the town.

2. Not signing posts. It makes you harder to read. If you're town, you don't want to be hard to read.


VOTE: Feysal
Not so much for ruining some potential tell I'm unfamiliar with, but for calling the town "misguided idiots". Could be designed to reduce morale.

@Magister: is there any reason for the sottyrulez vote?

[Herodotus]

I had forgotten about the waiting and the page refreshing...

Wait a second. Zach, did you just accuse Jabberwock of chainsaw-defending yourself?

A post appears!

Pretty lousy reasoning. IIRC, you're a better player than this. You're agreeing with the wagon, so at the very least I expect you to comment on that tell. The relevant bits in the other game are not a long read and are a good source of meta.

The tell isn't the relevant part to your argument or mine. You voted Feysal for ruining it. I voted Feysal for being in a position opposite to town morale. I later skimmed your linked game, which validated your vote, but I see no reason to comment on that. I'll let Feysal respond first.

As for signing posts, know that we have no issues clarifying authorship of particular posts if someone asks. You might have a bit of an issue figuring out who pokes fun at GodzIllusion more. :3 However, I believe every member of a hydra should be held accountable for their partner's posts as well, and so it makes no sense to dissociate them from the get go, as I find that tends to promote an ugly kind of hydra dissonance. Our request for the sottyrulez hydra to sign their posts has different (undisclosed) reasoning.

When trying to read zachrulez's alignment, something that zach says will mean different things than something that sotty says.

[Herodotus]

The tell isn't the relevant part to your argument or mine.

By that I mean what rob13 said - it's Feysal's opinion of it that matters, not whether the tell is good or not.

[Herodotus]

They probably have fakeclaims if they need them.

[Herodotus]

I agree with the reasoning behind the Feysal wagon.

ML is possibly scummy.

Vote: Herodotus

I'll ask the obvious question: Why are you not voting for either of the people you spoke against?

[Herodotus]

@DeasVail: Compared to each of Feysal and Magister, are you more suspicious of me, or less?

@Feysal: Do you think town sometimes use poor excuses to join an easy wagon?
How did you see your comment generating discussion more useful than waiting to see what someone else might say?
Also, in that game, Prosecutorgodot was following Tierce by making that comment, and also stated that their "reaction" was prior to receiving their role PM. So that doesn't seem relevant.

[Herodotus]

The feysal wagon seems to have served its purpose. Magister and Rob are looking town. I don't agree 100% with the defense that either has offered but will be looking for a new wagon.

Leaving my vote on feysal at least for a few hours because I don't see any scum suspects among those who have posted, and it's too early to think that anyone is lurking.

@Magister: I think I understand the idea behind Deas's post, and I don't find it scummy.
BTW, that's a strange post coming so soon after you were accused of chainsawing.

[Herodotus]

@Magister: I think I understand the idea behind Deas's post, and I don't find it scummy.

BTW, that's a strange post coming so soon after you were accused of chainsawing.

The bolded is odd. He brings up this idea of a chainsaw defense again, but doesn't do anything with it. He doesn't analyze Magister's post at all or try to equate it to an alignment, just lists it as strange. Reads to me like he's kind of hoping that someone else will pick up the idea and run with it. Also, if Herodotus thinks that Magister's most recent post looks like it may be part of a continuing chainsaw defense, then why did he list Magister as a town read earlier in that same post?

The reason I was brief was because I was rushing to finish my post and go do other things.
To clarify, I think Magister is town. I felt a little uncomfortable with his defending me so quickly for what appeared to be reasons not based on his read of me. But there is a non-self-conscious aspect to that post, which says he's not afraid of being attacked over the "chainsaw" accusation.

@herodotus:

Was your reasoning for voting feysal a fabrication? You seem to imply so in 38.

Partly. I do believe that town morale is important and that it's better to think positively about a role you claim to have, but I never wanted to lynch feysal for it. As for Jabberwock and sottyrulez's reasons, I consider them as adequate as can be expected on page 1. My vote was to help form a wagon to see how people would react. As I said in the post you linked, the wagon seems to have paid off. Feysal himself is currently a basically null read, but I did get a couple town reads.

Haven't read page 3 yet and I have to leave again. Am hoping to see that everyone is taking part in the game.

[Herodotus]

For what it's worth, I think I understand what Jabberwock was saying about Magister Ludi in post 52, though I agree that as a run-on sentence it was difficult to follow. I consider Magister's response in post 59 adequate to the point about meta on feysal. (One can't answer the accusation that one's effort

could be

coming from scum, and the comment on his writing seems like what we used to call "gut". (I don't use that term negatively.) )

@Magister, regarding your sottyrulez case: In your experience have scum contradicted themselves significantly more often than town? Had reads on other players that are in a quantum state of both town and scum, more often than town do? To me, "contradiction" is often as much of a buzzword as "chainsaw".
I don't see how sottyrulez asking feysal his opinion of your defense is scummy. And I assumed that the question to rob was designed either to test how much knowledge rob had of the scum role PM's, to make rob doubt his town read on feysal, or both.

I am still unsure of ML, but I do not have much of a scumread on him.

Regarding Herodotus, I think that his lack of response to posts explaining the flaws in his reasoning is scummy. I know that he's saying he wanted to wagon, but I don't see why he had to make up his own reason (unless he believed it) if he just wanted to wagon and see reactions, and if he believed in his reason being at least somewhat valid, I think he would have been more affected by posts that were critical of it.

I'm going to have to point you to my post right before yours:

@herodotus:

Was your reasoning for voting feysal a fabrication? You seem to imply so in 38.

Partly. I do believe that town morale is important and that it's better to think positively about a role you claim to have, but I never wanted to lynch feysal for it. As for Jabberwock and sottyrulez's reasons, I consider them as adequate as can be expected on page 1. My vote was to help form a wagon to see how people would react. As I said in the post you linked, the wagon seems to have paid off. Feysal himself is currently a basically null read, but I did get a couple town reads.

Speaking of that post, does The Mini-Librarian have any comment on my response?

Its easy to use hindsight bias on any wagon that actually doesn't result in a lynch.In the heat of the moment, anything is possible. Can you say with certainty who is going to be lynched today at this exact moment, Mini? Many times, stopping people from voting wagons you disagree with and

getting people to vote for other wagons you think are on scum

causes change and gets people to move their votes. It is not by some magic of doing nothing and hoping that someone doesn't get lynched.

Did you expect that people would join you in wagoning sottyrulez based on your page 1 post?

I feel like sotty7 is accusing Magister of doing silly or useless things, not of being scum. I want to see her reads.

[Herodotus]

-Unwanted light RoleFish noted. Continued in p25... does not want.

For what purpose(s) do scum rolefish?

As previously stated, I don't like his entrance to the Feysal Wagon. I feel, in that vein, that a lot of his posting comes across as false. I dislike p38 talking about finding a new Wagon. It feels more like passive play than anything else. The post is more inclined to let the game unfold around him that actively ScuHunting. There seems to be a fair amount of IIoA going on. His questions to others come across as a bit too 'wet noodly' to me.

I mentioned finding a new wagon because I was ready at that point to admit that I was only voting feysal so there would be a wagon.
I haven't found anyone I'd be willing to lynch right now, but I will. In the meantime, I've done some town-hunting.
Regarding my questions:
I asked Deas about his vote on me because it was strange that he would make accusations against two players, then vote a third. Especially when feysal had a wagon he could have helped with. But apparently he suspected me more, which makes the vote choice rational. If he had said he suspected us all equally, I would have found that scummy. I decided that the lack of a stated reason was because he read somewhere that unexplained votes generate better reactions and he figured he'd be able to read me.
Most of my questions in my last post are designed to pull at the strings of the Magister/sottyrulez conflict to see whether it unravels or strengthens. I'm hoping that they're both town, and if so I'd like to see one or both of them join me on the next big wagon. I figure they might stop fighting at about the same time I decide whom to maybe-lynch. (Please don't tell them about this, or they may resent my manipulation.)
My question to d3x in post... 79... was based on my evaluation that there is no real scum angle to rob's "rolefishing". His talk almost certainly wouldn't have outed PR's.
My first question to Feysal was to explain to feysal the vote that made feysal vote me. My second question to feysal summarizes my skepticism about his explanation that he had set out to generate discussion.

I find it significant that Feysal did not respond to my questions, and didn't mention me in his latest post at all. I'm having second thoughts about unvoting.

Then there is one other non-trivial question I asked, and it was to The Mini-Librarian, but I'm not ready to explain why I asked it yet.

[Herodotus]

Sorry, I was wrong. So it was the characters being misguided idiots that you thought lowered morale? (@Herodotus)

If you're playing mafia, the people on your team have roles. If someone says that the roles are misguided idiots, that doesn't make you enthusiastic about righteously destroying the other team. As far as I'm concerned, within this game, Sherlock Holmes is a fugitive criminal who will presumably murder someone each night. Anyone who wants to bring him to justice is doing the right thing.

[Herodotus]

Hero, what's your Rob opinion?

I'm waiting for one more post from him. He started out giving a newbie town impression, but he hasn't been useful. I'll be looking for one or two specific things in his next post.

I will say I might have read their tone wrong at some point in thinking they were accusing me of scum when they haven't been. So sorry if that was the case.

I meant sotty as opposed to zach.

[Herodotus]

@Mod: have prods been issued? I'd like them for Magna, Guy_Named_, and The Mini Librarian. (And will they be announced?)

(note to self: meta-check Herodotus)

self-meta: I'm usually more aggressive, but that's because I replace into games and can start with a solid set of reads. The first 2/3 of Day 1 is a trudge for me.

@Feysal: Do you think town sometimes use poor excuses to join an easy wagon?

I think scum are much more likely to do so. They want to look like they are scumhunting on their own instead of just following the crowd, so they can feel pressured to come up with additional reasons to vote and join a popular wagon. Sure, town can do it too, since town can pretty much do anything, but they don't really need to make excuses.

If we were talking about additional serious reasons, I would agree with you. But it's laughable to claim that I thought I would look like I was scumhunting, especially considering the negative attention my stated reason for voting you received.

I would expect that by now, you would have more to say about the person you're voting than answering a pair of questions that I needed to refer you back to. You seem to have parked your vote. (I know I've kept my vote in one place, but that's different from a parked vote, because I've stated reasons for keeping it on you.)

The same is what I was looking for from rob13. When I said I wanted to see some things in his next post, I was expecting him to continue the conversation about his reasons for voting me, and whether he accepted my responses. Though he didn't comment on my response, he did move his vote, which I suppose is an excuse.

How did you see your comment generating discussion more useful than waiting to see what someone else might say?

Someone has to make the first move. I figured it might as well be me. I'm usually much too passive anyway to the point of being called a lurker, so I should try to get involved from the start.

A preemptive excuse for lurking?

I need to mention the fact that over half the posts in this game have been about Magister Ludi, and that makes it more difficult, not easier, to read him.

sotty7 ... I want to see her reads.

[Herodotus]

She doesn't really like that you're trying to separate our reads though, cause we kinda coalesce our differences to come to a conclusion.

As I said early in the game, a post from one of you could mean different things than a post from the other. Even if you coalesce after, there isn't a pro-town reason that I can see to hold back on posting the "raw data".

---

Magister, I just reread Day 1 of Succession 2 to try to understand why you were comparing my play here to that game. I kept shouting at my monitor "HOW DID WE NOT LYNCH YOS2?"

Idle question: Feysal, do you know why ThAdmiral called "not voting" = "feysaling"? This was about a year and a half ago; is it still relevant?

[Herodotus]

I'm offering 1 Scumhunter point each for whoever points out either of the two things I personally found scummy about Feysal's last post. The first should be very easy. Feysal

is

eligible to receive these points.

[Herodotus]

I agree with Cogito's statements regarding how d3x was playing -- up to the point where Cogito voted him. Post 139 looks like an exception.
@Cogito: what do you think of post 139 that d3x made after you voted him but before you gave your reason?

Empire will post soon, but long story short is that Cogito Ergo Ludo is scum and needs lynched.

Feysal is probably his buddy

and needs lynched Tomorrow. Leave d3x alone.

Is this serious, or just a way to bargain for me and/or sottyrulez to join the wagon on Cogito?

[Herodotus]

That post does suggest a pre-existing read on Mini Librarian, which is a pretty decent town tell. I assume that's not what you're referring to though?

No, in fact I don't understand why you say that. I mean, is that post a counterexample to the scumhunting that was missing in d3x's earlier posts?

Is this serious, or just a way to bargain for me and/or sottyrulez to join the wagon on Cogito?

Tierce and I talked about this one last night. It's a serious accusation, based mostly on Feysal's #107 where he goes from townreading Ludi ("I think Ludi is more likely town than not.") to admitting he can't read him ("I tried to get a meta read on him, but after skimming a few games, I had to conclude he was simply unpredictable.") in the same paragraph and then finishing it off with something he

dislikes

about Ludi ("Something I find strange is Ludi's defense of Herodotus."). To me, that read came off with too many qualifiers that totally sapped its meaning to the point where it's not even really a stance on Ludi. The following #131 doesn't really clarify anything for me, just following up on a hypothetical Ludi-scum scenario.

I'm having trouble seeing Magister Ludi's page 1 post as one scum defending their buddy, though. And Feysal's post 131 (para 3-4) looks less like distancing than like a scum changing his position so that he can support a mislynch.

[Herodotus]

Busy during the next ~20 hours. Will catch up then if possible.

[Herodotus]

Magister Ludi Post 112 doesn't seem like a strong response to Jabberwocky's argument regarding Mag's defense of Feysal.
I would be losing my townread on the slot if it wasn't for the apparent sincerity of his frustrated reaction to Jabberwocky.

Didn't notice post 121 before. [Goodposting]. Rob13 has singlehandedly canceled my townread on Magister/Cogito, and it didn't take the massive number of large posts that others dedicated to the case. Cogito is now null to slightly scummy to me, though I'm still not convinced enough to want to lynch him because Magister may have had his own perspective on it that might explain the apparent contradiction. Yes, his replacement request is the reason we won't hear what he has to say, but there isn't any scummy motive to quitting.

I don't like him suddenly replacing out at all.

Why?

I think d3x could be scum, but ML's replacement request without explaining why in thread seems scummy to me.

Why?

Mandatory

Vote: CES

A scummy player replacing out without explanation needs lynching with fire.

I feel like you should know better.

My question to d3x in post... 79... was based on my evaluation that there is no real scum angle to rob's "rolefishing". His talk almost certainly wouldn't have outed PR's.

That's fine that you feel this way. I feel differently. As there was an ongoing discussion about what is/is not common flavor knowledge, I see this as a potential attempt by a newer player to gleen some information that would not otherwise be available to him.

I disagree. Having a wagon isn't the only way to get a read on someone. In this particular case, I think providing a small meta defense of feysal and than a stronger one was warranted. It allowed people to judge him fairly. A large part of mafia is the interplay of opinions and actions

Like Hero, you are entitled to disagree[...]

These two responses from d3x bother me. If Magister and I are two of your top scum reads, why would you apparently want to "agree to disagree"?

Regarding Hydras, I'm happy to play in a game with them. But I find both of the following actions by hydras to be anti-town at best:

1. Waiting to post until you have discussed with your partner. Sometimes it might be reasonable to withhold a vote until you agree. And sharing role information unprompted without talking about it might not be a good idea. But if you don't tell us who you think is scum, you are not acting in the interests of the town.

2. Not signing posts. It makes you harder to read. If you're town, you don't want to be hard to read.

3. Talking as if everyone knows which of you is posting when your posts aren't signed. YOU ARE NOT PLAYING AN IN-PERSON GAME. The "Empire" "Tierce" "One of us is flippant" "Lurker Scum Queen" "I" mess on page 7 obfuscates a lot of that conversation. I will be considering that might have been done intentionally. Unfortunately at this point I don't think Jabberwocky is scum so I can't lynch you for it. If you're not scum, it was simply inconsiderate. Either way, I'm not going to try to understand that mess.

Basically, the long and short of it is that when you replace in as town, there's more of a willingness to track your thoughts as you read the game in-thread and you tend to be more forthcoming with your reasoning (i.e, you don't wait for someone to ask you what you think before you say it). As scum, that doesn't appear to be the case at all and I think your entrance in this thread is more like the latter re: your vote on d3x. And your reasoning for suspecting d3x doesn't make much sense in light of the fact that you replaced into this guy's town slot and he has a very similar kind of IIoA/notation style of posting so I don't get how you're perceiving that as any sort of scumtell here w.r.t d3x.

Taking a nap now. Would love to hear from the stragglers soon by the way.

I followed your links but only very briefly read because catching up here is more important, so I didn't draw many conclusions (and he replaced in at post 134). But your last sentence is wrong because this post shows many questions and requests for comments.

BBMolla's catch-up post is surprisingly easy to read and follow.
Though I don't agree with the suspicion on Jabber.
I assume MLB = "The Mini Librarian".
But it's post 205 that says town to me.

Due to the L-1 vote, this will be a multipost.

[Herodotus]

If Magister and I are two of your top scum reads, why would you apparently want to "agree to disagree"?

With you, I feel it is a theory discussion. You have found in your past history that RoleFishing doesn't amount to anything, I disagree. I can't debate your experiences about it. With Ludi however, there is the theory discussion, but also the attempt to turn my point into something it was not {discussed after the convenient <snip>}. If you read the rest of the remark after your elipses, I talk about how I'm not 'agreeing to disagree', in fact. Why would you not include the rest of the statement?

IIRC, it included a double-quote you made to support your point, so format would have been bad.

[Herodotus]

@DeasVail: Compared to each of Feysal and Magister, are you more suspicious of me, or less?

I think more.

This is scummy. If you voted him, you damn well better KNOW you're most suspicious of him this early in the day.

This seems like either a misunderstanding of Deas's post or an overly semantic point.

Were you expecting me to do it for a 6 page game?

Yes, considering all the wallposting going on in this game (calling this just a 6 page game is misleading since there's a lot more content here than the page number would suggest).

To be fair, a lot of that is you and Magister Ludi fighting over whether Magister is scum. From your perspective, it's content. From Cogito's, it isn't, because he already knows the answer.

@Feysal- I'd like your thoughts on Hero, plz. You voted early for what can be conjectured as OMGUS, but haven't really mentioned a reason to stay.

My vote has remained on Herodotus pretty much for the same reason his has remained on me, because I left it there. I just have not bothered to say it while I've tried to establish more reads.

There is no equivalence, though. I've been talking about you, while you avoided discussing your vote.

However, ever since I noted Ludi's unexplained defense of Herodotus, I've considered the possibility of them both being scum. Now that I read through his posts in isolation, his reaction to that defense in posts #38 and #62 is indeed curious. I find it odd that he would even think of chainsawing when he is being defended himself, and he of course claims to be town. Odder yet is how in the later post he seems to assume the defense was not based on Ludi's read on him, when Ludi had not explained it at all. Herodotus has been asking several questions, so why not ask Ludi and jump to a conclusion instead?

In context, it is clear that I wasn't accusing Magister of chainsawing for me. What happened was that:
1. He defended someone (you), and attacked a person (sottyrulez)attacking them.
2. He was accused of chainsawing and received negative attention for it.
3. He "defended" someone (me), and attacked a person (DeasVail)attacking them.
To me, that means he wasn't letting his play be dictated by the negative attention he received over the chainsawing accusation because he did something that others might see as more it.

He said:

Herodotus is of unimpeachable character, the fact you are voting such a fine gentleman is suspicious.

I said:

To clarify, I think Magister is town. I felt a little uncomfortable with his defending me so quickly

for what appeared to be reasons not based on his read of me

. But there is a non-self-conscious aspect to that post, which says he's not afraid of being attacked over the "chainsaw" accusation.

There are a lot of questions I could ask anyone at any given time. But it seemed pretty clear in that post that he didn't say I was town, and he was a town-read of mine, so there was no reason to bother.

@d3x: I reviewed post 99. If I think someone is scum, and we disagree on something, I usually look for a scummy motive for them to have the position they have. I do see that my point isn't relevant to your response to Magister. I suppose I'm wondering why you accepted what I said. (Thoug now that I have revised it to this, I'm less suspicious of you.)

@kthxbye: We don't all agree on what is important and there are too many people for everyone to choose only 1 person to pay attention to.

[Herodotus]

Both of the leading wagons feel like second-tier lynches to me. Acceptable, but not strong choices.

If a sottyrulez wagon appeared I would probably move there from Feysal due to gut.

[Herodotus]

@sottyrulez: I didn't agree with replacing out being a scumtell.

@Jabberwock, rob13: The only reason you're complaining about not wanting to read my posts is because I'm not sheeping the Cogito wagon.
Tell me how Feysal isn't lurkerscum.

And just like Jabberwocky's post from long ago, Rob13, your reads are strongly correlated to whether people are voting the same person you're voting. This is a bad sign. But you do detail your reasons, and I'm glad to see that many of them aren't based on the votes.

[Herodotus]

If you had read the last sentence of that paragraph...

[Herodotus]

@Deasvail: If you replace out, it's always for a reason. Scum are just as likely to want to justify it.

@Sottyrulez: I didn't frame it that way. Wtf? You may remember that I've been watching your interactions with Magister since early.

The reason I feel like this matters is because it's a terrible reason to suspect that playerslot, and scum are more likely to use that argument against it.

[Herodotus]

Do you agree that you held the replacement against that playerslot, even though it wasn't the only reason you voted him? I don't like that, because I feel it should be null.

The reason it makes sense to me is that I see it as a major part of your argument. You say it's the weakest part, but it's also the only part that you actually stated at the time of your vote. And you repeated it in post 182.

The problem is that it becomes the basis for why he spoke out against the page one wagon. The thing that bothers me is that

he opted to replace out rather than explain how he could possibly have a town read on Feysal based on one post

.

Did you know the reasons why Magister replaced out, or were you speculating?

I don't understand why you would think I wouldn't assume it was important to you.

[Herodotus]

In fact, reread your own post 179. It implies you were previously suspicious of him, but you were hoping Magister would address the contradiction, and the thing about him that you find most scummy is that he avoided doing so via replacement. At least, that's my interpretation.

[Herodotus]

Is there any chance of a lynch other than Cogito? Waiting for another 6 days would mean stagnation, which solves nothing.

[Herodotus]

@Jabberwock 280: My point was that if a Cogito lynch is inevitable, then we shouldn't wait. I've already made clear I don't prefer that lynch, but at this point it looks like it will happen regardless. So I'm looking to the people who aren't on it to see whether they consider it inevitable. If The Mini Librarian, BBMolla, Feysal, and Gummy are all not interested in anything else, I'm going to vote Cogito.
What can I do to get Feysal lynched? You've been calling him scum over and over, but I'm the only one who has been voting him. Most people are either ignoring him or putting him as late on their lists, and I think it's because his low presence makes him easily overlooked. And he knows it. It's the reason why scum lurk.

@Sottyrulez: I can be undecided on whether Cogito/Ludi is scum or not, but still feel like people are using bad arguments.
I accept the part that you asked us to focus on is a contradiction by Magister Ludi, absolutely. But from posts 179 and 182, the replacement is definitely something you are holding against him. Do you understand why I take issue with that?

@Jabber 282: Did you even read what you quoted? Did you read the context for either of those quotes? I NEVER SAID THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON FOR SOTTYRULEZ'S VOTE, AND IN FACT WHAT YOU QUOTED STATES THAT EXPLICITLY. But Sottyrulez stated multiple times that the replacement issue was a big part of their vote. And so I'm talking about that. Now I suspect them of revising that, and of misrepresenting my discussion of the topic. (See

I'm going to try taking a break here because I'm aggravated. But as far as seeking a town point of view, that's clearly the approach I took with the other two who also held the replacement against the playerslot. Feysal ignored the question because he is lurking; Deasvail gave an answer I don't agree with but don't find scummy. The reason I was immediately suspicious of sottyrulez is because I have played with each of them before multiple times, so I didn't expect that from them, and because I had a prior scumread on them.
And posts 274 and 275 were looking for sottyrulez to provide their perspective on what they said to me more recently so I can see whether it might be explainable as town.

[Herodotus]

First part:
Townies replace out of games all the time. I know you both have plenty of experience on the site, and it's hard to imagine you consistently considering it a scumtell for all these years without someone correcting that impression.

Second part:
Reasonable. It definitely looked like you might vote him, but what was the reason why you decided he was scummier than Feysal?

[Herodotus]

@Cogito: Why so little to say? What is your perspective on the discussion between me, sottyrulez, and others regarding Magister's replacement request, and why have you not commented?

@Rob: If the lynch is determined already, and there isn't a need to coordinate night actions, the lynch should be carried out. The next day's lynch is best considered after we've seen the flip of the lynchee and whoever is nightkilled. If we keep the day open purely because we are afraid to end the day early, any discussion we have would be less significant and boring. It would turn into posting just to post. I recall that this used to be common knowledge, but I don't have any citation.

Everything spoilered is related to the discussion on the replacement issue. Skip it if you don't care about that, except Deasvail and sottyrulez, whom I ask questions.

Spoiler:

Town replace out and scum replace out, but this doesn't mean that the situation and way in which ML replaced out can't be considered scummy.

There is never a rational in-game reason to replace out. It doesn't help anyone strategically. So I don't understand this. Whether he is town or scum, replacing out means he can't win. But if he is (group)scum, then even if he's lynched, his teammates can still win the game for him. And if he's third-party, he could still hope that the momentum shifts away from him somehow.

How is it scummy for someone to do something, when they know in advance that it doesn't benefit them? There are at least three people who see things that way, so statistically it's extremely improbable that you're all scum. Therefore, I have to conclude it's possible for a townie to believe this. I initially figured that you believed it because you're newer, while the others, being more experienced, might be scum who don't really believe it but wanted to use it as an argument anyways. But can you explain it? I have considered your post 244, but the way I see it, you could reverse the "if he's scum" and "if he's town" clauses and it would still be just as valid.

((Note that Magister Ludi's only mafiascum.net post since his last post here was this one. Of course I don't expect anyone to have known in advance that would be the case, but I do see it as indicating that his reason for replacing out almost certainly wasn't "I don't want to explain my contradiction". This doesn't mean your ideas might not be rational interpretations at the time you posted them.))

Rob, I have no objection to the fact that sottyrulez wants to lynch Cogito. And ignoring the replacement issue,the reasons they want to lynch him are understandable and adequate. The flaw in the argument does not discount the conclusion. But the fact that they mentioned it as a reason bothers me.

First part:
Townies replace out of games all the time. I know you both have plenty of experience on the site, and it's hard to imagine you consistently considering it a scumtell for all these years without someone correcting that impression.

...what. When did we ever say anything like this?

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you have said it in the past, though I admit I accidentally did assume that. What I meant is that at some point, you should have heard that it isn't a scumtell. You might have believed at some time that it was, but if you did, someone would have told you otherwise.

I tried to summarize the related parts of 179 (and 182) in my post here. Is that post incorrect?

This has been severely frustrating for me. It feels like people are misunderstanding much of what I say. At first, I was questioning others' reading comprehension skills, but upon reflection, if I'm the only one everyone has trouble communicating with, then the fault is likely partly mine. I've had that trouble before. I'm not sure what to do here. I'll summarize my thoughts.

I feel like experienced townies shouldn't hold replacement against a playerslot, ever. To the extent that it's not even a matter of theory, it's a matter of logic. My reasons are in the spoiler above.
I know that sottyrulez isn't inexperienced.
It may have been a minor part of sottyrulez's reasons for voting, but the vote post, and the later choice of words "

The thing that bothers me

is that he opted to replace out rather than explain how he could possibly have a town read on Feysal based on one post." makes me think it made a difference to them.

[Herodotus]

se one of those fabulous walls of yours to actually build a solid case on him. Now THAT would be something I would read and enjoy doing so.

I'd like to do that. There are some problems, though. There isn't much to say when your primary accusation is what was missing - that someone was lurking and not discussing things that should have been relevant. Second, I feel like it wouldn't be useful if Cogito is going to be lynched regardless; if the purpose is to improve the information for day 2, why not wait until after we see Cogito's flip? I could try a PBPA, but those notoriously lead to confirmation bias and tunnelling. I will see what I can do when I can do it.

I also feel like my reads aren't very well developed. I do best as a replacement. The most appropriate time for me to enter is close to the end of day 1. The last two times I did that, I found scum quickly.

Preview edit: Rob13.

[Herodotus]

@d3x: If the lynch is determined, no. Back when I was a newbie, I wanted "Maximum Content!" The more pages, the better. We used to have deadlines of over four weeks, and if someone wanted to lynch when there were more than 2 days left, they were "cutting off discussion".

That was the wrong approach. It reduced the signal:noise ratio and made games a chore. I don't think there's anything scummy about Rob believing in that approach, but it's flawed. Save the misrep accusations for situations where someone is trying to paint another person as scummy via misrep.

In this game in particular, I asked whether the Cogito wagon is inevitable. If it is, we may as well continue our discussion after seeing his flip rather than before. The scum already know whether he is one of them; our content will be better once the rest of us are informed as well.

[Herodotus]

@Herodotus: Your post has weakened my belief in his replace-out being scummy, perhaps to the point where I no longer feel it is indicative alignment.

Of course, it doesn't mean he's town. Cogito hasn't helped my impression of the playerslot at all. But it is the reason why you, Feysal, and sottyrulez drew my attention.

[Herodotus]

@Herod: What is your read on d3x? You seem to hesitant to vote CES but you're also ignoring the major counter wagon.

I think Cogito is scummier than d3x. I'm satisfied with what d3x had to say when I accused him of agreeing too much with his suspects. And while I initially liked the reason why Cogito voted for d3x, I don't feel like there was much weight to it, because it could be that d3x just has an analytical playstyle.

I'm a little suspicious that if Cogito is scum, he expected from the moment he joined the game that he would be lynched D1, so his votes have been made with that in mind. The d3x vote could be distancing, or OTOH it might be designed to look like distancing. Looking into his behaviour might help determine which. What he does not appear to be doing is trying to prove it to be a superior counter-wagon. But I'd have to see Cogito's flip before it's worth investigating, because if Cogito is town this line of thought is useless.

[Herodotus]

Commentary on The Mini Librarian (chosen because their ISO is a quick read):
They haven't posted much, but in their ISO, I've seen a few town tells:
Their approach to Magister Ludi/Cogito has changed significantly in ways that don't give a gut feeling of either "buddies" or "scum attacking town".
In their ISO 5, the response to d3x, whether it's right or wrong, seems very natural. Because d3x posted his reasons for voting me after making the vote, I could see someone being predisposed to seeing those reasons as having been created after the decision was made.
I'd like to see them participate more, but the reason is not that I am not afraid that they are lurkerscum, it's because participation in general is necessary and the game has at times been crowded with limited numbers.

Feysal ISO:
I still don't see how it "fell to him" to be the first to point out the reverse-alignment property of the game. That was the 4th game post. He chose to be the first to say it. If he is interested in gaining information, he would be better off waiting to see who comments on it, and analyzing the manner in which they did so. Even if he thinks it's not a reliable tell as formulated, in context it might mean something.
The "discussion starter" reason feels like an excuse made up after he took heat for it. His later responses to d3x on the topic are consistent with that interpretation.
His reasons for voting me: Perhaps I didn't read. Perhaps I'm town. Or perhaps I'm scum. [I'm not making that up.]
I don't know the significance of voting Magma. In ISO Feysal looks overly defensive of his random vote on Rob, but on review I see he was called out for it. Still don't like it but it's hard to blame him.
ISO 2 has a vibe of being uninterested in the game.
ISO 3 and 4 answer my direct question, but ignores everything else I said about my vote. At this point, if Feysal was sincere about voting me, he should have commented on some of my posts: 38, 62, and 122, at a minimum.
He seems to play nice with Magister until Magister replaces out, and suddenly turns around. Mostly by reinterpreting the same evidence that he had already commented on. He says Magister may have been buddying him out of fear of a bad reaction, but Feysal's response could just as easily have been Feysal buddying Magister out of fear of a bad reaction. Says he doesn't like Magister replacing out.
ISO 6 presents a false equivalence between our votes on each other that I believe I've previously pointed out. Although I think that where he points out my use of the word "chainsawing", it was probably just a miscommunication.
ISO 7 The point that it wouldn't have been worth it for hypothical-scum-Magister to defend hypothical-scum-Feysal is a good one that I agree with, however, hypothical-scum-Magister wouldn't necessarily make the same judgement call, so a CogitoLudi scumflip wouldn't be solid proof of town-Feysal.
ISO 8 at some points assumes certain d3x is thinking of certain references and I'm doubting they are all correct, though that probably isn't alignment-relevant. Without deep investigation, some of the "Incorrect" responses look like meaningless semantics. Feysal is correct that he hasn't tried to paint d3x as scummy.*

*d3x, please explain that. Feysal hasn't called you scummy all game, at worst he accused you of not paying attention.

[Herodotus]

Feysal, if you think that's a town tell, then I'm skeptical about there being something that we need to discuss. If it has something to do with flavour confirming me as town, we're better off leaving the scum in the dark.

UNVOTE: Feysal

VOTE: kthxbye
There, now the scum won't kill you.

[Herodotus]

Under that theory a scum can get frustrated, throw up their hands and quit and you're supposed to go... walp, that's null then.

No, because it doesn't change the things that made them scummy prior to their replacing out.
Replacing out will never help scum win, so it's never helpful to the scum who replaces out. But, I might have been overly pedantic/dogmatic. People aren't always rational. I still dislike people making that accusation but I don't feel that discussing it further will lead to anything positive.

Preview: Consider me to be "not voting". The kthxbye vote is a joke, I don't have any read on that player.

[Herodotus]

In case there is VCA later:
UNVOTE:

I'm planning to put some thought into Cogito, because I'm finding him personally suspicious - aside from the arguments against Magister Ludi - for a specific reason that I'll share after I've had some time to examine him, confirm that my reason is valid, etc. as needed.

[Herodotus]

@Rob: I'm feeling more relaxed since I got post 298 off my chest. So if you mean right now, I don't know why. If you mean since last Wednesday, it's because of something IRL.

@Gummy: That's not quite what I mean re: DeasVail, but I can't find an answer from him, so I won't put words into his mouth by filling in the details.

God damn rob is town that guy is never ever ever getting lynched.

If we're looking at word choice, is it normal for you to evaluate whether someone is ever getting lynched, if neither you nor anyone else has indicated they wanted that to happen?

[Herodotus]

It seems that the effects of this on how we should be playing aren't as big as one might expect. Limit claims to the minimum needed, and no unannounced hammering, but that's generally good policy in mafia. Also, don't assume there is a typical 3-person scumteam, but be prepared for one.

[Herodotus]

Has it really been that long? I've been prodded.

CES claim.

That's all I've got at the moment - not much has happened, to be honest.

Same. (See my posts about the game stalling after the lynch is determined.) Yes, the town is supposed to drive the content, but there isn't much to say.

I for one will not be playing spot-the-secret-meta-difference. If there is something there, say it or I probably won't bother reading that game.

Cogito might have good reasons not to claim, but if so he's the lynch.

[Herodotus]

@Gummybear: Why do you think Kthxbye is scum? All you did was quote one of his posts and asserted that it was scummy.

@kthxbye: When you posted a scumlist, you didn't mention Gummy. Since then you've called them lurkers, but they were lurking from the beginning.
You appear to have dropped both BBMolla and d3x as lynch candidates. Is that correct?

[Herodotus]

Question in light of Feysal's post: I thought this was already evident for the most part, at least based on my role PM. Do we have town in the game that don't have Moriarty's identity in their role PM?

Does the NK mean the setup speculation was incorrect?

Rob13 is trying too hard to use setup questions to make himself look town.

[Herodotus]

That's better.

I think the mod doesn't intend for the relevant parts of the setup to be public. And I think the only way for us to make it public is if multiple townies reveal role information. There is one piece of information that the mod might say, though:

@Mod: If Game-Specific Rule #2 were to happen, would the game necessarily end at that time?

[Herodotus]

I didn't say whether I knew the answer to the question, and I don't intend to.

[Herodotus]

I felt that the intent behind the post was scummy. He had 2 posts before that vote, both of which had literally 0 content. His third post was an L-1 vote, and that was it. That kind of lack of content, combined with jumping on a large wagon without even rehashing the case before the vote, does not seem terribly town-motivated to me.

What would be the goal of the post, from a scum perspective?

@Sottyrulez: I'm specifically not asking any players to give out information about their roles.

[Herodotus]

Why do you want this?

What I want to be public information is whether this is an AITP game, in which the town needs one particular person to survive, or not. The reason why I want this is because it would make sure everyone knows what type of scumgroup to look for.

I definitely agree that Hero shouldn't be asking that question, but I get a lot more "durrrrrr" out of it than I get scum.

A swing and a big whiff at town cred! It helps if you don't swing late.

How would Gummy hypothetically get town credit here?

@Gummybear: there is a question in post 460 for you.

[Herodotus]

VOTE: d3x

I think his "projection" that Feysal was "painting him scummy" is bad.

[Herodotus]

It's not my only reason, but I do consider it very scummy that he read an accusation into posts that contained no traces of one.

[Herodotus]

What I want to be public information is whether this is an AITP game, in which the town needs one particular person to survive, or not.

Again, I don't see how this is even a legit Townquestion.

I don't see how it's a legit Scumquestion, though. I assume that the scum already know the answer. Maybe everyone knows it; but it's not public.

[Herodotus]

D3x: Care to try again, seeing as how I say in the same post you link that he has been scummy. Not the scummiest, not the best lynch, but a valid one, especially on Day 1.

p218 - You pretty clearly infer that you have a Town read on Ludi.
p342 - You state your read on CES is null.
p421 - You don't find CES obvScummy, but he isn't a bad Lynch.

You have fought against the Replacement being alignment indicative and 2/3 of your posts are Null to Townish sounding on him, then when the Lynchis secured he's suddenly the next best option.

The problem here is that if Gummy is scum, while you and Cogito (the two competing wagons) were both town, I don't see Gummy's motive to reposition himself like that.

[Herodotus]

@d3x: You presumably know kthxbye best from personal experience. Have you been trying to read them since your first comment on them?

I just did ISO's of several players, and see no reason to believe he's town.

UNVOTE: d3x

VOTE: kthxbye

Dex: thoughts on Rob saying GB is town.

It seems to me that if Rob has good reasons for not explaining what he said, then asking other players to comment is anti-town.

[Herodotus]

@sottyrulez: There was one vote on kthxbye when I voted him, your comment is nothing less than absurd.

@DeasVail: At this moment, I am more suspicious of kthxbye. When reading d3x, I keep flipping between a mild scum and a mild town read. Most people in the game have at some point given me a reason to think they are town, even if they have also triggered my scumdar at other times. kthxbye hasn't.

To put it another way, I could put together some argument to convince myself that almost every person is town, but I'm struggling to make that argument for kthxbye.

[Herodotus]

Noting that sottyrulez and kthxbye both seem to be reacting as if my kthxbye vote followed suspicion or votes from large numbers of players. In fact, the only person who showed any suspicion toward him before my vote was gummybear, and kthxbye earlier complained about being called town too much.

My reasons are mostly POE.
There was post 503 that I quoted.
I pointed out the strangeness of your reaction to Gummy at the beginning of the day:

@kthxbye: When you posted a scumlist, you didn't mention Gummy. Since then you've called them lurkers, but they were lurking from the beginning.

And to be fair, some OMGUS.

Since you asked, towntells from DV:
First was early - page 4-5 - If DV was scum, I don't think he would have declared his intent to abandon the wagon on me so soon after d3x placed his vote, as he was giving up on a potential mislynch. IIRC, the Magister wagon that he joined didn't seem any more promising at the time, though I might recall incorrectly.
I also get a very town vibe from post 341. I don't know his reasons for saying that, or what he thought Feysal had to say, but DV's post was almost certainly written by someone who felt the need neither to learn Feysal's information, nor to justify his opinion that whatever Feysal had to say wasn't worth discussing. I think scum would have been curious about what Feysal (assuming Feysal is town) was thinking, and even if they weren't, they would have felt obligated to explain a reason why they didn't want Feysal to elaborate.

As for Feysal, my townread is almost entirely from page 14. A scum could make the same posts, but I wouldn't expect it. And it is IIoA, but I've been assuming we'll get some of the A soon. (Feysal...?)

[Herodotus]

@sottyrulez, in chronological order:
I didn't say you said that, but your words "easy and terrible wagon" do suggest that you "seem to be reacting as if my kthxbye vote followed suspicion or votes from large numbers of players."

Can you go into more detail about your POE?

I could post some of the towntells I've found about each player, but no, I couldn't post everything that was going through my mind at the time that I did my reading.

When I voted kthxbye on day 1, it was a joke and not because I thought he was scum. This was clear from what you quoted and bolded. There isn't any direct connection to my current vote on him, which is not a joke. I doubt anyone understands what you're trying to say about that. If the word "pad" applies to anything, it's your post 522, which takes big irrelevant quotes without trying to apply them. (Is it your intention to draw the votes from your scumbuddy kthxbye onto yourself? Then he's a scum PR, while you're a goon. Thanks for letting us know.)

I wrote all of my reasons. In any argument, there will be some stronger and some weaker reasons to believe in an idea. OMGUS is weak. The fishing point about 503 is strong. The inconsistency about Gummy is moderate. POE depends on whether one is right about the other players.

[Herodotus]

@sottyrulez, in chronological order:
I didn't say you said that, but your words "easy and terrible wagon" do suggest that you "seem to be reacting as if my kthxbye vote followed suspicion or votes from large numbers of players."

It's a wagon I've counted three supporters for at least when I said that. When assessing your scumminess relative to that wagon, I'm not asserting WHERE your suspicion came, but how it came.

When you said that, there were two, but whatever.
Did you intend to make any such assessment, or only the assertion? A long, long time ago, in a game forgotten and probably not even in the archives today, someone once said:

That's not how this works. If you're opposed to the wagon and you're trying to stop people from supporting his lynch, you have to explain why it's a bad wagon.

It applies equally as much to a chainsaw defense as to any other defense.

Your attempt to make it about where it came is you trying to turn the argument into something that's easier to defeat.

There's nothing to defeat because you didn't make any argument. I was commenting on your reaction. Now you're trying to turn things from a mention of your own scummy reaction into a counterargument.

When I voted kthxbye on day 1, it was a joke and not because I thought he was scum. This was clear from what you quoted and bolded. There isn't any direct connection to my current vote on him, which is not a joke. I doubt anyone understands what you're trying to say about that.

So what's your point here? That you weren't taking the game seriously on page 14? That we shouldn't take your joke seriously and use it to analyze your alignment?

You're the one who brought it up, in your fluff of a post 522. Since you quoted it as if trying to show that it was relevant, I decided to describe the coincidence.

Explain the town motivation for unvoting in fear of a VCA later in the game. Who the hell EVEN thinks about that as town at that point in the game?

Accuracy. (Although I doubt that it would matter, as most VCA I've ever seen would probably treat a single vote similar to "not voting", but regardless, it was more accurate for me to be reflected as "not voting".)
I can see how scum can fear VCA, but it was clear that I wasn't trying to lynch kthxbye, so I chose to have my vote reflect how I was feeling. How does that help scum to avoid being caught by VCA?

If the word "pad" applies to anything, it's your post 522, which takes big irrelevant quotes without trying to apply them. (Is it your intention to draw the votes from your scumbuddy kthxbye onto yourself? Then he's a scum PR, while you're a goon. Thanks for letting us know.)

Who said that the scum even have power roles? As far as I know that's not a certainty. (Maybe

you know

they exist.)

Both times I have seen scum intentionally act scummy, it was while a partner was being wagoned, and they were a goon while the partner taking heat was a PR. I don't know whether they exist, but this does provide a good (if very speculative) explanation for your play.

The next good explanation is that you are prematurely white-knighting for a townie. Either suggests you are scum.

UNVOTE: VOTE: sottyrulez

[Herodotus]

We just suggested your jump on was crap. So far you haven't proved me wrong.

Maybe that's what you meant. But you still haven't explained calling the wagon either "easy" or "terrible".
My vote was based on four reasons which you can find in post 518. The first two reasons are good, the third is weak but still worth mentioning, and the last is illogical but may as well have been stated. I don't see how you could possibly find my vote worse than Rob's, if you consider my reasons inadequate.

There's nothing to defeat because you didn't make any argument. I was commenting on your reaction. Now you're trying to turn things from a mention of your own scummy reaction into a counterargument.

...What? Can you explain this thought clearly right now, because to me it looks like you are doing exactly what you are accusing us of doing and it is kinda blowing my mind. I want to know if I am understanding you clearly before I start ringing the bells.

The way I see it, in order, is:
(Gummy is voting kth)
Me: votes kth for some reasons you apparently don't like
(Rob agrees and votes kth)
(Gummy unvotes kth)
sottyrulez: kth wagon is easy and terrible, Herodotus's support of it is scummy.
kthx: So far all I see is "people are suspicious of kthx, I am too" from you. Why do you think I'm scum?
Me: {My impressions:

sottyrulez is saying I'm scummy for joining an "easy" (presumably meaning popular, or already pushed) wagon? And kthx is accusing me of following "people" (plural)? They're both pushing similar misrepresentations, I wonder why.

} (Make a public note of this.) (State full reasons why I suspected kthxby is scum.)
You: We didn't actually say that, {additional stuff}
Me: No, but what you said suggests it. {response to additional stuff}
You: I'm not talking where you joined, but how. You're trying to turn the argument into something easier to defeat. {response to additional stuff}
Me: What argument? (At this point all you've said about the reasons for my vote is that you're assuming the POE didn't happen.) I was noting something unusual about the responses by you and kthx, separately from any point you may wish to make. {response to additional stuff}

Now, I'm reinterpreting what you're saying. So please clarify: the "wagon is easy and terrible" wasn't supposed to be a reason why my "support is scummy"? What does the word "easy" mean in this context? I can think of no interpretation of the word as applied to a wagon other than to imply that people are bandwagoning lazily.

Also, could you comment on kthx's response? To me it looks like he was misrepresenting my vote as sheeping.

Both times I have seen scum intentionally act scummy, it was while a partner was being wagoned, and they were a goon while the partner taking heat was a PR. I don't know whether they exist, but this does provide a good (if very speculative) explanation for your play.

The next good explanation is that you are prematurely white-knighting for a townie. Either suggests you are scum.

UNVOTE: VOTE: sottyrulez

If you are going to talk about examples you are going to have to quote them.

DrippingGoofball in PYP 5 almost explicitly says she isn't town in the linked post because her team's RB is under attack.
MagnaofIllusion in Open 261

(Is it your intention to draw the votes from your scumbuddy kthxbye onto yourself? Then he's a scum PR, while you're a goon. Thanks for letting us know.)

lol

If you ever believed this there in no way you would unvote kthx and then vote us.

The part in parentheses is a jump to conclusions / one possible theory. I did state another. In general, it's a bad, and often scummy, idea to hold the suspicious acts of one player (you) as a major reason to lynch another (kthxbye) while the first is still unflipped, unless lynching the first isn't an option.

Also you cannot have it both ways, you just can't. It shows you are just not willing to listen to reason or logic and that you are willing to make anything into a scum tell for us and that's just bullshit. So which is it? Take a stand. Are we scum defending kthx or is k town? I refuse to let you sit on the fence like this and that allows you to come after us no matter what K flips even though your suspicion of us has come though him.

I don't know. Let me turn this around: people found Magister's page 1 defense of Feysal suspicious, without knowing Feysal's alignment. I don't need to have a singular and certain theory of the reasons why you reacted the way you did to find it suspicious.

I'm stating right now that POE on day two in an active town is a terribly weak vote

False, it can be used at any time.
Step 1: Acquire townreads.
Step 2: Vote someone who isn't a townread.
Step 3: See whether the person you voted becomes a townread or someone else starts to look scummier. If yes, go to step 2.
Step 4: Lynch.

Simply put, d3x makes a valid point about GB calling CES the second best lynch after consistently defending his slot.

What does scum-Gummy gain from changing to support a CES lynch after it was already decided? It didn't make any difference to whether the mislynch would occur.

[Herodotus]

tl;dr:
I interpret sottyrulez's post 514 as an accusation toward me of bandwagoning, and I think they dispute that interpretation. I don't see any other reasonable meaning behind the word "easy"; to me it looks very clear. But my last post asks for clarification ot their alternate explanation.

The same problem holds for kthxbye post 517, but I have temporarily lost focus on them.

[Herodotus]

Trusting is hard, but it doesn't look like you're going to be lynched.
What I'd like from you is to know why you used the plural in "

people

are suspicious of kthx, I am too". If you'd said "Gummy is..." I could understand where you were coming from, even though I would disagree with your point. Did you feel that multiple people were attacking you before I voted you?

[Herodotus]

It's quite an interesting post actually.

This. It's making me feel curious.

Although I am suspicious of sottyrulez, I'm categorically uncomfortable with chain-lynching. Maybe if the scum didn't have a NK things would be different but with it they can perform more manipulations, and planning the next day's lynch gives them more information.

[Herodotus]

I felt obvious D2. But everything is obvious when you already know the answer.

I'm glad I didn't say anything more about my win conditions being different from what d3x implied in 454, because my role PM didn't say anything about surviving. I didn't even consider the game could possibly be AiTP until late D1. In fact, I breadcrumbed twice.

Occasionally players will reveal their role for no good reason; the game could potentially have been ruined from the beginning by such a player as Moriarty. So I think it should have been more clear how dangerous that would be.

There is certainly room in Mafia for closed AiTP-style games, I'd just make it public what type of game it is and use powerroles.

That said, the theming was very well done. Thank you Debonair Danny DiPietro.

[Herodotus]

Feysal said he didn't know.

I was thinking he might have been lying about not having that information, so the scum might have less ability to make connections, or second guess themselves.
That post where he said "there's something to discuss" and "this post is a towntell from Herodotus" had me concerned, ha.