Mafia 40: The Worst Game Ever - Game over!

[Seol]

Oh, wow. Lots of petty squabbles! People reading far too much into random vote comments! What a wonderful way to start the day.

I’m a little surprised that *no one* besides Vesuvan and myself seem to be interested about why I’m listed twice in the votecount...

Possibly because you're not, any more, and the most likely explanation is that:

1. Pie missed Vesuvan's vote on the first compilation (there was only just half an hour between Ves's vote and Pie's votecount, and we've been having server troubles, after all).
2. He hurriedly edited the post to include Vesuvan's vote, by adding it on the end - not checking to see if there was already a tally for you.

As everything was back to normal at the next votecount, it's clearly not a mechanic in the game.

notice how my new tell is to vote for outed townies and doctors, much harder to spot

Thanks for telling us what your Mafia tell is. Marginal

vote: Macros

[Seol]

OK, I'm going to quote this out of order....

I am the Egyptian Tiger. I have special night powers that protect me from being killed at night.

Why would you declare that ability? Surely that's better being kept hidden?

I also have the power to vote and it will count as one vote .

Good to know.

My last power is at any time during the game I can say the word

berry

.

I can do that too. Watch me...

berry

I'm going to claim because I am paranoid.

I don't buy that reason, if you don't mind me saying, so I'll just flat-out ask you - is something (your role, another role, whatever) forcing you to claim now?

[Seol]

Unvote: Nanook

, who I think still hasn't turned up yet, but anyway,

Vote: Blackberry

, who probably has a post restriction

requiring

him to claim day 1,

I asked him that directly. I'm presuming that his "not really" was in response to my "is something forcing you to claim now" - but it'd be nice if Blackberry would clarify.

but that italicized name thing looks a bit too sinister. I'd like you to stop saying your name in any shape or form.

My current theory, until the mod pops along, is that it's a red herring, in the same way as the voting comment.

I'm going to guess that he's the BigBenWD type of role, and that BigBenWD is scum scum scum (no offense to BigBenWD of course. Just my opinion of the mod's opinion).

One paranoid theory is that he's got a role which wants to get lynched for some reason - which is why I'm not currently of the opinion that he's a good lynch today. It strikes me that vigging him tonight is a good placeholder plan.

Or he's a "meme" - some kind of neutral role that wins if it says a particular word, like. 10 times or something. I don't know, and... I guess I don't really care, so... just stop saying that.

It either does something, or it doesn't - if it's part of a win condition, why draw so much attention to it? If it activates some sort of day-trigger, that's another thing - maybe we'll learn more when Pie next posts...

[Seol]

no comment

as to Seol's questions. Not my place as a mod to say anything about that.

That's a good enough answer for me - I was wondering whether it might be a day-trigger for something we'd see, and that's all I meant by watching your next post. Nothing's happened to me yet either - no mod PMs, no instant kills or whatever.

Hey Seol, if you're required to claim day 1 don't you think that you'd also be required NOT to explain why?

I wouldn't expect him to clarify

why

. I wouldn't be surprised if he could clarify whether it was compulsory or not. Even if he just says he can't say why, that'd be nice.

Mod's are evil like that, so I think that BlackBerry CAN'T clarify. but that's assuming he's required to even claim, I'm thinking it's just a joke nonetheless.

Well, I think I've drawn sufficient attention to it now that if we don't get a response, we can assume that either:

1) He's not permitted to reference it at all, or
2) He's playing some sort of gambit (chances are, an antitown one).

[Seol]

It was a complete lie

8) . And I am nightkillable btw. I only did it to see who would jump on me, and now my suspects are those who voted me because they thought it would be an easy lynch.

To which I have four responses:

1) OMG LAL!

2) Don't waste our time.

3) Cool gambit! 8)

4) Well, at least we can move on now.

Each applies, in roughly equal proportions. They happen to cancel out to zero.

Wacky:
Not sure it’s that relevant anymore, but what did you mean by “BigBenWD”?

He's member here, and one who's prone to attention-seeking spammy behaviour (who's also a hoot, but I can see how he could get some people's backs up).

berry

[Seol]

pie- im voting for emptiger, not jadesmar.

-USE NORMAL VOTE FORMATTING. Votes will only be counted if they are in bold. Use the format

Vote: Pie

and

Unvote: Pie

.

Always unvote before revoting

, or your vote won't count.

No, you're not.

[Seol]

I can't see that anyone's referenced this yet:

In any case, mass claiming would not work effectively, as Talitha's vanilla would be a safe claim for antitowns.

With no mention of a mass-claim prior to this (why would anyone want to mention mass-claim in a game of this size so soon) - this strikes me as possibly being a shout-out to say "hey guys, we've got safe vanilla claims!". If you're a townie... why give such a hint to scum?

[Seol]

I’ve recently been mafia in 2 themed games. The hardest part, what I feared, was not feigning innocence- but feigning an innocent *role*. Which was most difficult at the beginning, when the mafia has the least amount of knowledge about the town. In those games I was extremely worried about early claims. (And I there are 2 witnesses present who can attest to how obsessed I was.) But each death (as well as whatever incidental tells could be gleamed) gave the mafia more information to better craft claims.

Let me just make sure I'm understanding - when you've been Mafia recently, you've been afraid of early claims, and focussing on feigning an innocent role?

And your post, that I quoted, undermines the possibility of an early claim, and highlights what innocent roles could easily be feigned?

We definitely need a claim.

[Seol]

I’ve recently been mafia in 2 themed games. The hardest part, what I feared, was not feigning innocence- but feigning an innocent *role*. Which was most difficult at the beginning, when the mafia has the least amount of knowledge about the town. In those games I was extremely worried about early claims. (And I there are 2 witnesses present who can attest to how obsessed I was.) But each death (as well as whatever incidental tells could be gleamed) gave the mafia more information to better craft claims.

Let me just make sure I'm understanding - when you've been Mafia recently, you've been afraid of early claims, and focussing on feigning an innocent role?

And your post, that I quoted, undermines the possibility of an early claim, and highlights what innocent roles could easily be feigned?

We definitely need a claim.

[Seol]

Gah. Apologies for the double-post.

[Seol]

Well, you're either telling the truth about your ability or you've been planning this claim from the start.

Hmm.

[Seol]

Hmm.

You've claimed a strict disadvantage role which you've been conspicuously laying hints for right from the start, rather than trying to keep quiet and make the best of it. Why do that

other

than to support your innocence in case of a claim? Sounds like you were pre-empting this situation from the word go... which fits for your own claimed mindset when you're Mafia.

Even if you are a townie, you're worse than vanilla - so BWCS theory supports the lynch too.

BTW, I advise the cop to check out Kaoticity, I have good reasons to assume he is mafia.

Uh, what?

Either you have information of your own - in which case it might be an idea to share it, rather than tie up the cop for a night - or you don't, in which case you're pretty much being actively misleading. Leading the cop is a dangerous game...

I think that's a lynch, but just in case:

vote: Emptyger

[Seol]

The Kaocity lynch is correct.

Why?

So... when would you propose we lynch Kaoticity? We have to lynch him some time...

May as well be now.

I'm not so sure. All we've been told is that Blackberry IM'd Kaoticity to check out his post, and then Kaoticity voted Blackberry after having said privately he thought the post was amusing. I don't see that as a particularly compelling argument to suggest that Kaoticity was scummy.

There's also the issue that Kaoticity was involved in extra-thread discussion... but under the circumstances, what can you do? It was Blackberry who brought it up, and it's a bit late then, isn't it? In any case, that's an issue for the mod and the mod's taken a position on it.

There's even the argument that Kaoticity

could

have used the incident to try to get Blackberry modkilled (which would have helped the scum), but didn't.

So, based on that "we have to lynch him some time", which I don't believe is the case, I'm going to

vote: Wacky

, and generally

FOS: Everyone on the Kaoticity bandwagon, especially LoudmouthLee

.

Here's hoping this one doesn't come through in triplicate like our mod's last post...

[Seol]

I agree with carrion pigeons here - the offences were

not

of the same magnitude. Blackberrry approached another player with information, Kaoticity didn't. Blackberry cited that information in the thread, Kaoticity didn't. The key point is:

If I was either on the giving or recieving end of the questioning

and gave pertinent info out

, I'd EXPECT to be modkilled.

True. But I don't see where Kaoticity gave pertinent info out.

Furthermore, going after Kaoticity on the premise that he wasn't modkilled

because he's scum

, and his death would therefore imbalance the game, is hella weak.

unvote, vote: LoudmouthLee

[Seol]

And I'm a better lynch? Maybe you should rescan my posts, Seol. Maybe you'll pick up on the missing link.

OK.

unvote, vote: Kaoticity

.

[Seol]

So FOS: everyone NOT on the Kaoticity bandwagon. He was clearly scum.

Um, except he wasn't.

Anyway, what the hell is it with Thok and Seol suddenly changing tack from "let's lynch someone else (think it was LML)" to putting on the last votes before a claim?

Why I was voting LML - he was saying that Kaoticity was "the correct lynch", based on what I thought was

highly

flawed reasoning. I'd heard the case, I didn't think it was compelling, and yet there was pressure from various quarters - predominantly LML - to speedlynch someone who turned out to be an innocent. Kaoticity's involvement in Blackberry's stupidity didn't merit the reaction some people were giving it. As for one-line posts and bandwagonning - we were barely into day 2, not everyone's going to be writing essays and it's certainly not enough to lynch on so quickly.

Why I switched - well, it was this post here:

And I'm a better lynch? Maybe you should rescan my posts, Seol. Maybe you'll pick up on the missing link.

Which I read as "back off, I know exactly what I'm talking about

because I'm an information role

", especially as he stopped addressing my arguments as to why the reasoning was shaky - I figured that those reasons he cited were so he could push for a lynch on a guilty result without having to claim yet, which is fairly typical early-game cop behaviour. There had been previous hints about that in respect of the Emptyger lynch day 1. That's why I switched my vote, and obviously I wasn't going to say "What, are you a cop or something?".

It does beg the question, though, what exactly LML is doing talking in absolutes like that when he's a cop and doesn't have information to go on. In fact, it's most un-cop-like behaviour.

Major FOS: LoudmouthLee

.

And why did LML claim when he was still far from a lynch, and had no useful results?

He'd already effectively claimed. He'd seen I'd picked up on it, and if I had, chances are the scum had too.

As for this:

LML, are you saying you got an innocent result on someone but you still aren't sure about that person? Your sanity was pretty much confirmed because of your guilty on Kaoticity. If you got an innocent on someone we would have a confirmed innocent.

Wasn't Kaoticity innocent? Therefore if he got an innocent result on someone.. shoudln't we smash?

Ready to vote thok if LML gives the word, butever i am pretty confused, so yeah, un do dat.

LoudmouthLee DID NOT investigate Kaoticity - he investigated Emptyger night 1 and Blackberry night 2. However, he did receive the correct alignments for both, so assuming he's telling the truth, he's sane.

[Seol]

Night 2 - Blackberry - Not Guilty

: Fingered a player, and not only that, acted VERY strange with his

berry

antics. Any cop worth his weight in gold would have investigated Blackberry there. He did come up Not Guilty, though, which made me feel very stongly about the lynch of Kaocity.

Night 3 - Not Guilty

: From someone who I was pretty sure was scum, clearing him this way makes me feel better. If he's the GF though, I'm screwed. I do not plan on revealing the name of the innocent, as it some strategy dictates that it gives the mafia an easy kill choice / confirmed innocent.

What makes me suspicious isn't the "convenient" results (although that contributes to my suspicions), but rather your aggression towards Kaoticity. Yes, Blackberry was innocent, but Blackberry's also an idiot. He told us his rationale for suspecting Kaoticity, and it was rubbish. How on earth does it follow that Kaoticity is a good lynch from that?

Oh, and also it's worth noting that you weren't pushing for the Kaoticity lynch until

after

Blackberry had been

modkilled

, revealing his role. You had posted earlier in the day, but hadn't even referenced Blackberry/Kaoticity.

Now, this is terrible cop play - what if we'd moved on from the Kaoticity lynch (as we should have done) and then you'd died tonight? We'd read your posts and come to the conclusion that you probably had a result on Kaoticity. Then today, you come out guns blazing for Thok (without a result, after he switched to vote

for the person you told him to, after you'd heavily hinted at being a cop

) - if anyone's responsible for the lynching of Kaoticity, it's you.

Yesterday you said:

But again, Thok decided to vote Wacky instead of Kaocity. Definate scum move. So, if Kaocity comes up scum, it'll by lynch Thok day tomorrow.

But Kaoticity

didn't

come up scum. What would have had to have happened for you to not have voted Thok?

I'm getting mixed messages - the aggression, the conveniently already-revealed results (including your withholding of today's result... although that's probably a wise play), the unnecessary drawing of attention to yourself - all that screams "Not The Cop".

[Seol]

Oh, and also it's worth noting that you weren't pushing for the Kaoticity lynch until after Blackberry had been modkilled, revealing his role. You had posted earlier in the day, but hadn't even referenced Blackberry/Kaoticity.

Why would I reference an innocent player?

I didn't know, again, if my results were accurate or not. I assumed, with a day 1 scum, that I was paranoid, then, I say Blackberry get modkilled. His

berry

from day 1 made me think he was scum.

Then I thought he might have had more info than he let on.

Why didn't you vote Kaoticity prior to the Blackberry meltdown, then? As far as I can tell, your whole rationale for pushing the Kaoticity lynch was that Blackberry was innocent. If you knew Blackberry was innocent before the modkill, why did you wait until after the modkill (when that information was available to all) to say anything?

[Seol]

LML, you said your role was a "computer hacker" cop. Is there anything you aren't telling us about your role?

Nothing else I can say. Know that I'm playing the way I'm playing for a reason.

Well, that just

fills

me with confidence. You've got some hidden agenda that you can't reveal? That sounds like scum to me... and when it's not scum, it's frequently still a hell of a liability to the town.

I'd be sorely tempted to vote for you now, if only my leading theory wasn't that you're trying to get yourself lynched.

[Seol]

Mmmm. Pie is good. Yum.

Yeah, there's still the question about night 1, and that still doesn't , to my mind, justify your propelling of the bandwagon on Kaoticity yesterday, but it'll do me for now.

[Seol]

Seol, is there any reason why you haven't voted LML at this point knowing what we now know?
Oh and

unvote: LoudMouthLee

He'd already been voted, there was no need. He'd indicated he got sane results n2 when he was only voted by (I think) one person d1, so there was no reason to vote him.

[Seol]

Well, if we're going to analyse killing entities, it's actually fairly clear we've got three so far.

We've got the "group" that kills by banning, the "group" that kills by modkilling, and the "group" that kills by OMG PWNing (which I would venture to guess is Emptyger's "n00b" Mafia). If there's an every-night vig (not beyond the realms of plausibility), it's either the modkiller, or it's the banner who's been either roleblocked or stymied by the doc on two consecutive nights.

Is Vikingfan's post a tell? I don't think the multiple scum groups element was (methinks LML was clutching at straws there)... but the "oh it's ok he'll be nightkilled" seemed a bit odd. On the other hand, he wouldn't say that if he was scum with Thok, and I can't see he'd say it if he was scum

not

with Thok either (signalling his nightchoices ahead of time?), so I'm just noting it as odd rather than scummy.

What about Thok's claim? That has to be one of the scummiest claims I've ever seen... but I wouldn't put it past Pie to have put such a thing in the game. One thing's for sure - we can't trust Thok, long-game-wise, but that doesn't mean he's a good lynch today.

[Seol]

I had written Wacky's position off as a totally understandable oversight, and was actually slightly suspicious of Ves for what seemed to me like excessive aggression on the issue - but one thing the mod's posts were was fairly unambiguous, so I don't see how Wacky can defend his position.

So I'll vote him.

unvote, vote: Wacky

.

[Seol]

Facts are:

IS is some kind of anti-town role (duh).

That has been heavilly inferred by the mod.

Antitown roles usually kill (duh).

With very rare exceptions (eg cults), this is true.

IS is going to kill by mod-killing (duh).

Disagree with the duh here. IS mods games very rarely, to the extent that there was a poll trying to get IS to mod a game. He does play a lot of games, and he's kinda lynch-happy in them - so that fits with a killing role of some sort, but I wouldn't agree it fits that well with him being a modkiller, and I definitely wouldn't agree that it's a safe assumption.

[Seol]

I might as well respond to these comments:

Anyway, seeing how there's an angry mob outside my door, most of which are probably there because they can't find a proper bandwagon target, and since I have a bit of free time now, may I suggest Seol? There's some evidence for him being in the n00b mafia:

Well, you're either telling the truth about your ability or you've been planning this claim from the start.

Hmm.

This was with regard to Emptyger, before he was lynched. It's largely ambivalent, but it's placed in such a way that is more "for" Emptyger rather than "against".

A few posts later, someone places the lynching vote, and we have this:

Hmm.

You've claimed a strict disadvantage role which you've been conspicuously laying hints for right from the start, rather than trying to keep quiet and make the best of it. Why do that

other

than to support your innocence in case of a claim? Sounds like you were pre-empting this situation from the word go... which fits for your own claimed mindset when you're Mafia.

Even if you are a townie, you're worse than vanilla - so BWCS theory supports the lynch too.

<snip Blackberry stuff>

I think that's a lynch, but just in case:

vote: Emptyger

A rather convenient backflip on Emptyger, and you place a vote there despite being twilight already to confuse any casual rereads of the thread.

Well, you may read the original comment as being more "for" than "against", but ambivalence is the operative word there. There were reasons to support his claim, which is why I wanted to consider it. I was actually trying to put the lynching vote on, but Blackberry beat me to the punch, which I noticed as I previewed. Note the posting times. If you think I was defending Emptyger, though, I'd also point out my post 76:

I can't see that anyone's referenced this yet:

In any case, mass claiming would not work effectively, as Talitha's vanilla would be a safe claim for antitowns.

With no mention of a mass-claim prior to this (why would anyone want to mention mass-claim in a game of this size so soon) - this strikes me as possibly being a shout-out to say "hey guys, we've got safe vanilla claims!". If you're a townie... why give such a hint to scum?

And, of course, the subsequent developing of that attack.

And then there was this:

...generally FOS: Everyone on the Kaoticity bandwagon, especially LoudmouthLee.

I did find it strange at the time that Seol defended Kaoticity.

The reasons for the attack on Kaoticity were incredibly poor, and a speedlynch would have been a singularly bad idea at that point. I still think the Kaoticity wagon was scummy.

And seeing how you then placed the 2nd last vote due to some kind of misunderstanding...

LML had very heavily hinted that he was a cop. I didn't misunderstand that. I did misunderstand what he meant by "Kaoticity is the correct lynch" - generally if a cop says that, it's because he has a result.

And then the next day you tried to get a claimed cop lynched, and that's a scum tell,

His behaviour was singularly uncoplike - dangerous, even, for a cop, and I wanted - at the very least - a good explanation. After all, if you can't even ask a cop to explain what appears to be dangerously anti-town behaviour without being attacked for it, there's no safer claim for scum than cop.

That reflects how I felt about LML this morning. Now, I'm more comfortable with him - although I don't think his role fully explains or justifies his actions, I don't think he's dangerous in the same way I did then. I'm currently on the fence about how scummy he is, and I definitely don't think he's a good target at the moment.

and you're too friendly with thok for some reason.

Same logic as Kaoticity. I didn't see a good reason for the out-of-control bandwagon, but I did see some bad ones. I feel a lot less comfortable about him now than I did when I was defending him earlier though, because that claim looks custom-made for scum.

Still, your claim gives us an obvious path to go down. If there are any non-single-shot vigilantes left, then please target Wacky tonight. If he's telling the truth, he'll be fine, and if he's lying he's scum and deserves a bullet in the brain. I presume that's what you meant by this?

Now will someone kindly shoot me? Good night.

No point pursuing this bandwagon now.

unvote: Wacky

.

Incidentally, why didn't you just admit to having a role based on a person earlier? If you remember, I noticed day 2 that it was likely you had a role based on a person, and I FOS'ed you at the beginning of the day because of that observation.

Is Rite a person? A GLer, or just relatively inactive nowadays?

Now what? Well, there's a whole bunch of things spork's said that have put me on edge -

vote:emptyger I hope yuor right seol.

"What he said" voting.

yes that's a lynch an over-lynch actually we'll have to kill him extra badly or something.

Followed by:

unvote

An unvote in acknowledged twilight? What the hell's that for?

No response - including no unvote - for Thok after he claimed doc, at least not until he placed the 8th vote on Wacky.

Right now, I like the sound of

vote: Spork

.

[Seol]

Hi.

I'm back again after a month or so and I'm surprised I'm not lynched yet... See V/LA for the details.

I still have to read all the posts sofar. I'll do that ASAP.

How soon is ASAP, then? It's been over a week since this post.

And this isn't just aimed at Kerplunk, there's been a whole lot of lurking going on here and the game's stagnating. How dull.

[Seol]

I'm in favor of having someone check out Wacky's claim tonight to verify it, and verifying it that way.

Unvote: Wacky

. I'm not sold on the Spork-wagon at this stage unless someone has something more to go on than lurking (I've noticed Spork does that a lot even when town), so no further vote until I've had some more time to read back over some things (and may have to ask someone to place a vote when I do).

I did have a couple of reasons to vote spork - he's been acting a bit oddly, although I couldn't say whether that's out of character for him. I couldn't say they're especially strong, just the best I had to go on, but there is more to it than a lurker-wagon and gut feeling.

LmL, out of interest (i.e. I won't object if you prefer not to answer), on which night did you investigate Seol?

Already common knowledge:

Night 1 - Emptyger - Guilty: Was my choice pre-game because of his verbocity. I could have bicked Seol, et al, but I decided on Emptyger here. It turned out to be a good choice. Please not how my vote on Emptyger stayed on Emptyger the entire day.

Night 2 - Blackberry - Not Guilty: Fingered a player, and not only that, acted VERY strange with his berry antics. Any cop worth his weight in gold would have investigated Blackberry there. He did come up Not Guilty, though, which made me feel very stongly about the lynch of Kaocity.

Night 3 - Not Guilty: From someone who I was pretty sure was scum, clearing him this way makes me feel better. If he's the GF though, I'm screwed. I do not plan on revealing the name of the innocent, as it some strategy dictates that it gives the mafia an easy kill choice / confirmed innocent.

[Seol]

Hi.

I'm back again after a month or so and I'm surprised I'm not lynched yet... See V/LA for the details.

I still have to read all the posts sofar. I'll do that ASAP.

How soon is ASAP, then? It's been over a week since this post.

And this isn't just aimed at Kerplunk, there's been a whole lot of lurking going on here and the game's stagnating. How dull.

vote: Spork

Thanks for contributing.

You've been called on lurking, and that's the best you can do?

FOS: Kerplunk.

[Seol]

No further defense? If so, I'm happy with my vote. Even if it has been dead, it doesn't explain your bad play earlier on and noncontribution.

Well, technically, it explains the

recent

noncontribution... that said, if that's all he has to say, I'd rather lynch him than look into replacing him at this point.

[Seol]

Well, I make that a lynch.

Spork, this is your cue to unvote.

[Seol]

vote: thok

Nice and easy!

[Seol]

One more problem. Macros blocked Talitha night one. So where did the OMGPWNed night kill go? Because it was there night 2, right before IS would have awakened (unless Thesp got targeted by IS as IS's choice one ZONEACE died).

Night 1 must have been a doctor protection, I guess. We don't know jack about IS. Cult's a possibility, definitely.

[Seol]

One more problem. Macros blocked Talitha night one. So where did the OMGPWNed night kill go? Because it was there night 2, right before IS would have awakened (unless Thesp got targeted by IS as IS's choice one ZONEACE died).

Night 1 must have been a doctor protection, I guess. We don't know jack about IS. Cult's a possibility, definitely.

Night two couldn't have been a doctor protection, because I (more accurately marcos) targeted talitha, who was doc at the time. My theories are either Wacky was targeted night 1, or when thesp was killed, IS automatically omgpwned his body. OMGPWNED does sound like what IS's M.O. could be.

Reread.

Tally was vanilla. Leo was doc.

[Seol]

Yep- I've been thinking cult for awhile concerning IS. Though one would think by pure odds we might have found a dead cult member.
Or maybe Thok is lying about his identity and is really IS- hmm.

In which case we're happy regardless.

You're right about that. Plus, it described coming back as a vengenance. I don't think a cult is much vengeance.

Maybe IS is a killer who's just rubbish at submitting nightchoices?

[Seol]

Or maybe Thok is lying about his identity and is really IS- hmm.

Well just to add to the confusion, I'll claim to be IS now. I'm also the modkiller, and I like to eat babies and say

berry

. And I'm the vig.

Which, of course, makes me the horribly confusing role that nobody likes but the mod uses anyways.

Pie?

Could you hurry along?

I want this guy dead ASAP.

[Seol]

Yea, i think either that, or he has to daykill, or he's trying to catch us off guard. Or, he is OMG PWNed, and the mod just had him help kill thesp the second thesp was targeted the first time by mafia.

Why do you keep saying IS is OMG PWNed? It seems fairly evident to me that that's the n00b Mafia. Reread the kill description - it sounds like, well, a bunch of n00bs. Not like IS. Looks to me like you're trying to justify something, but I don't know what. All I know is - it's on a faulty basis.

[Seol]

That's interesting.

InHimShallIBe, you've given a major cop-hint last day and that more or less confirms it. Care to comment on things?

FOS: Wacky

. Even if

you

think it's obvious, that doesn't mean drawing attention to a likely cop is a good idea.

[Seol]

*I* think it is a good idea. With an experienced player base it is reasonably probable that at least one mafia group would have known already - so InHim will most likely be dead tonight.

This I disagree with - well, I agree with your reasoning, but not your conclusion. It's probable, but bringing it out into the open forces the hand.

If I was scum, wouldn't it be a better idea to keep my mouth shut, hope he doesn't reveal results, and kill him at night?

You definitely have a point here. I'm not sure it was a good play, but there's little reason to bring it out into the open if you're scum.

[Seol]

As for the current situation with Seol and Wacky, I don't agree with Wacky bringing Seol's claim to the surface as I didn't even notice it when reading through (although I wasn't particularly looking for it, I don't think most people were). But now that it's in the open, I don't see why Seol wouldn't either continue with the claim and give the town some information or deny it.

My claim/role? inhim's, you mean.

[Seol]

Oh, right. And WindSlicer is replacing Nanook.

Sorry 'bout that.

Worst mod ever?

Only joking, Pie.

[Seol]

Well, we definitely have a lurker problem, and Astro wasn't on either the Emptyger or early Thok bandwagons (he did vote Thok after Thok admitted he was scum, but he obviously gets no points for that), so I'd say that a

vote: Astronaut

isn't a bad idea at all right now.

[Seol]

We're on day 6 and with five investigations

Hang on. We're missing an investigation. inhim, was there a no-submit one night?

from an almost certain insane cop, it feels like there's enough information out there to avoid lurker hunts.

It's partly lurker-hunting, and partly now we know a few innocents it's time to go after the most suspicious-looking people who remain, who are mostly lurkers. You're a pretty good candidate out of that pile. At the very least, we need lurkers to post more... so whilst lurker-hunting might not be our route to a lynch, it seems like a good way of starting the day.

Then again, we've probably got only two scum left,

Where do you get that from?

[Seol]

I do believe this is Day 5 instead of Day 6.

That'll teach me to trust the mod. *points at thread subject*

[Seol]

All right, you asked for a claim, I'll give it to you. I'm the stubborn bastard that never unvotes. I suppose I've got no way to prove this apart from the fact that I've never unvoted. I made a stupid mistake day 1 when I threw in a random vote before I remembered my restriction, but I never unvoted. If I try to avoid this by going through the day without voting, I'll appear guilty to investigation the following night.

What happens if you try to unvote/revote? Because this does seem pretty convenient, but if it's proveable, then so much the better.

As for the so-called "scum tell", I'm hardly the first townie speculating about setup (I think I remember vikingfan talking about scum distribution early on in this game as well). If I'd said "Now that we have 1 mafia and 1 SK left...", that would be a clear tell, but I was only saying I find it probable that there's 1 mafia left. That's a guess I think anyone could make, but I suppose it's possible that we started with 5 mafias.

The tell could be your assumption that there's an SK - we've got a kill type which could be SK or a second Mafia, but have no evidence of which - or could be your convenient forgetting of the existence of IS (OK, we don't know what he is, but we know he's anti-town somehow).

I have other information that leads me to doubt Wacky's claim

But you're still voting me?

FOS: Vesuvan, bigger FOS: Wacky

Seconded. Ves, if you're gonna say things like that, be prepared to elaborate. This isn't the first time you've dropped hints like this. If you have reason to believe Wacky's a liar, is there any reason we shouldn't be going for him over Astro?

[Seol]

]The tell could be your assumption that there's an SK - we've got a kill type which could be SK or a second Mafia, but have no evidence of which - or could be your convenient forgetting of the existence of IS (OK, we don't know what he is, but we know he's anti-town somehow).

I haven't forgotten the existence of IS, I was assuming he was our SK.

We already know he's not responsible for the modkills (he was activated n2, we had a modkill n1).

[Seol]

Actually, that's not the only "tell" I'm referring to.

Then again,

we've probably got only two scum left

, so if people feel they can afford to lose a pro-town lurker, all I can say to my defense is that I'll be more active now that most of my other games will probably be over in a matter of days.

There's two elements of tell to that comment, the implied knowledge about the setup and the "relax, we're low on scum so we can drop our guard" message - I was responding to Astro's rephrasing of that comment to "one scum and an SK". In fact, his rephrase-to-weasel-out is a bit of a tell too.

I have other information that leads me to doubt Wacky's claim

But you're still voting me?

FOS: Vesuvan, bigger FOS: Wacky

Seconded. Ves, if you're gonna say things like that, be prepared to elaborate. This isn't the first time you've dropped hints like this. If you have reason to believe Wacky's a liar, is there any reason we shouldn't be going for him over Astro?

The info isn't a certainty, just a reason to doubt him, and given that you're evidently pro-town I think you might agree that at this point in the game is the wrong time for "power roles" to roleclaim.

My point isn't that you should claim, it's that you shouldn't bring information like that up if you're not prepared to substantiate it. Obviously, if it's insufficient to justify a vote, we can't act on it... so, why mention it?

It's more a general irritation at an aspect of your tendency to dangle information, which is true outside Mafia too, and also a request to know how seriously we should take the allegation (because if there is something semi-solid on Wacky, he might be a better lynch today) - obviously it's neither irrelevant or conclusive, and your response seems to imply it's somewhat less significant than Astro's recent behaviour.

[Seol]

Ves - I'll argue this out with you later, I think we disagree on a couple of points but I'd rather expend my energies on finding scum than scoring points on Mafia theory. What I will say is that it has seemed to have the desired response - I'm getting that rabbit-in-the-headlights vibe

strong

from vikingfan.

unvote, vote: vikingfan

[Seol]

Yes. I thought my vote was the fifth, after this:

Vote: VikingFan

. That's 3/6

Obligatory

FOS: Wacky

for the misrepresentation there, but I'd have placed the last vote if I'd known it was that - well, certainly after that claim, anyway.

[Seol]

Time to explain my reason for suspecting Wacky: I have essentially the same ability as he claimed, though I have a drawback to my ability, and as far as I can tell he doesn't.

Huh. Recent experiences would lead me to believe that a "counter"-claim of an un-nightkillable role, albeit one with a drawback where the originally claimed one doesn't have one, is not necessarily a good reason to suspect the original claimant. Maybe I'm a little close to this issue at the moment, though...

This game has some already-observed doubling-up of roles too - for example, one cop who had to fill conditions to get a proper investigation result, and one unrestricted cop, which makes the basis weaker in this example than the other one. I wouldn't say your revelation either supports or undermines Wacky's claim at all, really - his claim still fits.

[Seol]

I never said anything about being right about scum, I'm just always right (vague wishy-washy post restriction) - or no vest for me.

Elaborate, please. "Wishy-washy" post restrictions are really difficult to design in an unambiguous manner, so as a matter of course, I view them with skepticism.

I'm going to

Vote: Astronaut

. His claim seems to double up on mine too much (stubborness ~= always riteness), and the modkill part is differs and stuff.

Oh, come on. Stubbornness = not unvoting, "always riteness" = wishy-washy-what-exactly? There isn't a great deal of overlap beyond a vague element of flavour about the role. Looks to me more like you're trying to shift wagons.

[Seol]

That *is* the mechanical side of that restriction.

Can we get a first vote on Wacky please?

OK.

vote: Wacky

That's, um, not a mechanic.

[Seol]

Think there's one less kill last night
Think I've hinted that the modkiller group might have targeted me (someone did) It's plausible that it might have been a one-shot vigilante or some other non-mafia role)
Think that people with bulletproof vests are generally told if they've been shot while wearing them (esp. since most are one shot). I.e. inevitably someone's going to say "hey, maybe you're mafia and you just targeted Vesuvan last night! (which wouldn't have made sense because him being dead = even more incriminating than the whole "maybe" thing Vesuvan said)

Let's make this crystal clear. You were targetted last night?

I think it's unlikely that's why we're missing a kill - after all, you were unconfirmed, claimed as having no investigative powers and the only outted un-nightkillable, and fairly high up the list in terms of frontrunner for a lynch. I don't like outguessing the scum, but to say you seem like an unlikely nightkill target is putting it mildly. So, I'd venture to say that if you were targetted, it was by a pro-town role. A vig taking a shot at you, for example, would make perfect sense about now.

If someone did target Wacky last night, it's probably worth their claiming, as it lends considerable support to his claim. An unkillable townie is a huge asset right now.

Also, I'd really like an elaboration on how "being right" can be a restriction. What exactly does that mean, and how does it work?

[Seol]

Addendum - I take it that you're also saying you weren't targetted prior to last night, is that also correct?

[Seol]

Unless I've been drastically misinterpreting my role, it means that I'm not going to admit being wrong.

Well, at least that's quantifiable, but I don't think that's the same as "always being right", and your orginal cited corroborating behaviour:

which was why I think I made it clear that I only voted for Emptyger based on the new evidence, and that staying out of it earlier is completely and utterly correct

doesn't seem to relate to your restriction at all. Also, re misinterpreting - you had a restriction you describe as "wishy-washy", and you didn't clarify with the mod?

[Seol]

Obviously not voting Emptyger initially was not a mistake. Neither was voting for him later.

But it's not about making/not making mistakes, you just said - it's about admitting being wrong. What about your pushing the Kaoticity wagon day 2, or your rant about IS on day 3? Nobody can "be right" all the time, which is why it's a nonsensical restriction. Not admitting you're wrong, that's fair enough - but your original citation of behaviour to back up your claim has nothing to do with your current explanation of the nature of your restriction. That's an inconsistency, and one which makes me doubt that you're telling the truth.

I don't really get why you are stressing this post restriction thing. I think I've already explained this enough times to bore the other people in the room to death.

No, you haven't - you've been incredibly vague about it for quite a while. Now you've provided a slightly more concrete form of it, it doesn't, to my mind, entirely fit with what we've seen from you so far.

[Seol]

unvote

to enable Ves' ability. I will revote once Ves has voted.

[Seol]

I don't think that's even possible. Let's take a look at the things that you've labelled as "misdirection":

- Whether IS is the modkiller - we haven't heard anything about that, AND if you look at all of the information in this game, we have a Comod so far, but no "Mod" role - that theory continues to fit and fit quite well.

You think we might have a "Mod Mafia" of "IS" and "Comod"? I suspect our "Comod" was a serial killer, with the "Mod" being Pie (who was lynched in pregame), but I wouldn't eliminate a "Comod Mafia" - however, there's a whole host of problems with the theory that IS is in it.

- Yesterday's vote count. Not only do I frequently count votes correctly (there was a comment about this in Dichtomafia, and most of the games I've modded), the guy that was lynched was MAFIA. Yes, it makes perfect sense (/sarcasm) to do something suspicious to get your own side lynched.

He was Mafia, was he?

Vikinfan- Comod, Lynched day 5

He was scum, yes, but not Mafia. Our Mafia have been

called

Mafia. Misdirection much?

- An ill defined post-restriction for a claim - you're suggesting that all of the post-restrictions in this game will be well defined. That's a very dangerous assumption in a game called "Worst Game Ever" with a role that's called Ridiculously Complicated Role that nobody really likes but the mod uses, anyways, already

Well, we don't know how it works, but that's already a reflection that Pie thinks ridiculously complicated roles are bad - just because this game is themed around badly-designed games doesn't mean he's going to hand out badly-designed roles. Besides, it's not so much that the restriciton was ill-defined any more as that your now-claimed elaboration doesn't seem to fit the evidence that well (plus the fact that getting you to elaborate was like pulling teeth).

[Seol]

I think Wacky is not scum. If you look at voting patterns, Wacky is cleared.

I wouldn't go so far as to say he's cleared (scum

have

been known to vote for each other to keep the scent off), but the voting patterns do certainly seem to support Wacky. On the other hand, I don't believe him about his claim, and he's been saying a lot of other things that make no sense.

That's why I have a strong suspicion he's scum, just not affiliated with any of our dead scum to date. My suspicion is that Wacky's IS. His "theories" about IS, which simply don't tally with the game as we've seen it so far, support this hypothesis.

I have to say, seeing posts like:

*blinks*

Unvote: Astronaut, Vote: Dranko

, for a fun diversion or something.

at a point where Wacky's effectively on 3 (Vesuvan was waiting for an unvote to put his vote on, I was waiting for Vesuvan's vote to revote) does make me think he's pushing alternatives for, well, the sake of alternatives.

Then again:

That said, I'd rather go for Dranko, who only showed up after a long time when I voted for him. And hasn't said much since.

I think Dranko is a better lynch then Wacky or anyone else.

Trust me.

The "pop in to say 'Hi!' in response to a lurker prod" tell is pretty good, it has to be said. Basically, I'd be happy voting either, although I still think Wacky's a better lynch. If we're going to go Dranko, though, we have to go through the rigmarole of the unvote, Ves-places-vote, re-vote, so I'm not going to switch my vote until/unless Ves does.

And now my keyboard's run out of commas.

[Seol]

Oh, yeah, I'm not currently voting Wacky.

vote: Wacky

should sort that one out.

[Seol]

The "pop in to say 'Hi!' in response to a lurker prod" tell is pretty good, it has to be said. Basically, I'd be happy voting either, although I still think Wacky's a better lynch. If we're going to go Dranko, though, we have to go through the rigmarole of the unvote, Ves-places-vote, re-vote, so I'm not going to switch my vote until/unless Ves does.

Cmon man, your a better player than that. That isn't a tell, it's called being busy. Or in another word, lazy.

Not posting is being busy/lazy. Not posting except for just after you've been voted is an "oshit, I'd better try to look like I'm here!". Same with just popping in after someone's made an attack on you.

[Seol]

Sorry about the triple post, it's just that some of what's been said border on outright lies.

The "pop in to say 'Hi!' in response to a lurker prod" tell is pretty good, it has to be said. Basically, I'd be happy voting either, although I still think Wacky's a better lynch. If we're going to go Dranko, though, we have to go through the rigmarole of the unvote, Ves-places-vote, re-vote, so I'm not going to switch my vote until/unless Ves does.

Cmon man, your a better player than that. That isn't a tell, it's called being busy. Or in another word, lazy.

Not posting is being busy/lazy. Not posting except for just after you've been voted is an "oshit, I'd better try to look like I'm here!". Same with just popping in after someone's made an attack on you.

Isn't not bothering to change votes unless Ves does because voting is too hard, well, lazy? Gee whiz.

I'm not "not bothering" to change my vote - I like my vote on you. Lemme see... ah -

Basically, I'd be happy voting either,

although I still think Wacky's a better lynch

. If we're going to go Dranko, though, we have to go through the rigmarole of the unvote, Ves-places-vote, re-vote, so I'm not going to switch my vote until/unless Ves does.

As for not changing unless Ves does, there's the whole matter of his ability. Unnightkillable confirmed innocents are somewhat useful in the lategame, I hear.

I have to say, seeing posts like:

*blinks*

Unvote: Astronaut, Vote: Dranko

, for a fun diversion or something.

at a point where Wacky's effectively on 3 (Vesuvan was waiting for an unvote to put his vote on, I was waiting for Vesuvan's vote to revote) does make me think he's pushing alternatives for, well, the sake of alternatives.

Actually, I'm voting because of such posts as

Just lynch Dranko.

There were quite a few of those and I wonder whether there's something more to them.

I thought that too, briefly. Then I noticed this:

Okay, Dranko20. Well,

I ruled you out as scum

, because I thought you were gone from the boards and thus couldn't have made the kill. But you are around. So, you lurked.

Which kinda undermines that argument - he wouldn't be saying that if he had info on Dranko.

[If there isn't I'm going to go with the Astronaut is scum "Alternative". Remember how I already said that someone else is always a better lynch than you? I know I'm town, so of course I'm going to have to find an alternative, because being lynched is a pretty bad thing.]

Which is a fair argument from your perspective. Astro is also on my list of "most scummy".

At this moment in time there's absolutely no evidence to suggest any other scum group (2 kills per night, no cultist deaths, no weird flying pumpkins flying around), so Seol's argument that I'm IS and unrelated to any other scum group is, well, BS.

My argument is basically that we have good reason to suggest IS is not connected with either the OMG PWNings or the modkills. I've gone over all that before. Therefore, if IS is in the game (and the mod basically told us he is), he's separate. What he is, I don't know - but you keep citing him, and trying to convince us he's something he can't be. That's why I think something's fishy there.

[Seol]

Reply to Seol: The thing is, a separate IS... makes little sense, due to lack of nightkills (SK), cult deaths (cult), or lyncher-wins-the-game (ZONEACE dead), or anything remotely anti-town that isn't connected with OMGPWNS or modkills. That's why I tried to figure out some other alternatives which you for some reason reject as making no sense. Seeing how your model makes no sense, that... makes no sense.

But then, a modkilling IS makes no sense, because we had a modkill before IS was "able to wreak havoc on the town", and a n00b mafia IS makes no sense unless our "Mafia" of noobs (which don't fit with IS at all, but I'll concede that's a pure flavour argument) can't kill until "IS" had found a specific member of the town - well, that's not a Mafia, and that trigger would be for more than just IS (it'd be for the whole Mafia), so that doesn't fit either.

For what it's worth, I can't think of much that fits with a separate IS, just I'd eliminated him being associated with our already-observed scum.

[Seol]

Again, Seol and I do not always think alike (oh my is that an understatement). Kindly don't assume that his position is my position.

I do not think your voting patterns confirm you as a townie, and as you might recall I was ready to lynch you over your voting patterns on day 3 (if I have the day number wrong, my apologies).

Basically,

he disagrees with me, so he thinks I'm scum

regardless of whether there are any other scum groups.

Um... you might want to explain the italicised bit. I got the argument on why Seol thinks you're not mafia and I disagree with it. I don't get where he "thinks you're scum because he disagrees with you".

Let me just clarify my position on this.

I wouldn't go so far as to say he's cleared (scum have been known to vote for each other to keep the scent off), but the voting patterns do certainly seem to support Wacky. On the other hand, I don't believe him about his claim, and he's been saying a lot of other things that make no sense.

I definitely don't think he's cleared on a basis of voting patterns, and for that matter I'm suspicious of Kerplunk for pushing that argument so hard.

Yes, I think the evidence tends to support him on that count - but it's kinda difficult to get this far into the game as a reasonably vocal poster without being able to find some evidence that supports you. I'm more concerned about his behaviour. I don't know what

kind

of scum you are, I'm just sure that you're scum.

[Seol]

Oh and "Basically, he disagrees with me, so he thinks I'm scum regardless of whether there are any other scum groups." is referring to how he repeatedly dismisses how my theory about how IS would have to be part of an existing group (newbie, modkiller) as being complete nonsense while touting his theory of how IS is definitely a third scum group.

I've given my reasons why I think IS can't be associated with the noobs or modkillers. If you could explain where I'm going wrong with them, that would be helpful. I'll be honest, I am extremely confused as to what IS could be (Vesuvan's postulations - that IS could be an obscure role that AFAIK he invented, or that IS was a straight-out fabrication on the part of the mod - don't seem that much more likely or helpful than, for example, a lucky cult leader, although IS as an Anarchist - basically an SK without a nightkill, but other random bonuses, or in other words someone who wins via everyone else getting lynched - does make some degree of flavour sense).

You want to know my position on IS? The mod told us he's out there. The mod told us he's bad for the town. He can't (as far as i can see) be associated with the modkillers or noobs. What conclusion do you expect me to draw?

Yes, I think the evidence tends to support him on that count - but it's kinda difficult to get this far into the game as a reasonably vocal poster without being able to find some evidence that supports you. I'm more concerned about his behaviour. I don't know what kind of scum you are, I'm just sure that you're scum.

Vote patterns are a key aspect of the game of mafia. You're also wrong on the behaviour count as well. What you call "misdirection" when it comes to my theory of IS is actually trying to present an alternative scenario to your "IS is a third scum group" theory, which is dangerous and dubious.

The thing is, I've explained in detail what's wrong with those alternative scenarios, and until you can address those reasons, your "presenting alternatives" is bullshit.

I don't know what kind of scum you are, I'm just sure that you're scum.

I think I've explained this many times. It is simply VERY unlikely that I am newbie mafia given those vote patterns. It is simply VERY unlikely that I am some other group other than the newbie mafia. If you just do this by a process of elimination, "sure Wacky is scum" times "sure Wacky can't be any of the scum types" equals "Wacky is moderately suspicious" or something like that (I'm referring to probabilities here)

Indeed. I'm not denying there are arguments in your favour. What I'm saying (and this is different to what Ves is saying - we frequently disagree, but that's usually because he's wrong ) is that

despite those arguments in your favour, I still think you're the best lynch

.

Finally, what happened on Day 3 (I'm assuming it's "Argument over IS, part 1") is exactly what is happening today - I propose a theory as discussion. Seol says it's nonsense (IS is a third killing group!)

I did

not

say killing group. I

have

said scum, but that's not the same thing. Day 3, all I said was IS wasn't a modkiller - and what you were proposing then

was

nonsense - but then again, it wasn't immediately obvious that it was nonsense, so saying it then is one thing. Continuing to say it after I've told you why it's nonsense is another thing altogether.

So Seol: Write a summary of what aspects of my "behaviour" you find soooo suspicious.

Will do, tonight. I'm supposed to be working now...

>__>

[Seol]

I've given my reasons why I think IS can't be associated with the noobs or modkillers. If you could explain where I'm going wrong with them, that would be helpful. I'll be honest, I am extremely confused as to what IS could be.

Well, I think the reason why we're arguing over this is that... you've been explaining why IS can't be associated with noobs or modkillers. I've been explaining why IS can't be separate. Both are IMO compelling cases, but in each case "can't be" is really "unlikely to be", to varying degrees. I mean, it's possible that IS can be an SK, only he or she forgot to send in choices for the last 5 or 6 nights or whatever.

No, I've stated logistical reasons why IS

can't

be the modkiller unless Pie is lying to us, and why IS

can't

be a noob unless Pie is lying to us

or

using a very unusual variation on how the "Mafia" operates and cripples them in the process (to the extent that I wouldn't call a Mafia that can't kill until a certain player's been located a Mafia - or in other words, if he's using that variation he's being highly misleading in calling them a Mafia).

So, basically, either IS isn't a modkiller or an OMG PWNer, or Pie is lying to us (and if Pie is lying to us,

all bets are off

). As Sherlock Holmes said, once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

If there's an error in this reasoning, please point it out. If there isn't, we should be done here. I know you're saying you can't admit you're wrong, but that doesn't mean I'm going to let you say stuff (that looks totally wrong to me) and go unchallenged, especially on the basis of a posting restriction that I think is bullshit.

I personally don't feel that IS is separate, because it's conceivable that IS might modkill (he modkilled ZONEACE in Penthouse Mafia) and when you recently mentioned it, it's also conceivable that IS might be with the noobs as a sort of godfather or something (A relative new player thought IS was a noob a while back, or something like that happened.).

Flavourfully, sure - on the modkillers, anyway, I think the n00b point is stretching it (you're basically citing a situation that's notable because they got it

so wrong

as support for your flavour) but I wouldn't eliminate that possibility on flavour grounds. My main arguments aren't flavourful, though, and never have been - they're why IS can't logistically be either. Have you been reading my arguments? Not that you should answer this if it means admitting you're wrong... huh, this is a convenient restriction for scum to claim, isn't it?

You suspected me of being IS because I repeatedly insisted that IS can be part of newbie mafia, and I wondered whether you were newbie mafia because you insisted that IS was separate.

And I was using the exact reverse logic - you were repeatedly insisting IS was part of the n00bs, which is impossible, and I was thinking that could mean you were IS because you were trying to lull us into a false sense of security (i.e. there is no third threat). Your "I'm not a n00b therefore I'm not scum" logic (paraphrased, obv) reinforced that theory.

As for the rest... I don't have a theory about what IS actually is that I think is

hugely

compelling, although I don't see why IS as a cultist is so unlikely from the observed evidence - IS was only activated night 2, so recruitment would only have started night 3, meaning that there would be one cultist out there night 4, two on night 5, and three last night (in addition to IS). I haven't crunched the odds, but it doesn't seem

that

unlikely that we wouldn't have a dead cultist yet under those circumstances.

Whilst it occurs to me, it's worth pointing out that if we do find an IS cult leader, we'll have to consider that our confirmed innocents may have had their alignments change since they were investigated, but that's an issue to consider later (if at all).

[Seol]

As Sherlock Holmes said, once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

That's fiction. Mafia, like real life, is "open". Generally after eliminating the impossible, you still have quite a whole lot of options left.

That's true - all I was saying was that I'd eliminated certain options, and you were saying "but these other ones are really improbable". In that situation, the other options being improbable doesn't affect the likelihood of the impossibles being true, and my argument has always been "this is what IS isn't", not "this is what IS is". There's always the option of things we haven't thought of yet or things that haven't been seen before.

How about (and this is just off the top of my head) IS is a traitor type role, who joins the newbie mafia when ZONEACE dies. Other people can probably come up with more things which fits the observed data.

Possible, although I don't think it fits that well with Pie's statement (which certainly heavily implies a new threat) and I've never seen mafia traitors joining the mafia being announced in-thread - it doesn't fit particularly (it's improbable!), but it's possible.

[Seol]

OK, I've been putting off writing this up because it's just too damn frustrating to go over again and again.

I'll start with your list.

Option: Lynch Wacky
Arguments in favour:
- Kaoticity lynch

Try "aggressive instigator and heavy pusher of the Kaoticity bandwagon" to summarise my feelings on that one.

- Vikingfan vote count (but he was scum)

Gonna stop you there with the "but he was scum" comment. That only mitigates the offence if you were scum

with vikingfan

. I've already called you on that one.

- Odd role claim

More like highly inconsistent and a likely lie - specifically, on the point of your role restriction. There was much discussion of your role day 3 when you claimed, and Vesuvan even said:

Next up, we have Wacky's claim. There is something about his claim that to put it bluntly doesn't sound right to me.

He seems to be hinting at some kind of restriction with his votes, requiring him to always be "right", but his voting pattern does not bear this out

. Then there's the point of being immune to nightkill. I've tried to figure this bit out, and given his willingness to be shot at tonight, I don't think it's one-shot and given his voting patterns, the restriciton I first assumed seems to be incorrect.

I am not willing to believe that a townie role that is immune to nightkills with no restrictions upon that ability exists in this game.

That was on day 3. It wasn't until Ves came out with his own role info and said:

Time to explain my reason for suspecting Wacky: I have essentially the same ability as he claimed, though I have a drawback to my ability, and as far as I can tell he doesn't.

that you said:

I never said anything about being right about scum, I'm just always right (vague wishy-washy post restriction) - or no vest for me.

Firstly, why didn't you clarify when it was asked after you'd already claimed instead of when you had it used as a basis for suspecting you? Secondly:

Unless I've been drastically misinterpreting my role, it means that I'm not going to admit being wrong.

What about that is "wishy-washy"?

Thirdly, why was it like pulling teeth to get the details out of you?

Fourthly -

I'm always right (which was why I think I made it clear that I only voted for Emptyger based on the new evidence, and that staying out of it earlier is completely and utterly correct)

That was your original support for the "always being right" assertion. What's that got to do with not admitting you're wrong?

This is the principal argument against you from where I stand. You're lying about your role, you stalled to try and come up with something that fits, it doesn't fit the evidence out there. LAL. That's why I'm saying things like:

I don't know what kind of scum you are, I'm just sure that you're scum.

- Might be IS

That's not a reason to lynch you, it's just a reason why "Wacky can't be a n00b" doesn't mean "Wacky can't be scum". I'd also question "Wacky can't be a n00b".

- Conveniently, 1 away from lynch! That saves time and stuff.

Why are you one away from lynch? Oh yeah, because four people have voted for you! Why have they voted for you? Maybe because....

you're scummy?

Well, if you can be fatuous, so can I.

Arguments against
- Vote pattern does not suggest newbie mafia

An indicator in your favour, yes. Not conclusive, but a point in your favour.

- Vote pattern suggests that if alive, will help find scum

If you're not scum, you're useful... fair enough. But I'm pretty sure you are scum, and that doesn't really change my mind.

- Seol, Vesuvan believe that modkillers are eliminated
- If true, then that would require Wacky to be IS and IS is some separate anti-town role. We don't have any real evidence that there is a third scum group.

We've argued that one back and forth plenty now. I still don't agree with you.

- By that I mean that if a person can only belong to a particular scum group, the restriction reduces the probability that someone is scum overall.

This depends on the basis for our reasoning against you. If you've lied about your role, even if we knew you weren't a n00b, that knowledge doesn't make you any less scum.

- Claim if true is very useful to town

If we can trust you

. I'm sure you don't need reminding that un-nightkillability is quite a common scum perk.

- Claim if true will be confirmed-ish the next day, if there is a vigilante or other kill.

If there is a vigilante, why hasn't he stepped forward? That's the other part of your claim that doesn't totally add up - you're saying that somebody tried to kill you last night. I don't buy it - you don't make sense as a scum target, but by inferring we've got more killers out there, you make yourself more valuable to the town.

I

was

logged in as Seol there. Bloody PC!

[Seol]

Dranko? Play nice, please.

[Seol]

If we're doing a mass-claim, we should do it with some sort of order. The standard I've usually seen is last to claim nominates the next to claim - either that, or someone should be nominated to come up with an order, but just chipping in when we feel like it is probably not the best approach.

Any objections/alternatives to last to claim nominates?

[Seol]

im a townie

True. Who's next?

[Seol]

OK, seems like any claim order issues have gone right out the window here. I'm also a vanilla townie.

That just leaves Sineish and roland to claim.

[Seol]

do it!

Well, they've hardly been around much.

Pie

, I believe we need some

prods

.

[Seol]

OK, that's two days in a row I've seen roland online and he hasn't posted.

Pie

, did you prod him? If so, we might need a replacement.

[Seol]

Okay, I've done a full look over the posts by Roland and no he hasn't claimed. He was "cleared" by InHim's investigation, and since we don't have a mafia godfather as of yet that's about the only way he could be scum.

However, looking over Roland's posts, he's said virtually nothing whatsoever since day 1. He has had 2 posts go beyond 1 line, none go beyond one sentence and only one contain any content (claiming that Dranko is a townie with some degree of notably unspoken conviction).

Can someone put the first vote on Roland please? If he's the mafia godfather, Dranko's scum too and we can get this game over and done with.

I'm not in love with this plan. Roland's got a reputation for being a savage lurker (so the lurking doesn't necessarily mean anything), and there's more than one possible reason why he might have defended Dranko. I know the game's slowed to an unbearable crawl, but that if you cite is still a big if and to lynch Roland before getting his claim would be a rash play. We've been waiting long enough, we can afford to wait a little longer.

He may well be a good lynch once we've got the claim in, though.

Pie

, any progress? I can't see where in the Queue thread you posted to ask for a replacement (hint, hint).

[Seol]

Can someone put the first vote on Roland please? If he's the mafia godfather, Dranko's scum too and we can get this game over and done with.

Wasn't I cleared by some sort of cop?

i think i was.

You were cleared by Roland.

[Seol]

Can someone put the first vote on Roland please?

I would if I could. (Well, techically, I could, but I can't unvote him if his claim is believable...)

This game needs to get rolling again.

Definitely, but lynching Roland before the claim is not the way to do it. If I thought lurker pressure would make a blind bit of difference, I'd put the first vote on, but quite frankly, I don't.

[Seol]

Just to clarify I'm not suggesting we lynch him before he or his replacement claims.

In that case, I agree with you.

[Seol]

if someone cleared you wouldnt you probably want them to see another day?

So you knew he had cleared you before he claimed to know you're a townie?

Interesting.

Huh? Where does that come from? I can't see Dranko even

referencing

Roland prior to Roland's support of Dranko.

[Seol]

RotN has basically admitted RotW was lying when he defended Dranko. Why aren't we lynching him instead? In fact... what do we have on Dranko apart from RotW having defended him?

Aren't we doing this all arse-about-face?

[Seol]

I am not saying that RotW was lying. All I am saying is that I don't know why he defended Dranko.

Let's just say

I know he's a townie

, so stop harassing him.

If Roland wasn't lying, how did he know? If you're a townie, how could he have known?

If I was mafia, how dumb would I have to be to have admitted that? I could have easily made some claim that would have given some reason for that defense and I would have been cleared of suspicion. Of course, I could just be saying that to get you to believe me.

I'm not sure anything short of an information role would have explained it, and trying to fake-claim an information role at this stage of the game would be really dangerous. Plus, this is all a WIFOM, and you know it.

The reason I say we should lynch Dranko, is that I have been confirmed by a cop.

Yes, but there is good reason to suspect there's a Mafia Godfather out there somewhere (specifically, all our dead noobs are noob mafia goons, not just noob mafia - that implies there are non-goon mafia, which implies Godfather), so that doesn't prove your innocence.

If you lynch me, and discover that I am not scum, you will still have no reason to believe Dranko.

Nor would we have a good reason to disbelieve him - we don't really have a compelling reason to suspect Dranko without the connection between you two.

If, however, you lynch Dranko, and he's not scum, you have no reason to disbelieve me.

We wouldn't have a reason to believe you, but we would have a reason to disbelieve you: Either Roland lied when he said he knew Dranko was a townie, or you lied in your roleclaim. Unless, that is, I'm missing something.

[Seol]

What you're missing is the reason I would have lied. Why would Roland, if he were the godfather, have claimed to have information about a townie?

Maybe he was protecting his scum partner? Maybe he wanted to make sure Wacky died that day? Maybe he wanted to use Dranko's innocence to further clear him at a later date? Maybe he had a specific clever roleclaiming plan? All speculation, though - with the first option being the most likely.

However, can you give me a reason why Roland would have lied about knowing Dranko's role

if he was a townie?

I can't think of one. Can anyone?

If you are just interested in lynching someone because they lied, you can lynch me,

Lynch All Liars is a very strong and well-known principle. Roland knows that, too - he's an experienced player - so he wouldn't just lie as a townie. I would most definitely be interested in using that as a reason for a lynch, especially at this point in the game.

but keep in mind that it wasn't me who lied, it was Roland.

So? You're both the same role. As far as I'm concerned, you're the same player.

Sometimes replacements can undermine the reason for suspicion, if it's based on playstyle or excessive lurking or whatever. Not when someone's been caught lying about role information, though.

I don't know that he lied, I just don't know why he said what he said. My best guess is that he knew there where townies left in the game, and that was what he was trying to confirm, but I don't know.

Roland said he knew

Dranko

was a townie. You say you're a townie, and therefore have no way of knowing Dranko was a townie. Therefore, either Roland couldn't have known what he was saying he knew- and was therefore lying - or you're lying about your role now.

I have been confirmed by the cop: if I was mafia, I would have to be the godfather.

Yes. So? Wacky was trying this one yesterday - "I'm not this sort of scum, therefore I'm a bad lynch" (paraphrased). We'd caught him in what looked like a lie, so had reason to believe he was scum, even if he "couldn't be n00b". Well, he wasn't a n00b, but he was scum.

So you can't be a goon. You're still scum. You've

admitted

that Roland lied, and you are Roland.

Dranko is also suspicious based on his voting history. I am less suspicious based on Roland's votes for Thok on day 3.

At the height of the bandwagon, yes. It's not unusual for scum to vote for themselves occasionally. Voting histories are not nearly as compelling a reason for a lynch as someone being caught in a lie.

Wacky tried that one yesterday too.

At this point, Ves is the only reason I am not voting for you.

[Seol]

I'm really not sure what to make of the nightkill. I was convinced going into night that Astro and RotN were scum together, and Astro lynched Dranko to avoid talking about RotN any longer. RotN waking up dead shoots that theory out of the water, as does RotN being town.

If there are two noobs, we are now on lynch-or-lose, and two noobs is quite feasible at this point, although by no means guaranteed.

My suspicions are, to be nice and to the point, Sineish and Astro, with Astro being the more suspicious of the two. This is principally based on the Emptyger lynch day 1.

Everybody apart from Sineish and Astro didn't just vote for Emptyger, they cited reasoning why they were voting Emptyger and they voted him early (not technically true of myself - I didn't actually participat in the lynch, as Blackberry beat me to the vote, but I was also heavily aggressive towards Emptyger) - which is not typical behaviour between two Mafioso, to put it mildly.

Sineish and Astro, however, didn't vote Emptyger at all. They both have excuses (Sineish was Jadesmar at that point, who was lurking to the point of never posting at all, and Astro's "role", which I don't believe for various reasons), but the fact is everyone else has that piece of evidence in their favour.

One important thing to note:

Not counting Thok, who admitted being scum, the only votes against n00b mafia members have been from Dranko, Kerplunk, Seol, Vesuvan and WindSlicer, all of whom were voting EmpTyger on day 1. Since this was a more or less uncontended (at the time of the last day one bandwagon, none of the other players had more than two votes), quasi-random bandwagon, I'm not sure we should put much weight behind this. For the record: WindSlicer was #6 on the bandwagon, Kerplunk #7, Vesuvan #8, Dranko #10 and Seol #12. I wouldn't be shocked to find scum among these.

Those numbers are wrong. Vesuvan was #2, Kerplunk #3, and Windslicer (then Nanook) was #4. If it was a quasi-random bandwagon,

they're the people who made it a bandwagon

.

Plus, re: Astro, as I said earlier, I don't believe his claim. We have seen vote-restricted roles in the game, but the restrictions are role-activator restrictions, not strict liability obey-or-be-modkilled restrictions. We have no strict liability roles at all, for that matter. The role is a convenient claim to cover for lurking behaviour in the early game and not being on the Emptyger lynch, and is not supported reading Astro's early posts, beyond the fact he didn't revote. If he did have that ability and was pro-town, I would expect some hints to be dropped about the restriction early, especially when he goes straight into a random vote at the start of day 1. No such indication exists.

Process of elimination says -

vote: Astronaut

, with the intention to vote Sineish tomorrow.

[Seol]

After Seol's post #683, RoTN is the last person I'd nightkill if I were scum.

After my post #683, why did you vote Dranko for the lynch without even referencing the arguments I'd made?

You're right. Can't understand how I managed to mess up those numbers so badly, must have skipped a page or something. Sorry. (And if you think that knowingly giving false info on votes is something I'd do as scum, you're wrong).

I wasn't pointing that out principally because of the misrepresentation - and I'm sure you don't need me to point out that your "I wouldn't do that" argument is a WIFOM, but for future reference you can't always trust votecounts to be listed in the order the votes were placed (some mods do, some mods don't), that's where you got the order - but to highlight how the positions at which the votes were placed supports the townie credentials of Ves, Kerplunk and Windslicer.

Also, you didn't even reference my comments about why I don't believe your claim - and that, in combination with the way the day 1 bandwagon supports everyone apart from you and Sineish, were the reasons I'm voting you. So, you didn't really address my reasons for voting you.

After Seol's post #683, RoTN is the last person I'd nightkill if I were scum.

Yes, and given that eliminating RotN makes you the most obvious lynch, that's why I'm doubtful of you being scum.

One of two things is the case here - either I'm missing something, or you're using CrapLogic to defend a very likely scum.

If Astro is town, the scum don't have any particular reason to want to lynch him over any other townie - what they want to achieve is the lynch of an innocent. Could you please explain to me how, if Astro's a townie and the scum kill RotN as opposed to someone who isn't Astro or RotN, we're

more

likely to lynch an innocent? I would have thought that if both were alive today, it would be practically inevitable that one or the other would be lynched.

The reason Astro is the most obvious lynch is because there are a number of separate indicators that he is our most likely scum. At this point, I'd need something a bit more solid than paranoia (either something which exonerates Astro, This argument is a gambit, and one which you are assisting to perpetuate. Unless I'm missing something, of course, which is perfectly possible.

Of course, it certainly doesn't clear you unless you're trying to pull a WIFOM gambit.

I presume you meant "in case", rather than "unless", here?

One thing which may be worth considering is that if Astro is telling the truth, he has an inbuilt suicide mechanism, and we already know modkills don't end the day. What this means is that if we do decide to lynch him, he could then vote twice and allow us to effectively have a second lynch.

I think this is preferable to no-lynch, in that we end up losing who I consider our scummiest person rather than allowing the scum to pick and choose (and have the option of killing Vesuvan, as well).

[Seol]

Reading over my previous post, I think I missed out part of my chain of reasoning. The argument that RotN's being nightkilled indicates that Astro isn't scum is

superficially

compelling, but falls down under investigation.

There are two questions here - firstly, could it make sense that Astro would nightkill RotN, and secondly, if Astro

isn't

scum, could it make sense for the scum to nightkill RotN?

I can't see any reason in the second instance (the one where Astro isn't scum) for the scum to kill RotN, because Astro and RotN were by far the easiest lynches. It could be used to implicate Astro - but what need is there for that, when the outcome is more reliable leaving both alive and nightkilling someone who's not under such heavy suspicion already?

However, if RotN was alive today, the situation is slightly different. There were arguments against RotN independent of the Dranko connection, but whether or not that would end up more compelling than an Astro lynch once Dranko came up as town is debatable. However, if there is some reason to support Astro - such as the argument Ves is making - then that could be enough to keep Astro in the clear for one more day. If there are two scum left, one more day is all that's required.

Now, that's a pretty convoluted strategy, but nonetheless as I see it there's a thought process which explains the nightkill if Astro is scum,

but not the reverse

. It's tenuous, and I wouldn't say it's a particularly strong reason to suspect Astro - but it is, at least, enough to disregard the kill as suggesting Astro isn't scum.

[Seol]

If Astro is town, the scum don't have any particular reason to want to lynch him over any other townie - what they want to achieve is the lynch of an innocent. Could you please explain to me how, if Astro's a townie and the scum kill RotN as opposed to someone who isn't Astro or RotN, we're more likely to lynch an innocent?

In case you haven't noticed, I'm top of several people's list of scumminess, more so than RotN. Scum wouldn't dream of nightkilling me.

What does that have to do with the quoted section?

[Seol]

Pie

, we need a prod for Windslicer, please.

[Seol]

In other news, we don't have to wait for Windslicer to show up in order to say stuff. In particular, I would really like feedback on the Astro suicide "double-lynch" backup plan, especially from Astro.

[Seol]

Hey, reporting in, sorry for the delay - I just kept putting it off.

I think it is kind of odd that they would choose to off ROTN when he was pretty high on the suspect list, but that makes me think that Astronaut isn't mafia. I can't see how if Astro is mafia why he would even risk night-killing the one person that might be a little scummier than him, especially this far into the game.

But why would anyone

else

night-kill Astro? The situation was looking like a clear choice between RotN and Astro going into today. Why would anyone want to eliminate a likely pro-town lynch candidate?

Again we see the RotN nightkill being used as a basis of reasoning to look away from Astro.

That's a reason why Astro might have made the kill

.

I also think that there is a godfather still out, so those of you who are just taking the non-guilty verdict ones into account may want to rethink a bit. I'm not sure why but Seol is looking a little guilty to me, just because he is trying to push a lynch (I believe that Seol was found innocent, but I remember someone was double-confirmed, was it him? Anyways..)

Yes, I have been found innocent by two separate investigators, but then if I were Godfather I'd appear innocent to both anyway, so that doesn't prove me innocent any more than the existing result proves Vesuvan innocent. I'm pretty much convinced there's a Godfather out there (because the existing dead noobs have been described as "goons").

When I believe I'm right, such as I do now (and did yesterday, and the day before) I will push my views very strongly until someone gives me a reason to rethink. Right now,

Astro is the right lynch

. My opinion on this has only been reinforced by his behaviour today.

And he's pretty much not even entertaining the idea about the night kill not being against Astro, which kind of makes me suspicious,

This I don't understand. The night kill

wasn't

against Astro, it was against RotN. If you meant it doesn't support Astro, I draw your attention to my earlier arguments. It's entirely possible I haven't considered all possibilities, but if you have a problem with my arguments, please tell me where I'm going wrong.

because if the mafia killed ROTN (and Astro isn't a mafia) then they would probably go for the Astro lynch at this time.

The only reason I can see for the Mafia to go for an Astro lynch over anyone else is that he's a hell of a lot more suspicious-looking, so he's an easier lynch. If the Mafia wanted an easy town lynch today, and Astro's pro-town, why would they eliminate the other option (RotN)? He doesn't have any power in his role, so he's therefore less of a threat to the Mafia than pretty much anyone else.

[Seol]

. No lynch is the right play today, and you of all should know why.

I don't like repeating myself, but it seems to be necessary: With two scum, we could lynch now with 1/3 chance of making the correct lynch, then no lynch and lynch with 1/3 chance of getting it right. Alternatively, we could no lynch, then lynch with 1/5 chance of hitting scum and then 1/3 chance.

With different numbers, the point is the same if we've only got one scum left. Bottom line: Since we will have to no lynch sooner or later, we should do so now to benefit from it straight away.

vote: no lynch

Those numbers are assuming that each person is equally likely to be lynched, and equally likely to be scum. That's not the situation here. The situation here is that you're about to be lynched. You acknowledge that here -

Oh well, so you guys think I'm scummy. What else is new? I see that there's little chance of me talking myself out of a lynch, but why on earth aren't we holding off the lynch until the odds have improved?

If we're going to lynch you anyway,

what odds are being improved?

That logic applies in crapshoot situations, not in situations where there's one front runner for the lynch already. Or, to put it another way, a mislynch tomorrow is no better than a mislynch today, so why should we sacrifice a townie? I'd say that the no-lynch reasoniing is a naive oversimplification, but for this:

As for the suicide plan, that ain't gonna happen. Why would I kill myself and worsen the odds for town? I'm sure there are situations where this could be beneficial (i.e. my innocense would incriminate someone else), but this is not one of them. Alive scummy pro-town > Dead confirmed pro-town.

And here you really shoot yourself in the foot - the arguments in favour of no-lynch are also arguments in favour of your suiciding. In the case where you're the townie, if we no-lynch then we wake up with one less townie of the scum's choice, but if we suicide we get to lynch as if we'd just no-lynched and gone to night, but we get to choose for the scum to kill you, our most scummy-looking person. So, you're quite happy to spin it one way for the no-lynch, but then "don't realise" the equivalence (which I've already pointed out!) when it comes to suiciding and spin it the other way.

From your perspective, suicide should be the right play too, because it's looking like if you're going to get lynched today anyway. If there are two Mafia, and you're town, then a mislynch is game for the Mafia. By suiciding and giving us effectively two lynches, you would still be in the game.

But, of course, you can't, because you're scum and you don't have the restriction you claimed to have.

[Seol]

If we're going to lynch you anyway, what odds are being improved?

Just because you decided three days ago that I am to be lynched, that doesn't mean that the rest of town agree.

Huh? Where does that "three days ago" come from? If you don't think you're a good lynch, then maybe it would be an idea to respond to my arguments against you?

If I'm being lynched tomorrow it probably doesn't matter if we wait one day, but that's no reason not to play by the book. I'm looking for an over-night miracle, there might be pro-town power roles at work that you and I don't know of. Or maybe you do know of them, you just don't want to give them time to act because you're the godfather. Either way, we know the mafia are capable of one kill each night, but we don't know what town are capable of. Yes, I know we did the mass claim, but there are times when it is beneficial for a pro-town not to reveal his abilities.

Oh right - so it's

not

a theoretical argument about the odds (the "by-the-book" play, which I've already said I don't think applies here), like you've been arguing before, it's a vague hope for an unclaimed power-role that we have no evidence exists?

Or, to put it another way, a mislynch tomorrow is no better than a mislynch today.

You're acting like a mislynch today is better than a mislynch tomorrow.

No, I'm saying there's no difference. Therefore, if lynching you is going to be a mislynch, I'd much rather we were talking about you than no-lynch right now, because as far as I'm concerned, the really pressing issue is lynching correctly, not when we do it. I would however say that I can't see any reason to think we'd learn anything relevant to the correctness of lynching you overnight if we no-lynched.

If you hold off the lynch until tomorrow, you'll at least know that you played it correctly. If I were scum, I'd have no reason to delay my lynch any further, especially if I had a scum buddy I'd risk compromising.

I don't think it

is

the correct play, though, and that's a WIFOM argument, again.

From your perspective, suicide should be the right play too, because it's looking like if you're going to get lynched today anyway.

Why don't we have a look at things from my perspective? I kill myself, you lose a pro-towner and have to do a new lynch with no new info. I don't kill myself, we go into night (possibly gaining new info) and then we do the lynch.

We do have new info - we know that you're innocent. That's as much new info as we're likely to get overnight, except that it's likely we'll find out somebody like Vesuvan, who's much

less

under scrutiny, is innocent. Finding out you're innocent is much more useful than finding out anyone else is innocent. Furthermore, we don't waste a lynch on you.

The argument for your suicide is only in the case where you're going to be lynched anyway, but that is looking incredibly likely at the moment. You die either way, however if there

are

two Mafia, and you

are

town, your suiciding is the

only way you can win

(assuming there isn't a hidden role which can save us ).

The only circumstance in which no-lynching is superior to your suiciding for the town is if

you

are a power-role. If that's what you're hinting towards here, quite frankly, I don't buy it.

Now, if you wanted to try and persuade me you're

not

the correct lynch, if you want to actually look at the arguments against you, then I'm all for that. It just looks to me like you're conceding you are the correct lynch, but are trying to put it off until tomorrow.

Also,

Pie

, could you please prod Windslicer and Sineish? I've seen Sineish online at least three times over the weekend, I don't know whether he's forgotten about the topic, doesn't have anything to add, or is just plain lurking, but we need to hear from both of them.

[Seol]

I don't have much time right now, so I'll just say that I think you're right Seol, that an Astronaut suicide would seem to be the optimal play. I'll review again tonight when I get home.

Yep, except that if he's scum he'll obviously never do it (and is probably incapable of it anyway), and therefore never acknowledge it as an optimal strategy.

[Seol]

Just because you decided three days ago that I am to be lynched, that doesn't mean that the rest of town agree.

Huh? Where does that "three days ago" come from?

Well, how about:

When I believe I'm right, such as I do now (and did yesterday, and the day before) I will push my views very strongly until someone gives me a reason to rethink. Right now, Astro is the right lynch.

Ah, sorry, I always read "day" as "game day". Yes, three days ago I was sure you were the right lynch, and I'm still sure, but that's my opinion. Let me point out that you have three votes (one off lynch) a fourth person is suggesting you suicide, and the only other remaining player is probably your scum-buddy. The rest of the town seems to agree to a fair extent, actually.

If you don't think you're a good lynch, then maybe it would be an idea to respond to my arguments against you?

And what are your arguments? A) I'm scummy, B) I have a questionable voting pattern and C) I don't want to suicide? As I've been telling you for the last couple of days, there's not much to do about A) and B),

So let me get this right - your official position on those is you have nothing to say in your defence? I thought that was what you were saying, but I wanted to make sure I had it right.

as for C), I think I explained that in my last post.

Why don't we have a look at things from my perspective? I kill myself, you lose a pro-towner and have to do a new lynch with no new info. I don't kill myself, we go into night (possibly gaining new info) and then we do the lynch.

I've already elaborated on this, but I'll repeat myself in a nice concise manner. All of this is assuming you are town, and there are two Mafia left, as if there's just one Mafia left the situation is strictly better for the town:

You kill yourself, we lose a pro-towner and have to do a new lynch with the only additional info being that you are indeed a townie. However, as you're dead, that lynch can't be you, so it stands a chance of hitting scum.

We lynch you, we lose a pro-towner and are 3 town to 2 Mafia and lose.

We no-lynch, we lose a pro-towner and have to do a new lynch with the only additional info being the scum's nightkill choice (see later on for my thoughts on the possibility of there being any more useful information). The next day we lynch you and lose.

Currently you have three votes. Half the town - including

both

cop-cleared players remaining - think you're scum. It's not hyperbole to say you're on the verge of being lynched, especially as you don't seem to be able to defend yourself or even suggest a good alternative lynch. Hell, by voting no-lynch you've put yourself in a position where you

can't

argue for an alternative lynch.

Furthermore - and this is a new argument that's only just come to light, we do get useful information from your suicide. You were on three votes, and both Sineish and Windslicer posted after you. If we had two Mafia, and either of them had voted then, that would have won them the game. Therefore, if you're town, that either clears both Sineish and Windslicer or there's only one Mafia left, which is actually really useful information. Therefore, we both get better information and we eliminate an almost inevitable game-losing mislynch if you suicide.

But, of course, you can't and won't.

If I'm being lynched tomorrow it probably doesn't matter if we wait one day, but that's no reason not to play by the book. I'm looking for an over-night miracle, there might be pro-town power roles at work that you and I don't know of. Or maybe you do know of them, you just don't want to give them time to act because you're the godfather. Either way, we know the mafia are capable of one kill each night, but we don't know what town are capable of. Yes, I know we did the mass claim, but there are times when it is beneficial for a pro-town not to reveal his abilities.

Oh right - so it's not a theoretical argument about the odds (the "by-the-book" play, which I've already said I don't think applies here), like you've been arguing before, it's a vague hope for an unclaimed power-role that we have no evidence exists?

It's both the theoretical argument about the odds(the "by-the-book" play, which I'd like to hear why you think doesn't apply here),

Because those numbers are contrived to the point of being useless - they refer to a theoretical situation where everyone is looking equally suspicious, which doesn't reflect the current situation. If everyone did stand a 1/6 chance of being lynched, and we had no information on which to base that lynch, you'd be 100% correct. However, what information we have indicts you, and I can't think of anything that could happen overnight that would change my mind about you being the correct lynch. If you're the correct lynch, then there's no reason to no-lynch now.

I could just as easily argue that, if we no-lynch and there are two Mafia left, it would only take one townie voting for another townie to lose the game whereas at the moment it would take two townies to vote for another townie to lose the game, therefore we're in a safer position lynching today. I think that argument is actually slightly less fatuous, but it's still not a good argument.

and it's the vague hope of an unclaimed power role.

The only circumstance in which no-lynching is superior to your suiciding for the town is if you are a power-role. If that's what you're hinting towards here, quite frankly, I don't buy it.

Bah, how obvious does one have to be... I'm no power role, I made an honest claim. But in case you didn't notice, we had no nightkill on night seven. Which means they targetted Vesuvan, or there is a power role out there. I know which one I find more plausible.

I'd completely forgotten about that. However, I don't think it makes any difference - one of the following is true:

1) Something prevented the kill at its source (eg roleblocker, redirector who redirected to Vesuvan).
2) Something prevented the kill at its target (eg doctor, self-protect [this includes the Mafia having targeted Ves] - and I agree that in this situation it is correct for the role to not claim their ability).
3) There was no kill attempt to prevent - there was a deliberate no-kill.

Let's assume one of the first two is true. Two things could happen at night - another kill could be prevented, or the kill could go through.

What if the kill is prevented - what does that tell us? It only helps us in one case - case number 1, where the roleblocker/redirector/whatever proves who's scum (which has been used successfully behind a lynch once already this game, on Thok). If that was the case, then that's our explanation for the night 7 missing kill too... in which case why wouldn't the blocker have told us already, yesterday, netting us a scum? On that basis, I think we can discount case number 1.

In case 2, all we have is a no-lynch night with no kills, which puts us back where we are now, other than the knowledge that either there is a doc or a self-protecting role in the game, or the scum skipped their kill again. That information doesn't help us with our lynch. If that's the miracle you're hoping for, all it amounts to is effectively being as if we didn't no-lynch in the first place.

If the kill goes through, though, the situation is no different to the one with no hidden role, so we revert to standard no-lynch arguments. Even if there is a power-role out there (based on the night 7 no-death), it's not the sort of role that would help us in a no-lynch situation.

[Seol]

I think I've heard pretty much all I need to hear, I'm just waiting for Astro to suicide now.

I don't think that's going to happen. He was online, posted elsewhere, and logged off without posting here over an hour ago. Time to finish him, I think.

[Seol]

[Seol]

Yes, but you're saying that because you're his Mafia buddy, aren't you?

We're lynching either today or tomorrow anyway. If we lynch town (and two Mafia remain) we lose either way.

If we no-lynch, the only information we gain is who the Mafia nightkill, which is laced with WIFOM, but we lose a pro-town voter.

There are multiple arguments against Astro, which he has stated he has no defence against. He has an out which could save the game were he town, which he has opted not to use.

We have nothing to gain by no-lynching, either. I repeat - Sub-Zero, do your thing!

[Seol]

HOT DAMN!

It simply didn't occur to me there could be three noobs left - far more likely there was just one idiot out there. Plus, if three n00bs remained, then I couldn't win - the best I could do is a draw, and chances are I'd be attracting a shot next night anyway. Lurking FTW, really.

What I want to know is why RolandoftheWhite said that he knew that Dranko was a townie.

Mod PM reference.

[Seol]

of the 5 n00bs 3 had to be replaced, how fitting.

Of the SIX noobs, you mean.

And what's really frustrating was that if Kerplunk hadn't unvoted, the noobs weren't guaranteed a win. It could have ended up a noob-me draw, I think. Furthermore, Kerplunk

shouldn't

have voted no-lynch. Why did you do that, Kerplunk?

Town was screwed by that point, though. And six noobs was probably too many...

[Seol]

I'm still thinking like town... :/

On the nonscum lynches:

Kaoticity was nonsense - OK, there were scum pushing the wagon, but LML pushing the angle as cop and then hinting towards that as his reason for doing so was bullshit (and the logic he provided was bullshit too).

spork was a lurkerwagon, which is inevitable at some point in the game - but it did allow us to trade one-for-one with scum, which is normally good math.

I'm pissed at Dranko/Roland - if it wasn't for that reference to the townie PM, then the whole Dranko/RotN thing wouldn't have happened day 7 (which would have meant we'd have gotten Astro that day). Of the two, RotN was clearly the correct lynch.... but Roland shouldn't have put him in that position. I lay the blame for that lynch squarely on Roland's shoulders.

No-lynch day 8 was wrong, pure and simple - the reasons being cited may have been conventional wisdom, but in a situation where Astro was clearly the correct lynch, the correct thing to do is lynch him - but with three scum out there, the only way town could win was to pile the votes on Astro quick and stall to deadline, then do the same every subsequent day... by that point, the scum had won (they were probably a little confused as to why day 8 dawned at all).

Lesson to learn - even when I'm scum, what I'm arguing for is right for the town. Every time.

Apart from the time I said that the vikingfan tell was insignificant (which it was) and provided the justification for the "comod" being a lone SK, of course. But you'd have been much better off trusting me than

Astro

. 8)