Best of the Internet Mafia: Over!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

vote: sotty7

real post coming up later

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Fritzler - O RLY Owl (Cop) - Had his ears blown up and his brains leaked out

I haven't quite finished reading through the thread, but I couldn't help noticing that the killing MO seems to fit LP's claim of Bubb Rubb.

unvote, vote: LostProphet

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Come on people, even the lynchee is convinced it's the best lynch.

And if you're still unsure, ask yourself a simple question: What would Space Jesus do? I think we all know the answer to that question.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Do you know what it's even funnier? The random Dinosaur Comics Generator.

But seriously just vote for LostProphet already.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think your lynch was and is inevitable, so not really. You're just helping us speed up a slow day 1.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well it doesn't seem scummy to me. But anyway let's wait for day 2 to come around before going around accusing people, okay?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Now that W!nt3r has explained his reasoning, I can't help wonder what the real motives of mikeburnfire are if you look at this post:

No Smilax, that post seems scummy to me as well.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

The eye-melting may have been commited by the Tubgirl. Then the dagger cross probably belongs to the I feel sorry for you mafia.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Probably another member of the OMG WTF mafia.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

My guess would be that it was an inventor-type role. He seems to have made a kill, so a couple of one-shot powers could well fit him.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Heat

or

cold(or caustic agents).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

It's not necessary a healing procedure. It's just the sealing of wounds. If you use, say, a samurai sword heated to a 1000 degrees, you could cut someone in pieces while the heat would seal up the wounds.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

He never claimed to have one.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think it was simply a Night 1 chopping up combined with cauterization and now I think about it, I think it's a lightsabre that did it.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

vote: Adele

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think Hezlucky has some sort of restriction. I see little reason to pursue it.

vote: Adele

whoop! didn't see you there, sorry. Why's that then?

Role-fishing in post 520 and failure to capitalize the parts of my username in post 521.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Also the spelling of cauterization with an s in post 504 and giving an incorrect definition of cauterization.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

That does not make the reason any less valid.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Everything I've done has had a good reason. Believe you me. It's all part of the plan.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Meh, I meant post 503. So what?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

That explanation seems to fit, so I'll

unvote

, but my vote will return if you don't respond to my comment on Hezlucky and explain why you're still voting for him.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

vote Cogito Ergo Sum for his ridiculous voting people because of spelling mistakes

That was not my only reason and I have unvoted in the meantime. As such, I feel you are misrepresenting me to some degree and I'll

vote: elvis_knits

.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I gave four reasons, not just the one. Stop misrepresenting me!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

She's saying why she's voting Hez, part of which is because she thinks he's implying a claim, but not actually claiming. That's her reason. There's no other way to say it than to bring up role-claiming.

But if Hezlucky, he undoubtably has a claim prepared. As such Adele's pressure is pointless. If Hezlucky is town however, him claiming will help the scum narrow down the options. In the meantime Adele has added to her reasons(Hezlucky's lack of contribution), but at that time I have to say it was scummy.

Reason 2: Failure to capitalize your name

THAT'S THE STUPIST REASON EVER.

It's slightly insulting, that's all.

Reason 3: Spelling Cauterization wrong

Spelling mistakes are not a reason to vote someone.

Just based on a spelling mistake I wouldn't vote for someone. But including it in my reasons did lead to an interesting response.

Reason 4: Giving incorrect definition of Cauterization

The link redirected to the correct definition, so what's your problem?

The correct definition is the sealing of wounds with heat, cold or caustic agent, she however did not include the last two possibilities due to the nature of the article. She looked upon cauterization as purely a medical procedure.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I voted you yesterday anyway.

No, you didn't. You voted for CA and lostprophet.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You are trying to start a bandwagon with utterly terrible reasoning.

No, I was not trying to start a bandwagon. It was just one vote.

1: There are times when you have to talk about roles. Example: when someone is CLEARLY acting as if they have a posting restriction. I don't want to let someone go the entire game with no suspicion because of an odd way of posting. You can't talk about restrictions without mentioning role, or at the very least some even which caused the restriction.

HezLucky either has a posting restriction or is scum faking it. Either way I see little possible gain for the town in pursuing it. Now HezLucky's lack of contribution( and its possible connection to the restriction) does deserve further questioning, but Adele didn't bring that up in the original post.

As for the other three reasons, they weren't truly serious. I had a reason for including them and I feel that, to a certain extent, it paid off.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Unless I'm very much mistaken, he's not dead, it was a joke.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

YARR RLY!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well it was inspired by a joke post by VisMaior and his role wasn't revealed.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

If you weren't trying to bring up an issue that could lead to a bandwagon, why'd you even bother saying anything, let alone voting?

Why did I bother saying anything? I didn't. I just voted. Why did I vote? I have already given my reasons. Now I don't see how that post could possibly have started a bandwagon.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

If someone votes something and provides a list of reasons to vote for that person, that's encouraging people to vote for them as far as I'm concerned(A.K.A. starting a potential bandwagon). The fact that he then defended his position to multiple people implies that it's a positition that he's willing to defend.

I gave the reasons why

I

voted for Adele rather than reasons to vote for Adele, an important distinction.

Saying that he 'was not trying to start a bandwagon' doesn't prove anything, as it could be just a case of 'Oh well, no one's joined in, better brush it off.'

If you can look back at those posts and objectively state that it might have lead to a bandwagon, then I don't wanna know what you're smoking.

The only logical reason I can imagine CES made his position for: was to see who else would join in, or turn it around. I would expect gambits like this day 1 perhaps, but by this time in the game I'd expect players to avoid them on the grounds that there are plenty of things to go on already.

It's all part of the bigger scheme. Also, nothing was happening and it's only day 2.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

It is only day 2, but day 1 lasted for aaaaages. Plenty of stuff to sift through there.

Why do you think I chose Adele to vote?

Objectively, yes I can. Misleading the town is a pretty serious thing as far as mafia games go, implying that the wrong cauterization definition (or not entirely complete definition) was misleading implies that there was a reason to mislead. Hence, something to hide, no?

The definition thing is hardly important. As it seems, it was the heat part that was relevant anyway. I certainly didn't call it misleading, precisely because there was no reason to mislead.

Role-fishing and potential deception via incorrect definitions is something relevent to the whole town. If I seriously think someone's trying to out some power roles, I'm going to make that point to the whole town.

There were reasons you voted Adele, but the role-fishing/definition reasons are more general reasons pertaining to the motives behind her actions. Seriously, I've seen games where people have been lynched for less than this.

The role-fishing only came up after I voted for her. If she had done it earlier, then I actually may not have voted for her.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Vote: Mikeburnfire

for 1.) lurking and 2.) post 453, which he still hasn't explained.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

It can be a scum tell, but in context I'd say it definitely wasn't, because he really did try to get CA lynched and he didn't just FoS him, he's still trying to get CA lynched, CA was not going to be lynched at that point and there was a decent case against LP, who was in a position to be lynched.

I'm not entirely convinced, but at least you've given a reason.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think it's more important that he has partially claimed and if he is scum, it will become apparent. Going after CA is not today's play.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

He said he had a power role and could confirm himself by day 4 at the latest.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

What is the play?

Someone(not me) re-reads and finds scum. We then proceed to lynching said person. Or we just lynch lurkerscum. I'm up for either.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

(

vote: )rolandofthewhite

?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

He could be, but so what?

Lynch all Lurkers

We need to get this game going and active. Lynching him will help us regardless of his alignment.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'd say he's unlikely to be a pro-town player, as that probably would have led to the mod replacing him. Although the same logic could be applied to the SK and the cult recruiter, I'd still say this would make him somewhat more likely to be scum.

And we don't have a read on him, we have no behaviour to analyze. I don't think he's the only one who could use a replacement, so let's help the mod and help ourselves. Suffer not the lurker to live.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

P.S. CES, as always you seem a bit too eager to try and save your own skin...

Pfft, you guys got nothing on me. I'm not taking you seriously.

With our amount of lurkers, we simply need to move on, we can't have all of them replaced. Suffer not the lurker to live!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

No, you're both wrong. It's "Suffer not the lurkers to live!".

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'll try and summarize the most important parts for you:

Rolandofthewhite hasn't posted and needs to die.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Because we're lynching rolandofthewhite anyway. It's much more useful to replace someone who isn't going to die immediately. Also it probably means rolandofthewhite isn't a power role.

Or the mod just hates rolandofthewhite and wants him to die.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

But is our only real reason for lynching roland that he's not been around? Because that's not the "character"s fault, if you get what I mean - it might not be related to the in-game character, and a replacement might change our minds.

It's circular logic to say that unless character "x" posts more he'll be lynched for lurking but it's not worth bringing a new player in for character "x" because he'll get lynched anyway, if you follow.

We would perhaps have more reasons, but it's kind of hard to find scummy actions or posts if he never posts. We don't have anything on him. If he's scum, he has no day 1 actions that might betray him later on. I'm still going to advocate his lynch if he gets replaced.

More importantly Glork can replace into the game without being forced into a defense or to contribute an exceptional deal immediately. He gets the chance to integrate himself into the game. If rolandofthewhite gets replaced, the replacement would be under pressure immediately. That's never fun. I agree with the mod that it's better to replace the others first. And the best way to help our diligent mod: lynch rolandofthewhite. That's all I ask and expect of the town.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Could someone point out where HezLucky actually lies. He never claimed to have a posting restriction.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Yes, but he admitted to it. He gave a reason for it. The use of the word "lie" in this case is not a technicality, it's spin. It's misrepresentation even.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

If we lynch Roland we get no information for tomorrow, so what do we do then?

We don't magically get no information, because he was lurking. We still get his alignment and his role and we'll be able to look back at this day with a more informed view. More importantly we have no information on roland. If we don't lynch him, what then? Are we just going to let him survive til the endgame because he never does anything scummy?

Lynch another lurker?

One of the reasons for going after a lurker is giving the mod to chance to replace some people and give the mod less people to replace.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I like replacements better than I like lurker lynches.

So do we all. It's not practical though with our amount of lurkers.

In other news, I've read through about 9 pages... I've been bogged down with RL stuff (2 midterm exams coming up this week), and I've just not had the time to dedicate to catching up properly. I'll be back with more, sooner or later....

You have the time to catch up. Someone replacing roland would immediately be thrust into a difficult situation.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Mostly the latter. But we also don't have any information on rolandofthewhite. Nothing incriminating or clearing. Nothing which might betray him as scum.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Now even I want a claim from HezLucky. Why do people keep on trying to derail the rolandwagon?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

unvote, vote: HezLucky

if he wants it so badly.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

He has suggested he wants to be voted for(not lynched though).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

unvote, vote: HezLucky

for being incredibly vague and making self-contradicting statements.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

A word of caution: I think we have around 11 votes on HezLucky.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Woohoo! Modkills are fun!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'll Unvote Hezlucky - strictly on the understanding this is to help guard against an "accidental"/speed-lynch.

Yeah, certainly not because you're afraid of abilities HezLucky might have.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

And saying something like "DO NOT PLACE ANY MORE VOTES ON HEZLUCKY" wouldn't have been more practical.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Why does it matter to you?

I want to find scum.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Why hasn't HezLucky claimed yet?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

:goodposting:

unvote

, I agree with the vig plan. I'll take a deeper look at DGB soon, so I can see for myself whether you have in fact caught scum.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

When I said FBI, I meant something more along the lines of psychiatist, you know, the classic search and destroy role.

Now I'm wary again. According to the wiki, the psychiatrist compliments the psychopath, a serial killer.

As I read it, Blue wasn't an actual psychiatrist, but a role with similar mechanics.

Anyway DGb's last few posts have convinced me.

vote: DrippingGoofball

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I have yet to see a reason why HezLucky's claim would be false.

Yes, I read the entire analysis. It was decent. That's not the reason I'm voting for you however, these last posts are grasping at straws, making ridiculous allegations.

As I see it, you haven't given any real reason why HezLucky would be scum and the motivation for your attack is that he's suspicious of you.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

If you can objectively state that the scum-o-meter should be at 0% percent, then you're just kidding yourself. Until HezLucky called you out, your posts contained little more than fluff and votes.

I admit that HezLucky's analysis of you certainly isn't perfect, but your "refutal" of said analysis is filled with misrepresentation and spin. If you're a townie, you need to learn a bit of self-control. Reacting in such a way to allegations is always going to get you lynched.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Alright, nothing scummy, by your own admission. Therefore it should be obvious to you too, that rating "fluff and votes" a whopping 80% scum has to be preposterous, and there is a plot being cooked up by HezLucky.

A complete lack of content while bandwagonning people IS scummy, quite scummy actually. Not 75% scummy, but still.

Oh yes? WHERE? Point it out. Show it to the people. Yes, let's duel this one out. Let's compare Hezlucky shameless trap and lies, and my perfectly earnest post. Let's. I am up for it.

Sure, I will. I don't have the time to point out the many things wrong with your posts right now though. But, I assure you, you ain't gonna like it.

Easily said when you are not the victim. Are you suggesting it's a good idea to automatically lynch someone who makes a real effort to defend themself?

There's a big difference between defending yourself and attacking your attacker in ridiculous manner.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Of course, you don't have the time. That's because I am correct. Oh, I am going to LOOOooOoOove it. Bring it on. You won't be able to handle the heat.

It's because I'm watching the semi-finals of the Olympic ice hockey tournament.

Because I will be a Townie.

Wow. What a good reason! You've revolutionised mafia playing. We just tell other people who we are![/sarcasm]

As it's between periods, I'll start my analysis.

Not scummy at all. I did agree with Adele's post:

It's absolutely a scum tell to not give any analysis of your own, not to give any input and vote for someone while hiding behind someone else's reasoning. Your action was an example of bandwagonning without contributing.

I never, ever said I'd never heard of a post restriction, this is a GROSS misrepresentation, because I never said anything even ressembling this. Never. This one is nearly LAL-worthy.

He never said or even suggested that you said anything like that. This is a gross misrepresentation.

Completely illogical. Meaningless words all. If he's referring to Adele's reasons to vote, he can't possibly infer that when I agree with her reasoning, I am also claiming to never have heard of a posting restriction.

This is just repitition of what you've already said. Ever heard of the Ad Nauseam fallacy? On top of that you call it "completely illogical" without actually giving reasons for that allegation.

I'll be back later with more.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Rubbish! Rubbish! The Canadians have been eliminated, no one is watching anymore.

I have to have faith in mankind that people will read your post and see right through it.

Pfft. The Canadians were playing crappy anyway. Sweden played a great match.

Let me start with your response as that one is just plain easy:

Read post 837. It's all there. If I repeat it again, I'll be called for more ad nauseum arguments!!! (Oh no!!! Triple exclamation points!!!)

This is not in any way a response to my argument. I correctly point out a fallacy, but all you seem to do is make mocking statements with no content. Post 837 includes no reason whatsoever why HezLucky's statements are illogical.

Wrong! WRONG! WrrrrRRrrRrRroOoOoonGGG! CES was doing an excellent job explaining why voting for someone with a post restriction is stupid? Of course it's stupid, that's not why I voted for HEZ in the first place. To boot, I did not vote for CES for the reason stated by HEZ! Another outright LIE.

The reason stated by Hez? Let me see:

Switches vote to CES Post 623. CES at that point in the game was doing an excellent job explaining why voting for someone with a post restriction is stupid.

I don't see one. HezLucky is saying I was appearing pro-town at the time. Of course you didn't vote for the reason stated by Hez. He didn't state any reason.

I voted CES much later, for reasons stated by JechtMurray in Post 577, who also didn't think that CES was being unreasonable, CES was voting people for spelling errors! Ii removed my vote after I realized sit might be sarcasm.

Isn't that one-sided? Why would a pro-town player vote for someone over one thing and not take everything into account? I was contributing, helping the game along. Because one of my reasons to vote for someone is frivolous, is not a valid reason to vote for me. I'd say this betrays the mindset of a scum. Looking for reasons to vote for someone rather than looking at the overall picture and deciding whether he's scum or not.

Note that HEZ himsel voted for Adele declining to give reasons. Other that the fact that Adele wanted to vote HIM off, there was no reason. Say... if he really did win already, why did he care? Why does he care about not being lynched so much? Why did he bother to vote Adele? Something very wrong here people... pay attention...

This is not an issue. Hez has stated he did it, because he didn't care. This is just grasping at straws.

[quote='DrippingGoofball"]
I had good reasons to vote Hez, and CES. CES looked less scummy, and the game had degenerated into flirting. I voted Roland.
[/quote]
I don't necessarily agree with your actions here, but the thing is you're not really contributing. You just seem to be hop on to every bandwagon.

Not extreme by any standard. His words were a veiled implication. He wanted people to vote for him, I played along, walked innocently into his trap.

HezLucky was talking about a general pattern behaviour. What's your defense? That one time my vote was logical. Straw Man.

And seriously, HezLucky didn't hint being SK. He hinted having some vague role.

The last part of HezLucky's analysis I don't really agree with. Luckily you have more than adequately made up for it with your posts since then.

I'd say there's a prevailing theme through your posts: Ad Nauseam. You keep on repeating the same words and phrases over and over again: "LIES", "GROSS misrepresentation", "plan", "trap", "blatantly lied". Pure propaganda. You've presented hardly any arguments yet you seem to feel completely justified calling people liar repeatedly. You got nothing.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You failed to correctly point out any fallacy whatsoever. The above was a general response to your general accusation of my being "completely illogical." I am telling you that I have already exposed my reasoning. Go read it. You are not paying attention, you have made up your mind, and you refuse to consider all the evidence that is not in favor of your current worldview. The content is there.

I did. Ad Nauseam is a logical fallacy. I've already responded to near all of your reasoning.

Your repeating a flattering quote from Hezlucky, whom you are vehemently supporting with colossal leaps of logic, is noted. Recall that others were miffed at your voting someone off for spelling errors and not capitalizing your alias. You were not doing an "excellent" job you were confusing a lot of people with what turned out to be raw sarcasm.

I completely destroy your argument and this is what I get? Instead of actually responding to my point or even acknowledging it, you just plain attack me.

I re-read this 3 times, and it still makes no sense. If you are voting someone for frivolous reasons, it betrays YOU being scum, not me, duh!

And again you completely fail to address my point. Pro-town players should look at more than just the one action or post.

It is an issue. Don't skirt around it. It is a central issue. Of course he cares. He cares a lot. If he doesn't care, explain his trap, and carefully crafted entrapment. Explain it IF YOU CAN. You cannot. His behaviour grossly contradicts his words.

He has already won. Why wouldn't he joke around and vote for people on ridiculous grounds? It's a perfect chance to mess with our heads.

I did not "jump on every bandwagon." I voted for people that weren't at all being bandwagonned, and I didn't push for a bandwagon. Hezlucky set up a trap, and you are lying through your little nose.

You were quick each time, but you can't deny that you bandwagonned.

Hogwash - because his statements about my so-called general pattern of behavior has no basis in fact. Compost masquerading as a scientific report.

If that's the case, then why didn't you unmask it as such? You're not addressing what I'm saying at all.

Good! Then you are getting the point I am trying to make.

You do realize that Ad Nauseam is not a good thing. Instead of using arguments all you seem to be doing is repeating slander.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think you're misunderstanding Hez' role. As I understand it, he searches for Blue. Once he finds Red, he shoots Red. That's the one bullet.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'm just waiting for you guys to finally lynch DGb.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Yes, she's been acting really scummy, asking questions and all. I can't believe we haven't lynched her yet.[/sarcasm]

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

and the very good points and rational brought up by Sotty and Smilax.

Oh yes, Sotty7 brought up the greatest point and rational. Her gut said you were town. I can't believe Adele didn't address that point. Honestly disappointing.[/sarcasm]

As for Smilax's argument, I still fully believe HezLucky's claim. His behaviour fits no other role.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think it's suspicious you're trying to get him to directly quote the PM...

Why? We do actually prefer HezLucky dead, remember?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

But a modkill wouldn't take the place of a lynch. If HezLucky got modkilled, the only thing it would do is free up the vig(assuming we have one).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I honestly could care less about HezLucky's analysis. That's never played much part in my decision to vote for you. It's the posts since then that have been nothing but scummy.

You're reading stuff in HezLucky's analysis that aren't there. Misrepresenting it and drawing false conclusions. I need to know no more. My vote's where I want it.

And I can assure you that if for some reason you do turn out to be townie, then that isn't going to cast suspicion on either Adele or me.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Unofficial "Why isn't DrippingGoofball lynched yet?" Votecount

DrippingGoofball: 8 (HezLucky, Commodore Amazing, Adele, Mikeburnfire, Cogito Ergo Sum, Aureal, Nightfall, TSAGod)
HezLucky: 1 (armlx)
rolandofthewhite: 3 (elvis_knits, cropcircles, PeaceBringer)
Adele: 1 (DrippingGoofball)

Not voting: Smilax765, PookyTheMagicalBear, Sotty7, Bamboomancer, Coron, ibaesha, kain, rolandofthewhite, stark, Glork

13 to lynch

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I see no reason we should take Hez's considerations to heart right now, especially considering we don't even know if he is who he claims to be. I suggest that we lynch Hez right here and now, and if he does turn out to be "Red," *THEN* (and only then) do we re-examine the DrippingGoofball case.

Because obviously scum want to be vigged. And DrippingGoofball obviously can't be scum if HezLucky isn't who he says he is. Great logic here, Glork.[/sarcasm]

Personally everything Hez has done pretty much fits his claim. And there's no gain to be had for HezLucky by faking it. I see absolutely no reason to doubt HezLucky's claim.

I find this bandwagon rather poorly founded, and I find DGb's defences to be pretty reasonable. That said, I don't like what I've seen from CES or Adele, and I agree that Roland's absence and history warrant serious consideration for lynching.

So what do you say about the continuous Ad Nauseam, DrippingGoofball's continued cries of "nobody's reading/addressing my points" when Adele and I clearly have, her misrepresentation of HezLucky's analysis, her blatant propaganda techniques, her continued cries of "I'm just a townie, I can't defend myself."? I've seen enough scummy acts to lynch her a 100 times over.

And yes, Roland needs to go. There's no reason why that has to be today though.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I see scummy actions on all sides

If this is true, please point out scummy actions made by either Adele or me.

I feel little reason to even take into account Hez. I'm basing my actions off of his analysis and he should be dead by the next day, so unless you've got a great hypothesis, I'm considering Hez a non-issue.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

First of all, I want to address the issue of HezLucky's role and intentions. Red vs. Blue (or Blue vs. Red, whichever it is), as we have already discussed, revolves around the concept that Red exists solely to destroy Blue, and vice versa. It has also been mentioned that this leads to a Psychopath/Psychiatrist relationship. I want to point out a small technicality that it's actually an FBI/Cannibal combination that we're looking at (as Blue's role indicates), but it's something of a moot point. My real point is that, though Hez explicitly claimed on multiple occasions that he is "protown," this is absolutely not true. Whether it's a Psycho/Psychiatrist or FBI/Cannibal role pairing, I can see absolutely no way that both Red and Blue could be "protown" roles. If you take the time to look at the wiki, both Psychopath and Cannibal are explicitly defined as "Serial Killer" roles. Hez is not pro-town. Nevertheless, I am willing to accept that he has completed his objective, and that he is Red.

FBI is merely a description of a role, the classic "seek-and-destroy", there's no reason why it can't be FBI/FBI. Blue and Red do not have bad guys and good guys. Hez can very well be pro-town.

Now I'm going to skip over the part about Hez' analysis, because honestly I don't care about the analysis. I might do something later though.

Since then, I have re-read the thread (though still not as thoroughly as I probably should) and have scoured over everything that has happened up to, including, and since Hez's claim. I can now safely FoS: Commodore Amazing, Adele, Cogito Ergo Sum, and for the sake of posterity and anti-hypocrisy, Glork. From each of these people, I saw little to no individual evaluation. People pretty much said, "Good work, I believe you. Vote: DrippingGoofball." That is not how a good pro-town player should respond to an extensive analysis or a clear and direct implication of a single player. Shortly after Hez's novel, DrippingGoofball accused us of being sheep. I "bleated" in response - my taciturn acknowledgement that much of the town (myself included) had taken Hez's words for granted, and had failed to think for ourselves. In retrsopect, I should have unvoted as well, to make my point clear. I didn't feel that, up to that point, anybody had provided any good supporting/individual thought as to why they would vote DrippingGoofball. I saw thinly veiled attempts to do so, but I still feel that the votes were poorly-founded (or unfounded) bandwagon votes.

The posts DGb made following the analysis are filled with scumminess. That's why I voted for her. Hez' analysis played little part in my reasons and I know the same holds true for other players. I clearly stated so. It was a over-blown reaction which did not fit any townie with strong propaganda elements.

The way I see it, DrippingGoofball is guilty only of failing to express her concerns. An inability to out-logic another player does not equate to being a scumbag. DrippingGoofball could not out-logic Hez. Her responses show a passionate attempt to stay alive - but passion does not imply scumminess. Continuing to attack DG based on these grounds, and by harping on wording and misinterpretations are, as I said, underhanded ways of attacking a player. I strongly feel that both CES and Adele have done this in the recent debate.

DGb has continued to use fallacious logic, misrepresentation and propaganda techniques. Yes, I'm going to attack a player over it.

Oh and vote counts, the most horrible crime one could commit. I see it as nothing other than helping a fellow player. Isn't it better if people know the consequences of their actions and are aware of the situation?

Next, I want to point out the "black and white" argument that Adele and CES seem very bent on. Repeatedly, they have said, "If you want us to lay off of you, then you need to give us a good reason as to why Hez isn't who he claims to be." I don't like this one bit. What you're effectively saying is, "Either I'm going to lynch you because I believe Hez, or I'm going to lynch Hez because I believe you." Very often, scumbags try to paint a situation as having limited options. Hez presented us with numerous potential points of discussion. Yet CES and Adele have both horned in on exactly

one

of these points, and have discretely painted a two-sided situation. That alarms me. What about Armlx and his absence after Hez's analysis? What about Adele? It is ridicoulous that a legitimately open-minded player would immediately jump on one player's analysis and relentlessly pursue his implication against one player, while ignoring every other iota of information that player offered up to the town.

Misrepresentation. DGb was making allegations aimed at HezLucky. We simply stated that if she wanted to be taken seriously in those allegations, she had to come up with an alternate hypothesis which would explain Hez' willingness to be vigged.

Finally, an additional point against Adele. In Hez's post, we should all note that he rated her as the third scummiest player in the game. Yet in the ensuing debate, she immediately jumped on DrippingGoofball instead of making any attempt whatsoever to clear her own name. Adele has foregone any attempts to defend herself in favor of turning up the heat on another player. I believe that she has tried to fly under the radar with regards to Hez's analysis, but blew her cover when she went overboard in attacking DrippingGoofball.

No one cares about Hez' analysis. It's that simple. And a lot of players didn't defend themselves. Why pick out Adele?

Ah, one more thing. At this point, I can't see myself voting for anybody but Hez, Adele, or Roland. Obviously, that sentiment is subject to change, but I'm not willing to join any other lynchwagons for the time being. My vote stays on Hez right now.

Roland's gonna get modkilled. No reason to lynch him.

As Sotty (IIRC) had said, there is the possibility of a "vengeful" role, or one that turns a kill back on the person who attempts it. If this is true and DG is town, Hez is getting a two-for-one on DG and the Vig (which, apparently, we're assuming we have). Do you deny that this is a possibility? That Hez might be a mafiate who decided that a 2-for-1 trade is advantageous for whatever reason? That's y "hypothesis" as to why Hez might be faking the claim altogether.
Blue = Town
Red = Scum, possibly with an additional objective.
Red's primary objective completed, he's now going to take out whoever he can to help his scumbuddies.

So you're saying Hez is Red, a scum that kills back. Not to mention that it's an extremely rare scum power, it has little bearing on DGb's situation. It's effectively still a 1-for-1.

What I want from you, Glork, is to point out concrete scummy actions. I can point out scummy actions made by DrippingGoofball that justify my vote. Can you do the same to justify your suspicions?

And there's no reason not to vig HezLucky. It's just more practical. We need to gain info from our lynches. Scum are never willing to die in this situation.

In conclusion, Glork seems to think we care about Hez' analysis and seems to be blind to the scummy actions of DrippingGoofball.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Uh... no? It has everything to do with DGb's situation. Why? Because this elaborate plan is what started DGb's now-pending lynch. Hez's analysis skyrocketed the vote count and percieved scumminess of a player who, as far as I can tell, had previously gotten little attention. If we lynch DGb today, and our supposedly-existing vig gets killed tonight (and then lynch Hez tomorrow), how is that *NOT* a 2-for-1?

Dude, I don't think anyone(apart from Hez) is voting for DGb over Hez' analysis. DGb got attention, that's never a bad thing, players getting attention. Even if by some strange coincidence Hez is actually scum, then I still think DGb is scum. We know we have multiple scum groups. And may I add that Red doesn't fit either mafia group. We're not sorry for Red, nor is my reaction "OMG WTF?". Hez' alignment has little bearing on DGb's.

It's a 35-player game. That pretty much insures a vig.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

There isn't a pro-town reason. Of course she wasn't asking that, so that doesn't actually matter. She posted a vote count and noticed discrepancies between people's behaviour and where their vote was. Therefore she asked those people why. It seems logical to me.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

No? You don't deny such a fact. Then please, explain to me why you are so insistent upon being vigged tonight or lynched tomorrow, rather than being lynched today. Tell me why there's such a big difference, why it's so vital that we lynch DG (or me, or Armlx, or whomever) TODAY rather than TOMORROW?

He hasn't been insistent. Lynching isn't just killing people. Getting information from people's reactions is just as important. Hez needs to die sooner or later, but I see no rush. Hez simply realizes that vigging him is best for the town. What you're doing, as I see it, is mistaking Hez' insistence on lynching DGb, which I share, with insistence on being vigged, an important difference.

I'm not going to take into account roles(scum that kill back) which are incredibly rare, if it's actually been done before, when we have a perfectly good explanation for Hez' actions.

Separate Note: The thought has occurred to me that perhaps DG is the lady in black - Tex, was it? I forget... and that Red has to get her killed, too. And since he used his bullet on Blue, he needs to get her lynched. Obviously, I don't really have anything to back up such a theory, but I thoguht I'd toss it out there. Thoughts/Comments/Questions?

If this is true, then DGb is scum. So it doesn't matter either way.

Why, Glork, are you so insistent on lynching Hez today? Why not give the vig a chance? Hez' case and DGb's are fairly unconnected(Hez doesn't fit either mafia, so even if he is scum, that's no reason for DGb to be innocent).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

If you read Crola's posts(FBI is just meant to describe the seek-and-destroy mechanism and read the article on Blue vs. Red, I see it as Blue/FBI and Red/FBI. You're surely not suggesting that Red is a cannibal?

One can always think of scum roles that would benefit. A role that wins if he gets vigged, why not? That doesn't mean any of those roles are the least bit likely.

Hez has only been insisting that you be lynched, just like me.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't see how we would be "wasting a lynch" on him. Do you?

Yes, I do. We don't need him dead. We ain't getting information from lynching him. We do get information from lynching you, valuable information.

Now let me take a look at HezLucky. He claimed Red, counterpart to Blue, as a FBI-type role. We have blue, as FBI, therefore Red must logically also be in the game. Looking purely at Blue & Red, does it make sense for one of them to be scum? No, they hate each other, but you don't have good & evil.

Red is in all likelihood in the game and makes most sense as pro-town. Hez was not counterclaimed. Logical conclusion = Hez is Red.

Let's look at the mafias. It appears we have a "I'm sorry for you" and an "OMG WTF?" mafia. Does Red make sense in either of those? No, not one bit. In fact, Red does not make sense as part of any mafia group.

Ok, SKs, he's gonna die, no SK would voluntarily die.

Cult? Again, cultists lose their powers. Hez would not want to die in this situation.

Hez wants DrippingGoofball, just like me. I agree with him. His behaviour makes sense as a person who has already won. He's not putting effort into this game. He's just making remarks, helping the town a bit.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

As I see it, the day has lasted so long there isn't really much of a difference, but I see Goofball as much more likely to be a SK or cult recruiter. And there are more votes on Goof. There's little urgence in killing off Hez.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

...that's what I've suggested. What's to say that Hez won't push back his inevitable death tomorrow? And then push it back again, claiming he has even more valuable information for the town?

So you're saying he's a SK that's counting on there not being a vig and the town having less brains than a potato? Sorry, but I don't buy it.

The information you will get by lynching me will greatly mortify YOU, CES. IF I were to be lynched, and it is a big "if," Yourself, Adele, and quite possibly mikeburnfire are next on the chopping block.

That's an Appeal to Fear firstly and secondly I don't think so, sorry.

And I don't mind elaborating:

Mastermind of Sin - William Hung (I Feel Sorry For You Mafia) - had his eyes melted out and the rest of himself blown to bits Night 2
Inhim - ytmnd.com (Multi-tasker) - was chopped to pieces yet the wounds were cauterized Night 2
Macros - Leeroy Jenkins (Suicide Bomber) - had a dagger cross plunged through his heart triggering his bombs. Killed Night 2
w!nt3r - Cult Recruit - blown up Night 2
bigbenwd - Tubgirl (OMG WTF Mafia) - was killed by a super pissed off person. Killed Night 2

Now can you give me a reason why Red does make sense as part of a mafia group.

And yes, we have a cult. Adele are mikeburnfire could both be cult, but there's little reason to suspect it.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

So besides DGb's argumentless "Red does make sense as part of a mafia group", is noone going to respond to my post 1021, which clearly shows that Hez' actions make absolutely no sense for scum. The only coherent explanation, to me at least, is that he is, in fact, Red.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

he isn't town-aligned as he claims.

He's not really claiming town-aligned, more like neutral.

Town is the good guys, Mafia is evil. Red and blue are neither. They make perfect sense as neutrallish types who care only about the other? They're not meant to be pro-town, really.

I've read the article Adele linked. Why would you feel sorry for characters of a first-person shooter. William Hung and the Star Wars, that's the kind of people you feel sorry for. Not guys with big guns. And I'm not even taking the SK possibility seriously, as Hez does in fact have more brains than a retarded penguin, 'kay?

Hez wants DGb lynched. I do too. Hez is not acting very seriously lately, that makes sense if you look at his role. Why can't Hez be exactly what he claims?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Neither Blue nor Red actually have negative or positive connotations outside the game. Specific win conditions make so much more sense. Blue was not a cop-type role, it was a seek-and-destroy, just like Hez claimed. Same roles, different names. Again, if Hez is a bad guy, then why would he want to die?

Sotty7, if you can't discount the possibility that he's a vengeful role, then I can't discount the possibility that he's a jester or that you're a jester or that DGb is a vengeful role. It just doesn't make any sense.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Those are two I remembered off the top of my head. I can go looking for more if you'd like, Aureal.

I think that, although he is technically pro-town, he is for all intents and purposes neutral. That's the idea of the role as I see it.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

A possibility which only makes sense in a group setting, which I have shown not to make any sense. On top of that, I did address that possibility in your post. I've never seen a vengeful role for scum before, I don't see why someone would put it in a game, I don't see how Red would have that role. It's very easy to think of roles, that doesn't mean they have to be taken into account.

I'm going to stop posting now, because Glork might be a scum role that'll win the game for scum if I do, k?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

And sorry DGb, two roles that are townish yet opposed to each other is perfectly possible.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Feel free to think that. Hez'll be dead soon anyway. I have faith in HezLucky. Of course his play hasn't reasonable, I'd be suspicious if it was.

People can always come up with answers or theories. That doesn't mean I should necessarily take them the least bit seriously. Of course I'm gonna say "I don't believe that" if you're saying that Hez is a SK or a vengeful scum. They're not realistic in the slightest.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

But most unlikely. If you're Town, you won't want to take a chance, and you'll vote to lynch Hez.

No, not most unlikely. I've seen it before. A different win condition is not rare.

I trust Hez. I don't trust you. I'd rather prevent you from possibly killing or recruiting someone.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

DGb, if all Hez really wanted was "one more night", then he could have just not claimed and acted normally. He could have gotten to Night 3 easily.

I believe Hez. I can't help that. I'm not going to lie to avoid being linked.

What the Red vs. Blue thing means, is that neither make sense as scum. Red and Blue as cults make little sense. There are plenty of those type of game. It's not what makes up Red vs. Blue. On top of that, Blue would have to be cult too, which he wasn't.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

They can be removed, yes. Like in MTG mafia that recently concluded. But IIRC it didn't happen in The Simpsons mafia. It depends on the game, I think. And giving people a chance to have some fun seems fair to me.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Yes, I checked, Pooky lived on despite having already won the game.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Hez had 6 votes on him at the time he started his shenanigans. It was by no means certain that he would survive the night.

He started his shenanigans way earlier. He never posted seriously.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Nah, we can still get a majority on DGb. Anyone else would be extremely hard though.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Can you people stop trying to derail the DGb-wagon( and preferably join it)?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Don't bother. She's my mason.

I can't believe nobody has figured that out yet.

Perhaps because we expect masons under great amount of scrutiny to actually claim mason and because multiple people had inexplicable reasons to not go after her.

unvote

And now an important question: Mod-confirmed innocence?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

To clarify my position: I'm still very much suspicious of DrippingGoofball and I'm just waiting for Elvis Knits to give a fuller explanation and for Elvis or DGb to point out the hints they supposedly dropped.

And yes, I actually have a realistic theory which makes this an intelligent scum action.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Just one last question: do your PMs specifically state that you're all innocent (to start off with, at least)?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

My theory was, for clarity's sake, that DGb was the cult leader and elvis a cultist. That would have explained DGb's townie claim and the eventual mason claim. Elvis' defense of W!nt3r on day 1 is too blatant for that to fit. It looks to me like it fits.

I still want to know why DGb didn't claim mason.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Although my last post was badly worded(the "it" was supposed to mean the masonry thing), I've stopped doubting now and I feel DGb needs to be lynched. I found this interesting post by W!nt3r:

haha, no one shall find out who I originaly was... eh it was a fun first day... GL everybody.

adiosssssssss friends.

If he was originally a badger badger badger mason, then this sure doesn't fit. For such a mason claim to make sense, you do kinda need three. Making the dead cultist your third mason makes sense.

The situation deteriorated so rapidly that I knew that claiming Mason would have me and elvis a suspected scum pair or later recruited by a cult. Had wint3r survived the night, had we been three of us still, I might have considered it - maybe. If I was going down, I was going down alone. My decision.

If this were really true, then why didn't you claim Mason without revealing your partner. The same effect, but then without lying. On top of that, the usefulness of masons is supposed to be that they can clear one another and the cult recruiter would know who you were anyway(through w!nt3r).

Yes, elvis, you've irrationally defended w!nt3r day 1. That just doesn't weigh up to what doesn't fit.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I did react to it actually, but I'll repeat my point more fully. Red vs. Blue is a machinima comedy. There is a type of game, in which you recruit people to join your side. That could be the cult, yes. Just because there is such a game that has a Red vs. Blue flavour, doesn't mean that Red vs. Blue make sense as cult. They don't. Because that game's not what Red vs. Blue is.

Duh. First of all, anything I said was labelled as "scummy" - no one was paying attention or giving me the benefit of the doubt from the get-go. I claim Mason, and you think people wouldn't have demanded to know my partner? You would have been the first to ask, CES.

You claimed townie quite early. There are very good reasons why LAL exists. You had no pro-town motivation to lie. You could have refused to out your partner and stated that you'd rather fight this battle on your own.

a cult that might be near winning

It's day 2. We have a maximum of 1 cult recruiter and 1 cultist. The reason your post about a Red vs. Blue cult was mostly ignored, is because it made no sense.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

No, Red vs. Blue has no cult overtones in the same way that the Simpsons have no mug overtones. Yes, there is game with a Red vs. Blue flavour that is cultlike and yes, there is a mug with the Simpsons on it, but that's not what they're about.

And we don't know whether you actually are badger badger badger.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

The strength of masons is that they can clear each other.

I didn't want to sell out my partner to save myself - I anticipated a hostile reception to a Mason claim on account of the sudden and volcanic anti-DGB wagon, as well as skepticism. My prediction was correct. Not only do you want to lynch me with increased vigor, but you are suggesting to take elvis down. Exactly as I foresaw.

If you had originally claimed mason with Elvis_Knits, I would have unvoted. I would have looked elsewhere. The reason for this response is that you blatantly lied to the town repeatedly.

And I'd actually say it would have been a big mistake not to claim. Tbe cult recruited already knew the masons(through W!nt3r). With you dead, he could have recruited Elvis, who would then gain a great deal of credibility. There was no gain to be had by not "selling out your partner".

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

But masons do attract nightkill attention. If she had managed to pull off the townie claim and survive, she could've lasted a long while.

I've said it before, but I think it's useful to repeat it. If she really is (still) a mason, then getting lynched without having claimed would've given the cult a very valuable asset in the form of a confirmed innocent they could recruit.

And the power of masons is the ability to clear each other.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Lynch all Liars indeed. If this game was active enough, she'd be lynched by now.

So good to have you back!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Problem is, with elvis and I out as Masons, we are prime targets for cult recruitement. Had I gone down on my own, elvis would be unknown as a Mason, and thus an unlikely recruit.

You can't even be bothered to stick to the cover story provided by Elvis, aye? Your "masonry" had already been compromised by W!nt3r and thus Elvis would have made an extremely likely recruit. Proven innocent by the death of her buddy.

As it is, the recruiter doesn't have that much incentive to recruit either of you, even if you were telling the truth.

confirm vote: DrippingGoofball

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Can any1 tell me why again the masons would've told us about their masonry being compromised if they were actually cult recruitees?

Well it's still possible that elvis is an actual mason. On top of that, it's badger badger badger, not badger badger.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Anyways, I'm not going to vote until I see a vote count. I'm for lynching DG and that's most likely where I'll put my vote.

I'm too lazy to make a full vote count, so I'll just give you the most important info:
12 DrippingGoofball (HezLucky, Adele, mikeburnfire, Cogito, Aureal, Nightfall, TSAGod, JechtMurray, armlx, Sotty7, Glork, cropcircles)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

We don't even know for certain they're masons.

What we do know, is that she has lied to us repeatedly on flimsy reasoning and that behaviour has been inconsistent with her claim. On top of that, DGb would've been a logical cult recruitment last night. Lynching scum is not dumb.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

So you're completely gonna ignore how I outlined how, if Elvis hadn't claimed for you, you would have given the cult a powerful asset? Predictable.

And why did you continuously emphasize your townieness?

if this is the kind of Town that wants to lynch Masons for sanitary reasons

I'd say this is the kind of town that is willing to look at behaviour and not just at claims.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

As I've explained multiple times already(you evidently don't even bother reading my posts), the cult recruiter already knows who the masons are through W!nt3r. Elvis would have been able to claim mason, confirmed through a dead player, without any problem. As such, the cult recruiter could recruit her without anyone ever having to know that the masonry was compromised.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think you're dead, DGb.

And there's a reason LAL exists. It's a good reason too.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

We'll have plenty more information tomorrow. I'm happy this day finally ended.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't see all that much reason to lynch you, elvis. If DGb comes up a cultist or actually a mason, then I'm not going after you.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I wouldn't lynch anyone over being "potential cult recruits". I will lynch someone over lying repeatedly without reason to the town, over fallacious logic, over making ridiculous accusations, over misrepresentation, etc. That's why I lynched DGb.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think you've made a mistake, but it doesn't matter.

vote: DrippingGoofball

HAMMAH!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Vig please kill CES.

Vig please kill HezLucky. This lynch was justified.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I was just about to unvote too. Oh well.

Twas already a lynch. I just preferred doing it this way.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

That Pooky protected elvis, would fit the facts, certainly the restricted doctor part. And the Flying Spaghetti Monster has nothing to do with the Virgin Mary.

I'm gonna do a re-readish type of thing and try to find us some scum.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Crazy EBAY Scheme seems to be some sort of Inventor-type role. Someone is offered something each night. This particular one, apparently, was a protection item (although I don't see how everyone has come to that conclusion).

Crazy EBAY scheme is a restricted doc, not an inventor. On top of that, he's dead and it was Pooky's role.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Could you, like, give reasons why I need to die(and Adele too, for that matter)? I mean, DrippingGoofball may have been a mason, but that doesn't mean the lynch was the wrong one.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You need to die because you just said that it was a good idea to lynch a pro-town player.

Town wins by lynching scum, not by lynching townies who make a play that you don't like.

If I had been certain she was pro-town, I would not have lynched her. Behaviour > claim. She had a reasonable claim, but her actions were far too scummy. I genuinely believed she was scum. I never said otherwise.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

For me, it was mostly the way you pushed her lynch so ridiculously hard, both before and after the masonclaim. I didn't like it one bit then, and I still don't like it. I want to see both of you dead.

Did you see how much fallacious logic she used? Seriously.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Your logic fails hardcore.

CA was a Cult Leader - meaning that it's highly likely that he was not aligned with either mafia. Thus, he would want to do everything in his power to help out scum. It makes him look better, and threats to his cult are eliminated. Right after Hez's SCUM-O-METER post, he jumped on the wagon immediately. He didn't get off until after the mason claim, IIRC, at which point he attacked the bandwagon... and both Adele and CES.

So what does this say? Well obviously, as cult leader, he liked having potential recruits. He's not going to want to kill masons if he can have a chance to recruit them. I would wager with the utmost of certainty that CA genuinely felt that, after the claim, Adele and CES were scum. It's exactly how I feel as well.

He attacked the wagon after the claim because he wanted us to lynch Mafiates, not his potential recruits.

No, your logic fails hardcore. CA knew they were masons and innocent too. He knew we were wrong about our suspicions. Of course he's gonna go after the bandwagonners. They make much easier targets. A cult leader's first goal is to stay alive, so he can continue to recruit. Lynching mafia is useful too, but it certainly wouldn't be his priority. Nor do I think he took an objective look at the case against DGb, because he knew she was innocent anyway.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Kill Analysis:

Night 1:
Had his ears blown up and his brains leaked out => OMG WTF mafia
Had a cross plunged through his heart => SK
Shot in the head => HezLucky
Night 2:
had his eyes melted out and the rest of himself blown to bits => OMG WTF + Macros
was chopped to pieces yet the wounds were cauterized => IFS4U Mafia
had a dagger cross plunged through his heart triggering his bombs => SK
blown up => Macros
was killed by a super pissed off person => inHimshallibe
Night 3:
vomitted himself to death and also had a cross dagger lodged in his heart => OMG WTF + SK
laughed himself to death. => probably IFS4U Mafia

I think this one is pretty accurate. It would mean the IFS4U mafia missed their kill night 1.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

EBWODP

=Edit By Way Of Double Post

QFT

=Quoted for Truthery

Can someone tell me what these acronyms mean?

Answers in dark red.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Vis, you should totally kill Glork. I can't guarantee he's scum though, but it would shut him up.

Also, I will take a look at Cropcircles.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

CES: No, it wouldn't shut him up, as Vis's kill doesn't go into effect until the end of the Day, remember? And I don't particularly care for reactionary "this guy thinks I'm scum, someone shut him up" comments.

I know(I don't even want Vis to vig him, really). I'm just annoyed by his constant empty comments about me being scum. I thought that comment might get the message across.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Oh and

vote: cropcircles

. Suffer not lurkerscum to live!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Whats with rolandofthewhite anyway? Does he have a role where he is not allowed to post?

No, he's just a lurker extraordinaire. He'll be modkilled or replaced.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

...

cropcircles had an innocent on me, remember? I didn't think you'd be that stupid.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if CES and CropCircles were culted and are backing each other up. It might be worthwhile to test CC's legitimacy by getting CES killed off. If he's cult, VM lives to flip another day. If not, then we worry about CC later. (Man, CES... it must really sound like I hate you this game. I don't, I promise. I'm just paranoid as hell.)

Or we could not. There's no way cropcircles and me are both surviving till the endgame. If we were cult, then you don't have to worry about us no more.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Agreed. I don't like his last posts.

unvote, vote: mikeburnfire

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

unvote; vote CES

If for no other reason than he was voting Adele for misspelling his name a while back. That's the stupidest reason EVAR. Barring all the DGB craziness that went down, I still think CES is scum.

So you don't believe cropcircles' HomestarRunner claim?

Anyway, I'll believe mike for now and I'll go after a lurker.

unvote, vote: armlx

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Crazy Frog might be bad, but not Tubgirl-bad.

I hadn't heard of my role either before I got my PM. I'm willing to believe mikeburnfire's claim, for now at least.

Everyone, to the armlx-wagon.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think your own claim shows clearly that probably isn't such a smart idea.

We'll just lynch armlx. Much simpler.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Taking another look at our deceased, it might indeed be a good idea. Forcing the scum to fake claims is worth the couple of roles we may out.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

mbf claimed zombo.com

cropcircles claimed homestarrunner

So it's TSAGod's turn to claim.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

And I haven't a clue who or what Ms. Perrin is.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

All inactive players should probably nameclaim in their first post from now.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Let's not lynch a Monty Python-inspired role here, ok, and get on with the mass name claim?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Pfft, I got an innocent on me. I don't see why I would have to claim earlier than some of the inactive guys.

Anyway, my claim really isn't all that great, so I assure you there's no risk in my waiting for the last moment to claim some great role.

We should continue with the chain mass claim, but we should basically force the more inactive players to just claim in their first posts, to keep it moving.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I said "more inactive players". Did I say the people who aren't posting? Nope. I was talking about players like armlx and bamboomancer. And I'm not suggesting we wait for them. We should continue the mass claim at the same time, but people like them should simply claim as soon as possible.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I hadn't realized so few people hadn't claimed yet.

Still, I have an innocent on me. That's gotta count for something.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Whatever, I'm ninja burger.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You, obv.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Amen to that!

I'm probably gonna research some of the claimed roles later.

Also stark, suicide is probably good for the town.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I was thinking of the Ourobouros role in Dragon Mafia. In suiciding he's making a sacrifice. It's only logical to assume then that it has pro-town effects.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Ok, I know who Vis is now.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

The Spanish Inquisition doesn't kill people, silly boý. It just surprises people. We really should be looking in the area of crazy Christian anti-video game lawyer people for our SK(, I think).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

FIRST POST!!!!

EDIT: DAMN, NINJAD.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Meh.

unvote, vote: mbf

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Decrease! It's for the greater good!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'm considering switching to TSAGod. The claim isn't very pro-town.

Also we need more webcomic references.

(I expect zazzy kerfluffle.)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

unvote, vote: TSAGod

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

(I think Glork's a GF.)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I know. I trust you right now.

*makes a mental note to force Glork to make him mafia GF roleblocker*

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Adele, Marguerite Perrin is the only actual internet-related Perrin. Let's just move on.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Yay!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well, I believed your claim then and I believe it now. And seeing as we haven't had any out of the ordinary scum roles and both the SK and the cult recruiter are dead, I only have more reason to believe you.

Going after stark seems futile as he can prove his role beyond a shadow of doubt. I do feel that would be in the best interest of the town though.

I'm considering voting for mike. He hasn't acting really pro-town.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't think any of the scum(except our SK of course) actually told the truth about their role. They're probably all reasonably obvious. I'm considering the possibility that the GFs(if there are any) have safe claims, but then I'd also expect the SK to have one and this game certainly allows for fake claims. With a cult also around, I'd say this set up is pretty mass claim proof anyway.

That's why I trust Glork and distrust mbf's attack on him.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Ninja Burger

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Bonsai Kitten may be gross, but I don't feel it compares to Tubgirl or Lemon Party. We're probably looking for Goatse and probably another.

I don't really see how it fits with the IFS4U honestly.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Hmm, I'm getting a feeling this isn't the right lynch.

Ibby went after Mike and I actually kinda like his claim.

Unvote

for now, I'll try and find a better target.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Thok, I'd say that argument is actually in favour of Nightfall. The mass name claim would've been totally pointless if the scum had been given safe claims. As it is, it has been to our advantage and we may gleam more information from it yet.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

He never claimed, but he was a badger badger badger mason.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well, with 35 players to start off with, I'm inclined to think we have 4-man mafia groups, so I'd say we have 3 or 5 mafia members left and 0-2 cultists.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Certainly.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't think I've dropped any hints.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Neither was CA's cult leader role.

The FSM was on there...

And I see no reason not to give JechtMurray the chance to confirm his ability.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

There's no reason not to wait another day and see whether JechtMurray can indeed be confirmed. I see no harm in that.

I also agree that stark should probably commit suicide(in game terms).

But then who to vote for?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Moreover, since you aren't defending yourself from my accusations (of being the last OMG WTF mafia), that means you are the last OMG WTF mafia.

Great logic here, honest.

Let's just let stark off himself at night. If he's the final OMG WTF mafia, then he has little motivation to try and kill a confirmed player anyway. Why are you so sure we had 3-man mafia groups btb? We started the game with 35 players, so I'd honestly expect 4-man groups.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Because the obvious group of OMG WTF (Tubgirl, Lemon Party, Goatse) has three members in it.

So? Couldn't there be some sort of extra GF-type role. You're making this kind of assumption awfully fast. 8 scum to start off with in a 35 player game seems very low to me. I don't feel there's sufficient evidence for your interpretation.

CES, stark's defense right now is "If I'm the last OMG WTF mafia, let me stay alive so I can kill other mafia". Would a townie choose to defend himself by starting with the statement "Assume that I am mafia"?

Where did he say that? I don't think he did. If he is the last OMG WTF mafia, then lynching him tomorrow instead of today won't do us much harm.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Should we ask stark to commit suicide tonight, and if he's still alive tommorrow lynch him?

Yes.

Should we give Jecht a chance to show his role, which I'm not even sure if it can be believably proven?

Yes. There's little reason not to give it a try.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'm actually considering voting either Adele or Aureal. Their claims just don't sit right with me, although I'm not quite sure why.

For now, I think a

vote: Aureal

is in order.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I remembered Adele had some limited access thing, but Aureal can't defend herself either, correct. So I'll

unvote, vote: Adele

.

I don't think the evidence we have is all that strong. I can't help it, but this is what my instincts are telling me.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Wasn't there a concern at one time that Stark's suicide might harm the town? Or was that just what Stark thought but the town at large dismissed the likelihood?

Don't think so. I think it's actually likely to have a pro-town effect. Maybe something with Vis. Him suiciding already has an obvious negative result: the loss of a pro-town player.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Seriously guys, have none of you realized that faking a claim in this game is as easy as bludgeoning a baby with a half-brick in a sock?

And Thok, stop trying to lynch a player that'll die tonight. You're being silly.

I wish I had some solid reasons to suspect someone, because this isn't going anywhere.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I'm leaving for South Africa today. I'll be back the 7th. In the meantime I'll have limited access, although I'm not sure to what extent.

I should be able to continue playing.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well, we can always lynch Jecht first, seeing as if we have a mafia roleblocker, it's probably him. But, seeing as we have a cop who hasn't had any problems, I don't suspect this to be the case.

Anyway, why worry about stark surviving now?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

My opinion of everyone in chances of being mafia is something along these lines:
CES, elvis_knits, VisMaior, Thok, HezLucky, cropcircles - negligible at this point
stark - 5%
mikeburnfire - 10%
Glork - 20%
Bamboomancer - 30%
JechtMurray - 30%
Nightfall - 35%
Sotty7 - 45%
Adele - 55%
Aureal - 70%
As you might notice, the percentages add up to 300%, as I was working under the assumption of 3 mafia left and I decided not no take possible cultists into consideration.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I meant to put Mike at 20% and Glork at 10%. My mistake.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Even at 20% why so low for Mike?
And why the highest for aurel?

My stance on lynching Mike...
I think there are a few beter choices, but mike is near the top of my list of possible scum so I'll agree to a lynch.

Gut + claims + wild guessing.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Meh, I don't see an Adele(or Aureal or Sotty7)-lynch happening, a mike-lynch seems inevitable and at worst we lose a townie. It's time to go to night.

unvote, vote: mikeburnfire

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

stark, why aren't you dead?

cropcircles, got an useful result?

Vote: Aureal

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Nice fake "Wooooooo!", but I don't buy it.

Regardless,

unvote, vote: stark

, I don't see any reason not to lynch him if cropcircles doesn't come up with a guilty.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well, it's quite simple really. You're pretending to be happy you can talk again, while, in truth, you were quite happy to not be able to talk Yesterday, as it meant you didn't have to contribute and you were unlikely to be attacked.

And I never said it was a fake "Wooooo!", I said it was a fake "Wooooooo!".

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I don't think he actually said that.

We should let VisMaior flip out on stark if at all possible, I'd say.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You're saying you were roleblocked? Did anything point towards Jecht being the Spanish Inquisition?

It seems we just have 2 IFS4U mafia left, shouldn't be too hard.

I'm going to wait for cropcircles now.

(

Vote: Aureal

)

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

*still glaring at CES* Are you ever going to give any sort of reasoning for your attempts to persecute me other than that you don't like my role name?

Not really, seeing as that is basically the reasoning for it. Should've fake-claimed better.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well yes, but you see, that was the role I was given. That's the vital difference.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Why don't you at least claim how you used your one-shot, Jecht?

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Well, it seems the OMG WTF mafia is gone anyway, so it'd just be a cultist(or two?) to worry about.

I think that if you take into account the fact that Glork and Thok died the night before, that the mafia may well have tried to nail the cop.

It's also possible that the mafia nailed Sotty7 because her name didn't suggest vanillaness.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

And Jecht was supposed to have used his ability the night before.

We could of course still have a real doctor out there that prevented a kill, but I'd definitely say signs point to the OMG WTF mafia being gone.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Adele, sloppy play here. Thok's randomizing of choices accounts for the final one.

I trust cropcircles here. Failing his posting restriction makes sense and there's good reason to believe the IFS4U mafia tried to target him.