Mini 839 -- Mafia Invasion! (Game Over)

[DeathRowKitty]

Vote: RedCoyote

because you're in another ongoing game with me! Wait, what? You're the mod?!

unvote, vote: James.Denholm

for trying to kill a poor harmless kitten.

[DeathRowKitty]

1. one
2. no
3. one game doesn't exactly qualify as experienced...
4. none
5. I haven't completed any games as town or third-party so I can't answer this.
6. can't say I have one
7. 3
8. because you told me to
9. not really, but it can't hurt to try
10. I doubt it's indicative of alignment.
11. yes

[DeathRowKitty]

Why do you have to be last to answer the questions? If you'll have to answer them anyway, there should be no reason you can't answer them now, especially when you're asking the rest of us to do so.

[DeathRowKitty]

Honestly, I didn't think Vi had much reason for voting Y.C (thought I suppose it wasn't unwarranted at this stage of the game), but I

really

don't like his response. It seems like a bad attempt to justify a post that just sounded like a flame.

vote: Y.C

Also,

In conclusion, since she is not a jester, she is either mafia, which should be lynched, or third party/Townie

No...really?

[DeathRowKitty]

I'll start with the second question. I consider it a flame because you said you don't consider Vi town, yet we should lynch him over asking us to answer a survey. Maybe you disagree, but sounds like a flame to me.

Now for your first question . Saying that "after further thought, I believe she is not a jester as well" is ridiculous, when there's nothing at all to indicate he is and it sounds like you're just covering your stupid mistake of bringing it up in the first place. The quote I mentioned in my last post is just pointless, especially when you stand by the fact we should lynch him anyway if he's town. For what? Making a survey? You ignored it anyway.

Allow me to summarize your post. "Okay, maybe Vi's not jester, but we should lynch him anyway because of what I mentioned in my last post (He asked us to fill out a survey)."

[DeathRowKitty]

What exactly did the survey take our attention away from? Scumhunting? We're doing that right now. How does it allow scum and third parties to stay under the radar? Everyone has said something about the survey, by either completing it or refusing to do so and some responses (yours, in particular) have given us a good lead to start the game.

Also, I forgot to unvote before I voted.

unvote, vote: Y.C

[DeathRowKitty]

You need 24 hours to analyze three pages? Seriously? Could you be more transparent? You just realized you don't actually have the support from Porkens you thought you did so you resort to an AtE? ("Vi is clearly pushing for the final two votes on me." (actually I think that's only 4 votes))

I would rather not see a 3-page Day 1, but it looks to me like we've caught scum.

[DeathRowKitty]

Okay, my last post wasn't worded that well. I wasn't suggesting we end the day immediately (though I was implying there was little need to extend the day much further). I actually do want to hear Y.C's analysis of what's been said. It could be helpful later, but it shouldn't take him 24 hours to analyze three pages. 24 hours just sounds like he's looking for more time to try to weasel his way out of this.


(Before someone calls me out on having English as my first language, my writing isn't always that clear. Sometimes, things I say make more sense in my head than in writing.)

[DeathRowKitty]

@jammer
You seem disinterested in the YC wagon. What do you think of YC's actions?

[DeathRowKitty]

I assume he meant people who cop out.

[DeathRowKitty]

I wasn't going to bother correcting my last post but it's kind of bothering me...

I think by cop he meant an instance of copping out, not one who cops out. No, it doesn't matter to the game, but I'm a lunatic so I had to correct myself.

[DeathRowKitty]

I liked to hear more from YC, including the analysis, but that is not going to happen.
The coming replacement is rather annoying becouse (s)he can not explain any of YC actions.

In your opinion, how should we treat the replacement? (Should we immediately look for more votes? Should we take votes off? Should we look for new targets? etc.)

[DeathRowKitty]

Hey guys, i'm replacing for..... someone who posted like a godfather and made me check my role pm twice :0.

Did it say "Godfather" in your role PM? It would explain a lot from this game.

I think TMJ's sheeping is the best material we have right now.

If you were in our shoes, would you still feel the same way? Personally, replacement or not, I still think you're our best lead. I'm willing to look elsewhere to extend the day if I see someone scummy enough (TBD), but don't expect my vote to stay off of you for too long after the way YC played.

[DeathRowKitty]

I think someone should hammer and we should be done with it. Yes, we're only on page 6, but discussion has stalled as we all focus in on the same couple of people. Plus, they've been a very productive 6 pages IMO and I think that coupled with the reveal of alignments will give us enough for an informed Day 2.

[DeathRowKitty]

I'll tell you the truth about what I think of Jammer: he's been an issue ever since his third post.

What did you think of Jammer's second post? I've been watching him ever since then because I thought his answers sounded too much like he was trying not to step on any toes.

[DeathRowKitty]

Also, slight FoS for Imaginality and DeathRowKitty. Their latest posts (L-1 vote, and 'someone hammer him now!') looks like an attempt to speedlynch pops.

Honestly, we've gotten pretty much nowhere the past couple of RL days. I figured we'd get more out of seeing responses to a request for a quicklynch (and seeing if someone was willing to hammer) than we would from prolonging the day.

Post 4 - Post 90 were August 29-31, the first three days of the game. Post 91 - Post 134 were September 1 - September 3. We're down to less than 15 posts per RL day and only a few of those are moving the game forward.

I still think a quicklynch wouldn't be so bad.

[DeathRowKitty]

^^ The flavor had me doing this:

Thank you

[DeathRowKitty]

Right now, most of the focus is on pops and TMJ. Pops keep fluctuating between L-3, L-2, and L-1 as people vote and unvote him. People discuss TMJ, a bunch of people ask him questions, and he pops in, gives responses that tell us essentially nothing, and we wait for him to pop back in. Is this really getting us anywhere?

Calling for a quicklynch does a few things for us:

1. It gets reactions from people who agree and disagree that pops should be quicklynched
2. If someone decides to quicklynch from my request, it gives us a better read on that person (and on me for calling for a quicklynch
3. It prevents players from losing interest in a game that isn't going anywhere

We have 7 players ready to lynch pops. Waiting isn't getting us anywhere.

[DeathRowKitty]

Seriously, read TMJ's posts and try and tell me questioning him further is going to help us. If you want to keep questioning him, I won't (and can't) stop you, but to me, he looks more like a scapegoat for keeping pops alive.

If pops were at L-1 and i wasn't voting yet, I would hammer, even at 6 pages in.

[DeathRowKitty]

In saying this you are implicitly assuming TMJ-Town and pops-scum. Correct?

That's my current feeling.

1. Wouldn't we want to at least hear a claim from pops before lynch? This is my first closed-setup game, so I could be wrong about this.

Somehow that slipped my mind. We should, but if the option had been open to hammer and I'd done so, I wouldn't have felt bad about it.

2. TMJ isn't the only other person we can question. At least three people have expressed that they find jammer suspicious (me, Cruciare, Porkens), Cathart has FoS'd you and imaginality, etc. You're setting up a false dichotomy between TMJ and pops right now.

At least four people find Jammer suspicious (I didn't express my suspicion of Jammer as clearly, but I did mention it in a recent post), but he's better (IMO) to look at after alignments have been revealed. The FoS on me came after (and because of) my call for a quicklynch. As far as practicality is concerned, it's pops and TMJ.

Is your interest in lynching pops completely based on Y.C's scummy actions, or is there anything that pops has done that added to your case against him?

I think he's scummy for basically the same reasons that have already been mentioned. There were of course YC's scummy actions and now pops seems to be trying to latch onto our suspicions of TMJ to try to save himself.

I agree that hammering to keep up interest in the game is anti-town, but that wouldn't be the only reason for a hammer and a town that's tired of sitting around waiting for responses from one or two players is less likely to care to scumhunt. I agree though hammering just for keeping up interest is a bad idea.

[DeathRowKitty]

It doesn't come off particularly well to me that you come in at L-2 and tell us we need to lynch the player who happens to have the second most votes. Whether or not you're doing that because you feel he's scummy, think about how that comes across.

You think an unreadable player is more important to lynch than someone who's scummy? That would be like scum deciding (knowing there's no doctor) that "Well we know Player X is a cop, but we should kill Player Y instead because we don't know whether or not he has a stronger role." Scummy players first. We can lynch unreadable players later if it's really necessary. At least give them a chance to prove their usefulness.

[DeathRowKitty]

DRK: Why do you think TMJ is Town (in line with this conversation about him being unreadable)?

Well, I have little direct read on him. His actions have been strange, yes, but I don't see any of them as more likely to come from TMJ-scum as TMJ-town. Based on that, I would probably put him as neutral. What puts him at town is my mind is largely that I think pops is scum. People started paying more attention to TMJ after the YC wagon began and pops himself is attempting to fuel the TMJ wagon. Based on this, he's leaning town in my mind.


I don't want to explain too much about jammer at the moment. There are certain connections I think we should look more into with jammer when we know an alignment or two. I prefer not to give away too much now. It's better to present arguments against someone in bulk (That's why I didn't mention anything about jammer's second post until Cruciare's post saying he didn't like jammer's posts from the third onwards). Also, if jammer is scum, there's no reason to tell him what to avoid doing.

[DeathRowKitty]

>.<

Just about the last role I would have guessed from the way Y.C played...

Unvote

. I'm not willing to lynch a claimed doctor Day 1.

[DeathRowKitty]

So your Town read on TMJ is based entirely on your scum read on Y.C?
How does this Doctor claim factor into that?

Well I'm inclined to believe the claim. For now. A day 1 PR fake-claim will almost always back scum into a corner later on. For me, that puts TMJ at neutral unless (see quote below)

I stumbled across another (ongoing) game he's in, and his play there is significantly more sensible than it is here.

Does this refer to TMJ? It wasn't clear in context.

Are these alignments necessary for the case, or are you just trying to prevent anyone but pops from getting lynched today?

They're not technically necessary (and I suppose no specific alignment is crucial. I just don't feel there's enough for a strong case on jammer right now, something a couple of alignments might remedy. I might make a case on jammer now anyway if I feel there's enough to go on since pops just claimed doc.

[DeathRowKitty]

Whatever. Just let him wallow in filth. I'm the lynch today. I can see these things coming.

AtE? Defeatism? I seem to recall someone mentioning earlier that you thought your position was worse than it actually was, something that could mean you're scum who's overestimating the hopelessness of your situation. This just looks like more of that.

I personally prefer not to lynch claimed PRs day 1 unless there's a very strong reason to believe it's a lie. I'd prefer not to lynch you. Yet. Don't make me change my opinion.

[DeathRowKitty]

PBPA of jammer

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 16#1838016-random votes Vi
1-answers the survey; seems to have answered carefully to avoid getting on anyone's bad side
2-relates the survey to his own questions in Newbie 803
3-responding to jammers; I don't like his response to the second quoted segment
4-asks JD what he thinks of Porkens thinking the survey was a smokescreen
5-one-word-answer-athon; votes afatchic
6-(@YC)"Would a simple way to remove most of this after survey talk, not simply to remove you from the game?" "You start to talk about side-tracking, but who is the one side-tracking from finding scum?"
7-says YC is the scummiest player
8-says he wants to wait to lynch until his V/LA (town tell, perhaps? 48 hours would be Tuesday though and he said he'd be gone Wednesday - Friday)
9-calls TMJ a hypocrite and asks why he's still voting YC; votes James.Denholm
10-asks Porkens why he's tunneling on YC
11-says YC is worthy of being voted (but doesn't vote); says he wants to hear more from TMJ
12-votes pops (L-1)
13-says TMJ's actions are "newish"; votes afatchic

A few things I don't like:

• His survey answers
• What I mentioned in post 3
• His hesitance to vote YC, followed by putting him at L-1
• His constant (random?) voting
• His posts in general (more a gut feeling than anything)

[DeathRowKitty]

In other news, I'm liking pops less and less.

[DeathRowKitty]

I don't get this whole 'let's wait some times before questioning Jammer'. If someone acts suspicious, then he should be investigated immediately.

YC/pops was a much more convincing case. I figured it would be beneficial to wait to make a case on jammer until there was more to go on, especially with a much better lynch candidate out there.

In worst case scenario, I see your actions as: 'Y.C is an easy D1 lynch, let's push it as hard as possible.' When this turned to be impossible

It wasn't impossible at the time of my unvote. I ws the first one to unvote and pops was still acting suspicious. I'm just extremely hesitant to lynch any claimed PR day 1, especially doctor.

[DeathRowKitty]

I think, the scum would be far too careful to actually attack someone when he just claimed PR.

This is where not having completed any games as town comes back to haunt me. I'm just against lynching claimed PRs day 1 without strong reason to believe they're lying, regardless of my alignment.

But why? There's more than one scum in this game, we have to look at others. If it won't be taken into a spotlight, there's a dreadful possibility, that we'll just forget about it, when the thread will have ~30 pages.

We're not getting to page 30 anytime soon and I wasn't going to just forget about jammer, especially since I've been watching his posts more closely. I'm not sure there's enough on jammer for a good case. I wanted to wait until he'd made more posts and since there was a perfectly viable lynch candidate already, I decided to wait.

[DeathRowKitty]

@DeathRowKitty, you did not want to put a case on me becouse there was already another lynch target? Why not going after somoene you suspect at the moment you see it? If my behaviour changes after you pointed out my scummy behaviour, would that not be another tell for scum trying to get back on being towny track?

I didn't want to put a case on you because I didn't have enough for a strong case. I've said that twice already. The fact that there was another lynch target meant I could afford to wait.

[DeathRowKitty]

Also I get, Fatal error: Out of memory errors, anyone else with this issue?

I've been getting them on and off all day.

[DeathRowKitty]

@sigma
I don't endorse lynching a claimed doctor Day 1. Even if he looks scummy, it's very much to the advantage of scum to NK him. If he's town, we're doing their job for them. In the absence of other exposed PRs, if pops is actually doctor, I would expect him to be dead Night 1. If we don't lynch him, the longer he stays alive, the more suspicious he is. Eventually, if he's not NKed, he would most likely be scum and we would lynch him. That's why I was willing to wait. However, I do think he's scummy enough that if deadline comes around, I would hammer. I would still prefer if we find someone else though.

[DeathRowKitty]

[WIFOM]Won't the scum keep pops alive then, since they know he'll be lynched if he stays alive?[/WIFOM]

Yes, which is why I wouldn't have made my previous post if I didn't think there was a good chance of pops getting lynched. If the scum aren't sure we're going to lynch pops at some point or another, it would be to their advantage to kill him to give them a clear shot later on, especially if there are no other exposed PRs to shoot at (which there aren't). Once people start saying we have to lynch pops anyway (like I did in my last post), scum can potentially afford to wait with the idea of getting him lynched Day 2 or Day 3, especially if they have a roleblocker.

Of course, we could also benefit from that WIFOM. Suspicious or not, if pops really is a (town) doctor, he has a powerful pro-town role and keeping him alive could prove dangerous later on for the scum. Overall, if I were scum and pops is really pro-town, I would choose to NK him, so I don't think I really gave much away in my previous post.

I agree pops is our best lynch at the moment, but if someone else pops up as a strong lynch, I would prefer to put off pops until a later day. If everything stays the way it is now, I'll be voting pops at deadline.

[DeathRowKitty]

DRK, what do you think of JD?

I think he needs to post more so I can form a stronger opinion of him. Neutral at the moment.

I'm the wrong lynch. TMJ is ridiculous obv scum who has done nothing good this whole game.

Just about everything you or YC did this game was scummy. Scummy>nothing.

I would vote, but that would put him at L-1, which could end up in a quicklynch with TMJ around (look at the game he referred to in a previous post).

[DeathRowKitty]

DRK: TMJ is already voting pops.

It was a good idea in principle...

I would definitely feel safer about voting pops now considering that, but I'd prefer to wait. Since we waited until deadline anyway, I'm fine with waiting another couple days (I thought deadline was closer...).

[DeathRowKitty]

@pops
Two problems I see with that:
1) If you really are doctor, scum will just kill someone who voted for you.
2) You're practically trying to buy unvotes with the promise of doc protection.

Deadline in under two days. I fully intend on voting pops.

[DeathRowKitty]

I'm not seeing the case on Vi...or Cruciare.

DeathRowKitty

You keep saying that you don't want to lynch the claimed doc, but you haven't done a whole lot to push your case on Jammer either. Why is that?

There's not enough for a strong case on him. Based on what we have right now, I find pops to be a better lynch than jammer, claimed doc or not.

Pops' play as of late has been very odd, to say the least. To me it looks like scum trying to get out of a lynch. He's used
1) defeatism
2) AtE and AtV (Appeal to Vi)
3) diversion tactics

1)Defeatism isn't stricly a scum tell. Townies also sometimes use defeatism out of the frustration of being close to lynch as town. However, his defeatism didn't seem like townie defeatism. It seemed more like scum trying to make it look like townie defeatism. His posts (to me) gave the feeling of trying to hold his doctor claim over us while still sounding hopeless.
2) I personally think that townies sometimes have the urge to appeal to emotion when all else fails, but only scum should have the urge to appeal to emotion when the situation is far from hopeless. In fact, he was pops painted his situation as hopeless even after people started unvoting him. It's only natural for scum to have an exaggerated view of how bad the situation really is.
3) I guess he almost had to try to divert suspicion, even if he's doctor, but not the way he did. He's been saying a lot that TMJ needs to by lynched, while giving the feeling of just saying "lynch the person with the next most suspicion/votes."

Also I

really

hope this was a joke because if not that's an awful post for a townie (and especially a doctor) to make.

At best

, it was defeatism and an AtE.

[DeathRowKitty]

EBWOP:

In fact,

he was

pops painted his situation as hopeless even after people started unvoting him.

[DeathRowKitty]

It's just past 8PM for me right now and I'm not sure I'll have a chance to check this game before deadline tomorrow. I doubt I'm the only one in this timezone. We need to agree to a lynch soon . I still say pops should be our lynch. I would also agree to a jammer lynch and probably a TMJ lynch if it would avoid a no lynch.

[DeathRowKitty]

I'm surprised to see that DRK isn't voting anyone, especially after that last post.

I'll be around another hour or two and I figured I'd wait to vote to see if anyone tried to make too strong a push for either candidate without strong reason (trying to save a scumbuddy). I would've voted earlier if I'd realized TMJ had 4 votes.

Vote: pops

[DeathRowKitty]

...are you telling me that you were trying to gambit by not having your vote on someone for over 150 posts?

The "gambit" was only recent. For most of that time, I just wasn't ready to vote.

[DeathRowKitty]

Okay, first-off, I was wrong. I was wrong on TMJ and half-wrong on pops. I actually considered the possibility of YC being jester at one point, but never survivor.

I agree that (almost) everyone on TMJ's wagon should be practically confirmed for the moment. I'm not sure anyone would have bussed near the end of the wagon (we can worry about that later on if necessary), but I wouldn't be too surprised if there was bussing early on when pops seemed the likely lynch.

DRK: What do you think of Sotty?

From what I've seen, I'd say town. She falls under the category of "people who chose TMJ over pops when things could have gone either way" and I haven't had a problem with any of her posts.

@CC
Your vote for me looks very opportunistic coming immediately after Cruciare's vote, especially since your post mostly rehashed and explained Cruciare's post. Your main contribution to the case was this:

When Pops claimed doc, he jumped off the wagon, and went in Jammer's direction, as he looked like a fine place for his accusation, since 4 other people already said they are suspicious of him

Looking back at my earlier posts, you'll find that my posts are directed mainly at YC with a couple of posts directed at jammer. Perhaps this was because I was suspicious of jammer? (hint: that's why).

[DeathRowKitty]

Looks like you forgot, that I am the original creator of case on you

Yes I did.

And about Jammer, I was going to ask you a question, why were you insisting on NOT looking at Jammer for alternative discussion in this case, but several people (including me) actually asked you about this on D1, and you answered in not satisfying (at least to me) way at all, so I'm not gonna repeat that again. Unless you have something more to say about it, that is...

The case on him wouldn't have been strong enough. I was waiting for the flip of pops, Vi, or possibly Porkens. Seeing as pops didn't flip mafia and that jammer was on the TMJ wagon, I no longer find jammer scummy.

[DeathRowKitty]

I am seriously though, what do you think of the DRK and SOTTY (non)connection?

My random vote on JD was purely OMGUS and he didn't post enough content afterwards for me to comment on. There's nothing more to it on my end, except perhaps some tunneling.

[DeathRowKitty]

But I have noticed that DRK has ignored the couple of questions I tossed his way in the last page.

Somehow I missed those.

1. Given that TMJ had a potentially powerful scum role, I don't think his buddies would put a late vote on him to bring him close to lynch with the town split the way it was. I can see one of his buddies voting him early when he had fewer votes and pops was the most likely lynch in order to earn some townie points.
2. This is going to sound very hypocritical of me, but my top suspects in general are people on the pops wagon. I agree that at least one of us almost has to be scum. Right now, I'm guessing imaginality because I haven't found the others particularly scummy.

[DeathRowKitty]

Very little, which is why I didn't vote. I thought Vi's case on him wasn't great. The scummiest thing is what sigma pointed out about his vote change from post 2 to post 3, but I don't think it's worth of a vote, especially since I was suggesting a quicklynch Day 1.

[DeathRowKitty]

If the two above posters would respond to my question.

The question of how many scum? I would have said 3+survivor, though admittedly, I didn't take the time to plot out the possible course of such a game. Personally, I think this discussion should wait a day when we know more about the setup, since having one mafia+survivor dead puts us in no sort of immediate danger of having the setup come crashing down on us.

Vote: DeathRowKitty for defending TMJ too much.

I object to your use of the word "defending." I was asked about TMJ and I said I thought he was unreadable or a noob or neutral or something to that effect.

Ignoring TMJ + inconsistency between 'hammer now' stance before Pops's claim and 'lynching claimed PR is bad' stance after Pops's claim + more inconsistency with behaviour near deadline = Scumdar Resonant Frequency Detected?

My stance wasn't inconsistent. It only appears that way to someone incapable of reading minds.

I thought pops was scum and TMJ wasn't. To me, the TMJ case was a distraction that would prevent a scum lynch and discussion about pops/TMJ wasn't getting us far enough to justify the perceived risk. Then pops claimed doctor. My first instinct when someone claims a townie PR and especially on Day 1 is to leave the person alone. Seriously though, his posts after his claim were not posts that a townie would make and especially not a doctor. I thought he had to be scum, so I voted him, especially in the absense of (in my mind) other strong suspects. I was half-right on pops. His behavior post-claim was not townie-behavior. It just wasn't mafia behavior.

I agree with your choice of top suspects. Have you had a chance to look at the other folks on the pops wagon in detail? I'd specifically like to hear your thoughts on imaginality and Cruciare. Extra credit for some thoughts on afatchic.

Let me preface this with a scummy disclaimer: I have a really bad read on this game. I haven't had a chance to look at the wagon in detail as I've been busy the past few days/week and will be busy this week. Personally I've found no solid evidence to think Cruciare is scum, aside from things I've also been guilty of. I really need to re-read imaginality (actually I plan on re-reading the entire game when I get a good chance (probably won't be until Friday)), since to me, he's the most suspicious player on the pops wagon. As for afatchic...I can't say I like his lurking, but seeing as he didn't post in any of his games the two days before deadline, I can't really fault him for that. I suppose his lurking means a slight scum read on him, but nothing solid enough for a lynch.

[DeathRowKitty]

Sorry about my lack of posting over the past couple days. I should be free for my re-read tomorrow and Saturday if not.

[DeathRowKitty]

His distancing from TMJ at the beginning of the game still looks very suspicious as well.

Care to point out where? o.O I searched my Iso posts and didn't even find a passing reference to TMJ at the beginning of the game.

Heavy suspicions (I'm happy with those lynches): DRK, for things I already said + low activity during D2.

School started up and putting everything off until the last minute finally caught up to me, hence my low Day 2 activity.

---

Right now, I plan on voting imaginality, largely because of points brought up by Ojanen here. Also, as I've mentioned, I feel the best place to look for scum is on the pops wagon. Looking at the final votecount, that leaves just 3 people: me, Cruciare, and imaginality. I don't currently support my own lynch. I have a gut town read on myself. That narrows it down to Cruciare and imaginality for me and I don't plan on voting Cruciare. Why?

I F H T B M L T H B A T C P (P S W A T A T F L O T A)


@anyone who has a "gut town read" on me or something similar
Why?

[DeathRowKitty]

@CC
If I was really going to explain it now, why would I have given it as an acronym?

DRK, do you feel "boxed in" by having to suspect the {DRK, Cruciare, imaginality} group?

I don't feel "boxed in" by that group. I think it's the most likely place to find scum, especially since Mafia Framer can be a powerful role if used properly. I just don't think there would be a unanimous scum push to bus the framer (regardless of how many scum there actually are). If there are 3 scum, I would think at least one of TMJ's buddies would have tried to save him and if there are 2, I doubt his buddy would sit by and watch him get lynched Day 1.

you have specifically said you're unimpressed by the case on imaginality.

IIRC, that was directed more towards your Day 1 case on imaginality. Plus, new posts have been made about imaginality since then.

[DeathRowKitty]

Ok, time to point out the obvious and then try to outguess the mod: neighbors have a reputation for being of opposite alignments.

Now, why didn't RC confirm them? Well, there are a few possible reasons:

1. One of the neighbors is scum
2. Confirming them would unbalance the game too far in the town's favor
3. He wants us to try to outguess him to balance the game out for scum
4. He just doesn't like the idea of confirmed masons

Well, let's consider the setup. So far we have

• 1 mafia framer
• 1 survivor
• 10 unknowns

Presumably, we have a cop. The only other game I've been in/seen with a mafia framer had a Godfather as the other scum role and if there are three mafia members, the game could easily be balanced towards scum. If that's the case, town masons might not be so farfetched. At the same time, having them as confirmed masons could make us waste a mislynch or two. If the mafia have just a framer and a Godfather or just a framer and another scum role, town masons could tip the game too far in the town's favor. What it comes down to is this: how prevolent is the idea that neighbors have different alignments?

If the idea that neighbors are oppositely aligned is prevolent, then having neighbors who are actually both town-aligned masons has strong potential to hurt the town. If the idea isn't as prevolent as I seem to recall reading, then oppositely-aligned neighbors would benefit scum more.

Since Vi unvoted imaginality, I'll

vote: imaginality

and, pending a response as to how common scum masons are, I think imaginality is the strongest lynch.

[DeathRowKitty]

why did you want to wait until near deadline with pops revote yesterday?
What were the connection flips you thought would be useful in determining jammer's alignment D1?

1) My thinking was pops-scum and TownMJ. I thought pops was far ahead in the voting, or at least far enough away that 1 or 2 sudden votes on TMJ wouldn't put him in any danger of majority (the vote was closer than I thought). I figured that if I was right about the alignments, TMJ had enough potential support that scum would try to make a strong push for his lynch, which would be very telling if pops flipped scum.
2) pops, Porkens, and Vi. Pops' flip in addition to jammer's TMJ-vote make me less suspicious of jammer now.

---

From what Vi's saying, oppositely-aligned neighbors aren't that common? (Can someone confirm or deny this?)

@Sotty
How sure are you of imaginality's pro-town alignment?

[DeathRowKitty]

Also, upon further thought, I'm not so sure that acronym I posted earlier provides a valid reason for not voting Cruciare (I'm still not saying what that reason was), but I'd still prefer not to vote him.

[DeathRowKitty]

Okay, unless I counted wrong, I'm at L-1, so claim time I guess?

I'm just a

townie

, for some reason still thinking about pre-season football 3 weeks into the season. Go figure.

[DeathRowKitty]

On second thought, my acronym might be valid reasoning.

[DeathRowKitty]

@DRK: Please state all parts of your exact role name.

My exact role name is

townie

.

Why did you claim? I'm going to vote you since you claimed vanilla, I don't know why, who was about to hammer you?

The problem wasn't that someone would have hammered me immediately, but that no one was going to unvote. It's better I claim before I'm hammered, which I'm not sure was preventable.


Don't think I'm not taking the recent news of a mafia invasion seriously. In fact, I'm taking it quite seriously. Unless we all got different role PMs, hopefully someone will recognize something from this paragraph >.<

There's really not much more I can say to defend about this...I'm just trying to eliminate all opposing factions.

[DeathRowKitty]

@sigma
I've seen worse quoting, including exact phrases put in quotes, so I didn't consider what I posted to be bad, but I guess that's RC's call.