Mini 306: Arrested Development: Game over

[chaotic_diablo]

vote chaotic_diablo

[chaotic_diablo]

I'd rather see how people would react than a random scatter of votes. Still, I just do it for fun because I want to.

[chaotic_diablo]

I agree with PBug that there are generally 3 players in a scum group. However, that doesn't take into account any Sk's, traitors, or cults. So in reality, the chances of randomly picking scum isn't 3/12, but probably slightly higher.


[qoute="al_kohaulec"]As for C_D, I realize players here typically vote randomly as soon as the game starts, so voting yourself is just another thing to gauge reactions and stuff, but I still don't like it. As there are already 3 votes on you, I'm gonna hold off a 4th vote, but I am interested in seeing how everybody else responds to this. [/quote] Are you saying that you dislike my selfvote because it is used to gauge the reaction of others, or are you just picking on it because it's the most easily available target? If neither, then why do you dislike my selfvote?

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm intrigued that you singled me out versus anybody else. Well, I am going t gauge the reaction of others myself, which I did mention in my post. It's just that self voting is not normally done, and your possible intentions based on it are making me feel uneasy. I'm not going to try to make a big deal out of it because so far I don't see any reason to.

Truth is, Fritzler has voted me based on selfvoting before, so I already know it's not that big a deal to him, Gaspode listed his reasons for voting me, Pablito just wants to ignore it, and no one else is responding to it. In addition, you have had more to say in content than everyone else and even opted to profit from it as well.

It would be contradictory to think that you would dislike my selfvote for gauging the reaction of others while doing the same thing yourself. To avoid a misunderstanding, I didn't openly accuse you, but asked for a clarification. I don't see anything wrong with your explanation, so I won't make a big deal about it either.

[chaotic_diablo]

C_D seems quite desperate to avoid a confrontation with al_k. Somewhat scummy.

Or it could be that I don't have anything to ask. al_ko's response is acceptable and there is no contradiction whatsoever. If your implying that I should continue a hopeless case that might not go anyway, then that's somewhat scummy since I would look scummy either way.

@kain, no I haven't heard of a random traitor before. I was just naming general examples. A random traitor is just a random factor placed into the game, just like a SK, cult, or mason traitor.

Overreation would look like a defense, then an accusation, followed by exagerated and illogic evidence. That's how I view overreactions... well that's how I view them

now

.

[chaotic_diablo]

Gaspode, I dislike idle accusations. I have a tendency to believe that despite the intelligence of everyone in a game, they will eventually believe it and cause more trouble that it is worth. For instance, "desperate" is a highly exaggerated word given the conditions.

I'm not familiar with the theme, so don't turn to me if you want to ask something about it. A good background summary would help.

[chaotic_diablo]

Gaspode: Idle accusation, as in spouting an accusation that has no meaning. A confrontation is similiar to an argument with opposing views. There was nothing either al_kohaulec or I could argue about, therefore a confrontation would not occur unless something dramatic happened.

Thanks for the links.

We still have the hear from sLYph.

[chaotic_diablo]

@Gaspode, what al_ko said, although it's pretty similiar to what I was saying.

Could the SEC be a role in the game? The mod's post did say they would drag us individually for interrogation. Perhaps that was just for show.

[chaotic_diablo]

Let's get a modprod for Slylph.

[chaotic_diablo]

By the by: the fact that I was targetted last night strongly suggests to me that at least one of the Mafia is someone who has been on this board long enough to have played with me, and know my reputation as getting killed night one. In this game, that includes Gaspode, PBug, and chaotic_diablo

. There might be one or two more of you that I just can't remember.

Just something to keep in mind

Using that logic, you can predict that they could also be a doc. Knowing you would die night one, they protected you. Anyway, I'm not familiar or don't remember anything about your reputation.

[chaotic_diablo]

That was the info I decided not to share with the mafia... I think it's not that wise to help them getting a power role.

It's called common sense. If both of us came up with it, I'm sure someone else will as well. In addition, the information is supported by metagaming evidence, which makes it highly unreliable.

[chaotic_diablo]

Most of the arguments are based on the players 'implying' that they are not scum.

I'd like Y to clarify his post on Gaspode.

unvote chaotic_diablo

[chaotic_diablo]

WIFOM=wine in front of me
Example: The wine could or could not be poisoned by the mafia.
1. Scum may have poisoned the wine, it is not safe to drink. Which can be argued with number 2
2. Scum believe that we think that they poisoned the wine, so they didn't poison it and therefore it is safe to drink. which can be argued with number 1.

It's basicly a flip flop reasoning. Accusing someone of it and defending yourself with it is essentailly bad for your well being.

http://www.mafiascum.net/cgi-bin/wiki.p ... ront_of_Me

[chaotic_diablo]

@Pablito, interesting question. Technically it's not WIFOM. In a sense, it's part metagaming and playstyle. For instance, rite always dies night one. Since doc knows he's going to die night one, he/she will think scum will go for rite, therefore the doc will protect rite. Same goes with my selfvote. It's like WIFOM logic, but it's really using past experience: metagaming. WIFOM would just be a random 50-50 guess without using any kind of evidence/support. Another example would be Gaspode's earlier post on PBug of being "too eager". It's not WIFOM but simply using metagaming and past experience.
Metagaming and WIFOM are two different things, but distinguishing the two will probably not be easy if your not too famliar with both.

[chaotic_diablo]

All this discussion on WIFOM is distracting us from lynching PBuG.

@Gaspode - I asked you a question. Any ideas?

I think you should at least give your opinion on your own question. Asking how someone thinks about another person while keeping your thoughts private seems kind of intrusive to me.
*This(as in this post that I wrote) post is contradictory*

Do we need a vote count?

[chaotic_diablo]

The best case against PBug is that his posts contradict each other. However, I also find sLYph's reaction on the vote count to be far more suspicious. Asking to place a vote seems like he's tellnig us that he's protown and doesn't want to do something wrong. Although not a necesarily bad thing, I find it far too obvious and probably scum trying to brownnose us.

vote sLYph

[chaotic_diablo]

sLYph is a new? I had no idea. His actions do correlate with being a newbie, but I'm not entirely convinced. Still, I want to think this through a bit. Kain's quick defense to sLYph seems pretty suspicious to me.

unvote sLYph

fos sLYph and Kain

[chaotic_diablo]

unvote
Vote: sLYph

Random voting after we had quite some discussion? It's not you voted someone before with a reason...
And letting the town choose your target isn't smart. It's also scummy. Maybe the two are related.

FOS: chaotic_diablo

I don't see this as a "quick defense" by Kain. Spreading accusations everywhere?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "quick defense". Are you referring to kain's post not being quick, or that kain's post isn't a defense for sLYph?

Anyway, being a newbie doesn't necesarily mean the person is a bad player. sLYph should explain himself at least.

[chaotic_diablo]

Are there anyone in the theme that use "yall" alot?

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm not in favor of a no lynch at this point. Lynching sLYph may be the only way to move on, unless he claims and we find it valid. I'll wait until he claims.

[chaotic_diablo]

Steve Holt doesn't seem to be a family member, so sLYph can't really be an informant, scum, with that role. Steve is in the show.

The only problem with sLYph's role is that he isn't within the family. Seeing as the SEC wants us to 'discredit' a family member, I can hardly see how Steve could fit into it.

I didn't really do any deep research, so if I'm incorrect that Steve is not a family member, then correct me.

[chaotic_diablo]

GOB? translation please. GARY BLUTH? In other words Who's the BLuth?

Diablo I dont think that everyone in this game is necessary a family member. There can/could be supporting characters right?

I have no idea if there will be outside characters. If there are, I'm more inclined to believe they'd be protown.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm pretty sure there are enough family members.
GOB, George Sr., Lindsay, Tobias, Michael, Lucille, George Michael, Maeby, and Buster.

And the minor roles:
George Sr's twin brother, Oscar
Lucille's adopted child, Annyong
That's 11 there, only one more to fill the spot, which is Steve.

There might be more, but again, I'm not familiar with the theme.

[chaotic_diablo]

To me, every role seems to be pretty much ambigious as to which/who is scum.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm sort of confused with Y's accusation on al_ko.

I've FoSed him already. With this and rereading his answer to my accusation, I think it is enough for a vote.

For those who don't remember, I asked him why he wanted a No Lynch.
His answer was something about that it will probably end the day that way because of the deadline.

Rereading now, I noticed something: In his first post, he said that we will end in a No Lynch and that could be helpful for the tow because that way we will have more info, but when he responded to my post, he said that No Lynch is something bad that we should try to avoid and asked for a delay in the deadline.
Seems to me like trying not to go against the stream (Same with the sLYph wagon).

Could you quote the evidence your referring to?

[chaotic_diablo]

Name claiming is a double-edged sword. One reason is because there are times when a the SK needs to kill a certain player in order to have some kind of effect happen. Since an SK is bad, it probably won't help protown.

However, it could also help us. For instance, if a person needs to find someone to form a 'mason' group, then they can immediately just target the person after the mass nameclaim instead of wasting time.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm undecided on mass nameclaiming as of the moment.

I agree mostly with rite that we have a mafia group, Sk, and vigilante.

[chaotic_diablo]

I say we use the name claim as a last resort. I'm pretty sure that we have other clues to go on, particularly the stuff from day one. Someone go reread it or something and give us the bare details.

[chaotic_diablo]

Actually, this point has almost nothing to it. The tracker (Probably instead of a cop) and the doc are dead. No one to protect. Except for the scum, of course...

I'm guessing that this is an assumption.

I don't think that the mod is responsible as Y has described. I'm more inclined to believe that it was a delayed lynch. With sLYph having the majority of votes, it could have just been transferred to the next day. We(if not, then just me) had the impression that whoever had the most votes would die, yet it didn't happen. The evidence is pretty slim, but it's a theory we can test on our next lynch.

[chaotic_diablo]

Actually, this point has almost nothing to it. The tracker (Probably instead of a cop) and the doc are dead. No one to protect. Except for the scum, of course...

I'm guessing that this is an assumption.

I don't think that the mod is responsible as Y has described. I'm more inclined to believe that it was a delayed lynch. With sLYph having the majority of votes, it could have just been transferred to the next day. We(if not, then just me) had the impression that whoever had the most votes would die, yet it didn't happen. The evidence is pretty slim, but it's a theory we can test on our next lynch.

That theory is interesting, and possible, but I believe it's highly unlikely, and I'd rather not risk another no lynch just to test out this theory.

We dont' have to necessarily have to no lynch. All we have to do is lynch someone, and since they have the majority of votes, they might get killed the next day instead. So basicly we just continue what we're doing until we decide who we want to lynch.

[chaotic_diablo]

Hmm... I should probably post.

Can anyone catch me up? I'm confused and I seriously don't have the time to read through everything.

In recent events, there is great controversy over how each person died. For instance, Y is suggesting that it could have been from a "modkill". Other examples include a 'delayed lynch' and the possilibities of having 3 scum groups or less.

As of this moment, there is evidence that a double kill isn't pausible because of the 3 different kinds of kill types: discrediting, banana stuffed in the thoat, and implication. However, people are tending to believe and even defend it because it's

possible

.

Currently the two with the most attention on them are Y and pablito. They have been arguing the most about this.

[chaotic_diablo]

ok, I see. The only thing is... If we reach the actual number required to lynch, then they're lynched and die. If we don't, then that's when the deadline would hit, and essentially end in a no lynch, but this could possibly prove whether it's true or not. But ya, we should just continue doing what we're doing.

If we get the required number but the person isn't lynched that day, then it proves the theory anyway since he/she'll die the next day. If the theory is correct, it reveals that there are only two killing groups and not three.

[chaotic_diablo]

I prefer not to have a name claim at this point. Even if we did, a dice tag can be easily faked by scum. Just type in the appropriate numbers, bold the right words, and you have the fake roll there.

Nameclaiming doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Many mods take measures to prevent such a thing from breaking the game, so I don't see how it will help correlate kill types to each character. In the most unlikeliest situation, there will be an improbable role and that will screw us over if we take that bait.

[chaotic_diablo]

Faking the dice roll isn't as easy as I've said, still, I'd prefer a different alternative if possible.

I'm not sure how a nameclaim would help determine the kill types. Most mods take measures to prevent such a thing from 'breaking' the game so I fail to see how it would help.

[chaotic_diablo]

Okay then, let's start the voting. I vote against a nameclaim.

[chaotic_diablo]

We can have as many power role as a mod wants. We can even have only 3 townies and the rest power roles.

I'd like Pablito to as least flip a coin or something. Participation is one of the key themes in a mafia game. Claiming apathy and indifference sort of ruins the game IMO.

[chaotic_diablo]

We can have as many power role as a mod wants. We can even have only 3 townies and the rest power roles.

We can also have 11 mafias. I'm working with logic, not with known numbers.

3 townies, 1 back up cop, 3 masons, 3 scum, 1 cop, 1 doc. There you go, 3 townies, rest power roles. We can switch in the back up with a roleblocker! Or we can switch one of the townies to be an SK. Better yet, a traitor! That logical enough for you?

Pablito, I suggested a vote in order to put the mass nameclaim to rest. I agree that discussing it is bogging us down, so as a result, we need to actually do something to finish it off quickly. The sooner we get the votes, the sooner we can get back to the task at hand. If we manage to pull through with the mass nameclaim, then protown will at least profit from it. If not, then you can start some more interesting points against Y from the new information gathered by the votes. So far, I'm not a big fan of Y either for bringing the mass nameclaim up again.

[chaotic_diablo]

For:

Y
alko
Kain

Against:

Chaotic_Diablo
zu_faul
PBug

Not Voting

Gaspode/replacement(?)
rite/replacement
Pablito

If we get one-two more votes for against, then the nameclaim is officially scrapped.

[chaotic_diablo]

For:

Y
alko
Kain

Against:

Chaotic_Diablo
zu_faul
PBug
Pablito

Not Voting

Gaspode/replacement(?)
rite-viper0933

One more for against and that's the majority.

[chaotic_diablo]

Pablito, I'm aware that arranging a name-claim doesn't progress the game further, but there is really nothing for me to add. The game is stalling for a reason and people are not posting anything of use because of it. The best I can come up with is to update the vote count since alko isn't updating it. I've already revealed my position in my last few posts so you can't really say I haven't been trying to make progress.
As far as giving you a bad image, I felt that your own posting is the cause of it.

[chaotic_diablo]

As far as giving you a bad image, I felt that your own posting is the

cause

of it.

I cannot deny that. I said "painting a bad image" though, if it makes a difference to you.

Okay fine, your posting

caused

yourself to look bad, and my post

worsened

it. Although I disagree with the statement, I'm not about to argue such things since it looks like something you've just thrown together.

[chaotic_diablo]

We aren't really getting any progress here, so I'll just state a couple 'concerns' I have.

Mmk. That was a lot to read, but I think I'm caught up. I could care less whether we name claim or not, so I'm gonna vote FOR.

As to scum.... Vote: Pablito He sort of sat in the shadows, popping out every now and then to add his two cents. Once he was even remotely fingered, however, he's all over it and seems really upset. Screams scum to me.

This post really nags at me because it states that she doesn't really care about the nameclaim, yet she still supports it. If she was scum, then it gives me the feeling that scum has nothing to lose with or without the nameclaim. It's a pretty weak tell, but that's all I can come up with.
Her second paragraph is sort of correct. Earlier in the game, Pablito has been popping up and down. However, as day two progressed, he's become the most active player so far. Although the hiding in the shadows do not apply to him, the part where he gets upset seems somewhat true to an extent.

Another concern I have is why rite isn't dead. Certainly scum wouldn't want to have a confirmed townie around. There are many possibilities, but I just want to raise that question up.

As for pablito, he has an extensive 'hit list' a of right now. Ths list consists of players he has either fosed or voted: Y, zu_faul, chaotic_diablo, kain, Al_ko, and Pbug. The three who haven't been on his list yet are the two replacements and himself. He's a bit paranoid IMO.

So far, I still haven't not received any explanation of how a name-claim would help us. The argument that we can 'guess' the roles by the name can be used, but such a tactic is highly unlikely and improbable. I stated earlier that town might profit from a nameclaim, but I was assuming that someone else would have an idea what to do with the new information. I really have no idea.

[chaotic_diablo]

I doubt that rite was targetted at all. Day one stated that rite was protected, and there was no indication day two. Fritzler's attitude day one seemed to confirm that he protected rite, but I'm not quite sure. In addition, if rite was protected night 2, then we have 4 killing groups, not three. I'm sticking with the 3.

Al_ko did bring up the mass nameclaim, but it sort of died down right up until Y brought it up again. Despite the arguments, there haven't really been anything convincing with the strategy. Out of the 4 that supported it, one just didn't really care. As such, I'm more inclined to believe that the three who supported it might have a connection, though a weak one. I'd like them to give us a reasonable explanation of why we should have gone through with the nameclaim.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'd like to switch my vote for the nameclaim. There's been less activity from the non-supporters that I doubt we will get anywhere.

[chaotic_diablo]

Maeby Funke

Original Roll String: 1d7

1 7-Sided Dice: (7) = 7

1 Mariyta (replacing gaspode)
2 viper0933 (replacing rite)
3 Y
4 al_kohaulec
5 Kain
6 pablito
7 zu_Faul

[chaotic_diablo]

Here's what you do. Your copy the list:
1 Mariyta (replacing gaspode)
2 viper0933 (replacing rite)
3 Y
4 al_kohaulec
5 pablito
6 zu_Faul

Original Roll String: 1d6

1 6-Sided Dice: (1) = 1

[chaotic_diablo]

Here's what you do. Your copy the list:
1 Mariyta (replacing gaspode)
2 viper0933 (replacing rite)
3 Y
4 al_kohaulec
5 pablito
6 zu_Faul

Original Roll String: 1d6 (STATIC)

1 6-Sided Dice: (2) = 2

Ignore the "here's what you do part". I was originally going to post the instructions, but midway I thought it was easier to just do it for him.
If there are no problems or disagreements, Al_ko is up.

[chaotic_diablo]

I've been intentionally not posting because I'm having trouble making a decent post that won't lead me to oblivion.

The new info on Pablito seems plausible. Considering that he's one away from being lynched, I'd like a claim. I'm not too confident of this type of reasoning.

AS for the maeby stuff, I'm going to object the scummy stuff made against her since I'm pretty sure she is innocent, and considering that she's my character role.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm having problems with PBug having information on scum because it's part of his role. It's something I want to keep an eye on.

fos PBug

I don't really believe Pablito's role, however, I want to see what others may come up with before something happens. As stated earlier, we're at a point when just by lynching badly will make protown lose.

[chaotic_diablo]

Currently, I believe zu_faul's theory on Y. If pablito is a roleblocker, then it would make sense that if he blocked a killer, then there would be no kill. The three kills we had last night might have had a vigilante, so he/she would not have chose a target night one.

Here's my take of post 443 and onward. Mariyta is once again using the name claims as the basis of a lynch, but it's not really effective as Pablito was found not guilty when we tried it.

I'm not quite sure what led Mariyta to believe that Y was protown, but I've seen no evidence that may prove it whatsoever. From what I've seen, Y could not deny or prove Pablito's claims. Using hindsight, it looked more like Y was poking around for information. If Y was blocked, there would be no reason to ask for flavor. If he wasn't, then he would know that Pablito was lying.
Followed by that, Y exaggerated that zu_faul had been 'after' him the entire game and that he 'jumped' immediately on Mariyta. It didn't seem that way to me.
When asked why we should have done a mass nameclaim, Y replied that there were numerous 'advantages and disadvantages' accompanying it. However, he was not really specific. So far, the only 'plausible' evidence of an advantage was explained by al_ko. I still don't see the 'numerous and 'many' advantages.

Pablito's role seems plausible for the theme, but I'd rather rely on more compelling evidence. I dont' see any reason to lynch him at this point.

vote Y

I haven't voted in a while.

Note: I didn't go back to reread, so if I'm wrong about somethings, then correct me.

[chaotic_diablo]

I am using the name claims, because I don't have much else to go off of. I have looked back over previous posts, and the name claims, coupled w/ peoples' responses and whatnot, I feel zu_faul is the best lynch for today. Our doctor was killed, which makes me a bit nervous. I would rather make the right lynch, than waste it on a non-informant (aka: scum).

I can understand that you are using the name claims to back your accusations. However, the point is that you tried it and it didn't work out as well as you thought. Twice now you've been wrong. When you suspected maeby would be scum, al_ko came up and disproved it. When we got the nameclaim from Pablito, we had information to back up his theme. Now I don't see how doing it again will help us. Picking out the people who are most likely to be scum because of the nameclaims doesn't seem like a great idea.

[chaotic_diablo]

C_D, could you point out exactly what you want to know? I have no problem answering any questions.

I don't want to ask questions, I want a defense. I feel that making you search for information would provide more pressure for you, and therefore less work for me. I've raised three points against you to refute.

[chaotic_diablo]

By the way, I love how you completely ignored Y's attempt to answer any questions you have.

I don't 'ignore', I miss them because I'm attempting to post.

I said I feel zu_faul is the best lynch based on his reactions and previous scummy posts.... If you can't see that, maybe you are protecting him for some reason....

Now that I think about it, you were on my "list" as well... Hmm.... Very interesting....

I've read your posts clearly. The only problem I have is that you fail to tell us what

kind

of reactions convinced you. I'm not going to spend time rereading the thread just to find information that I don't find scummy. I need you to help convince me of

why

those posts are scummy. Aside from that, I don't see any difference from what you've done before and what your doing now.

Yes, I am on your list. I'm Maeby, the role you suspected as 'guranteed' scum. Since I know I'm not scum, I could care less if I'm on your list or not. It only further proves my point.

I'm certain that my arguments supporting zu_faul is far more suspicious than your, let's say, few pages of support for Y.

[chaotic_diablo]

C_d, if you refuse to take a look for yourself, I'm not going to bother trying to "sum it up" for you. Put in a little effort.

You missed the point. Your asking me to look back and go through pages of info that I don't find scummy because I don't agree with your line of thinking. As a result, there is no point in looking back since my opinion will not change.
In my opinion, I feel that even you have forgotten what you based your accusations on.

I didn't receive any PM about being blocked. If I would have said so before I ask for flavour, pablito could have made up whatever he wanted, knowing we can't prove it wrong. We can't anyway, but I wanted to limit his options and create a possibility for mistakes in case he's lying.

I can't approve or deny being role-blocked, so we have only what pablito said. It sounds plausible.

I don't believe people receive pms when they are blocked. Then again, I've never been blocked before.

I'm not convinced with your explanation. Even if you tried to limit his options, you could not disprove any of it. As a result, whatever he said would go anyway. It seemed more like a useless effort to me.

About zu_Faul following me:
pablito noticed it too. First, actually. He was the one that said he thinks we're both scum or masons because the way of the way he agreed with me.

After unvoting pablito, he jumps on the first one to point at him. Mariyta's post had nothing concrete in it and it could have been ignored or answered easily. z_F decided to fos.

In the same post he mentions the blocked-NK thing, yet doesn't vote nor fos me. Mariyta? Much more scummy for sure...

If I'm correct, Mariyta has been pointing fingers against him for quite a while. If zu_faul failed to respond to her previous 'idle' statements, then why respond to the one she made now? In my belief, there is something much more that constituted an fos while yours did not.
Pablito claimed that he was in a joking manner when he said both you and zu_faul were scum or masons together. I can't deny that Pablito suspected zu_faul, but there is little evidence that he supported you for most of the game.

First of all we had the deaths that looked like the roles fit the character. So it was a pro.
I also said that the name claim was not as important as the vote. Why would some one want to remain anonymous? That was when you decided to switch sides, by the way. Could you tell me why you were so eager to prove that you don't mind the name claim?
Just something to remember.

We had roles that fit the character in ways we didn't comprehend until it happened. It's similiar to getting the answer to the riddle from someone else, then realizing how it fit with the question.
The reason why someone would remain anonymous is because as stated earlier, they become big targets, both for the Sk and scum. There are other reasons, but I'd rather not state them.
You exagerate that I was 'eager' when I clearly was not. I voted against it up until discussion started to dwindle.

We also had the possibility to get some one counterclaimed, which didn't happen (Although we think some one got away with a lie).

The biggest con, by the way, was that the mafia could find out the power roles. If the names are useless, it won't help the scum either.

Another explanation is that no one lied. As a result, we just lost the game of 'outguessing the mod'. The good part is that scum probably won't find the power roles as easily as they think.

Please read before you send me to look up for things I said in the last page or two. I feel that making me search for information instead of reading stuff on your own, is extra work for me.

Please read what I say before you accuse me of anything. Thank you.

If you were scum, then why would I make myself do work? Makes more sense to make you do it instead of me.

[chaotic_diablo]

Interesting. I don't remember c_d putting this much effort into the game before...

FOS: chaotic_diablo

BS.

[chaotic_diablo]

[quote="Y']I had two options: Let him know he can say whatever he wants and make him think he should be careful. On my side it isn't relevant which one I choose, but on his side it might get us something. Whatever info or mishap we can get is good.[/quote]
Which brings me to the point, your poking for information. You've attempted to gain information in numerous ways. First is the name claim. Second is your useless attempt to 'limit' his choice. Third is when you attempted to bring up the nameclaim discussion again. The fourth is in your post where you suggested that I might have been hiding something:

Do you have a good reason for yourself. Interesting. Any one wishes to try and guess what it is?

I don't have a reason to hide myself, but I'm more inclined to believe that there are others who will. My role is related to nameclaiming and although I'm not harmed from it, it is not always the case for everyone else, hence why I was against it.

What you're saying is similar to what I'm saying: Mariyta's accusations have no basis. A "Could you please explain why do you think I'm scum? Your reasoning has no basis" would work better than a "I'm tired of you" FOS.

In the other hand, his accusation about me do have something to them. You voted based on them. Why would he FOS her and not me? Except for her being an easier target, of course.

I'm not saying Mariyta's accusations are baseless(although it's true), I'm saying that zu_faul failed to respond to Mariyta's previous idle statements as proven when she constantly referred back to her 'list'. zu_faul's difference in reaction might suggest that something is going on.
zu_faul's reaction reflects mine as I'm tired of her constantly refering to her 'list' and using it as a BS reason to investigate those people. I'm not a fan of McCarthyism.
I voted based on my own reasons, as you can see in my post.

He wasn't joking. He didn't mean what he was saying, it wasn't a joke. It was an exaggeration.

Yes. I exaggerated on that matter. But you did see a pattern for those voting against the name-claim. You said so yourself.

Some one (Was it PBuG?) mentioned that a name appeared on his role PM. Either some one lied about his his name, or the one who told us about the PM is lying. We have a lier anyway, we just need to find who it is.

Then you can rightly say that Pablito's exageration is still to my point. You claimed that zu_faul was constantly dogging you. Now that Pablito just 'exagerated' his statement, then it was just a quick assumption.

No, I didn't say I saw a pattern in the name-claim. Could you go back and pick out the post? I went back and didn't see any evidence of it.

You know better than to trust anything anyone claims. PBug is a player and therefore still capable of being scum. The part that he even has information on scum implanted in his role already suggests that he might be lying. Why might he lie? Because we are at a lynch or lose situation and anything that can lead us astray is good for scum.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'd like to switch my vote for the nameclaim.

There's been less activity from the non-supporters

that I doubt we will get anywhere.

This is what I'm refering to.

That's a while back. However, it does not suggest that I found a pattern. It simply states that we have nothing better to go on.

C_D, how you play this game, I don't understand. First, no one is allowed to try to gather information? Um, how are we supposed to determine anything if we don't gather information? Second, yes, I have a list. I write down those I think are suspect. I'm sure everyone else does to, they just don't post their list. Get off it. The more you talk, the more I think you could be scum.

First, the information Y attempted to gather had to deal with roles. I have no problems gathering information on other topics.
Second, I'm not going to let up because you want to. Yes, others have lists as well, but they don't constantly refer back to it and hint at our suspicion without proof. When they start picking on you, you bring it out and start 'investigating' their past posts. I still haven't seen any of this 'investigation' being done. So far, you've based most of your opinion on me for what I have recently said, not what I have done in the past.

I don't see any of my posts as untrue. I simply see people stating that it is untrue. Could you tell me to what extent how I have been untruthful?

[chaotic_diablo]

So far, you've based most of your opinion on me for what I have recently said, not what I have done in the past.

That's cause you really didn't say much before.

And that proves that I'm scum and subject to suspicion.

[chaotic_diablo]

C_D, how you play this game, I don't understand. First, no one is allowed to try to gather information? Um, how are we supposed to determine anything if we don't gather information? Second, yes, I have a list. I write down those I think are suspect. I'm sure everyone else does to, they just don't post their list. Get off it. The more you talk, the more I think you could be scum.

I didn't say it. It was Mariyta.

@ Kain: Ok. It does fit beter to the sentence...

O right, sorry. I meant to write mariyta, but I wrote Y instead because of all the Y posts I was quoting earlier.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm not sure what zu_faul means by the way it was proven best. However, I do know that Mariyta is a she.

[chaotic_diablo]

The day is going to end in another no lynch if we can't decide soon. As for me, I don't want to lynch someone without getting the claim. Otherwise we could have just lynched Pablito from the beginning.

So we have a couple of options
1. Lynch Pablito
2. Lynch kain, CD, or zu_faul without a claim
3. No lynch
4. Waste time
5. Any late suggestions from anyone else

[chaotic_diablo]

Why don't you claim, CD?

I'm eating a cookie.

[chaotic_diablo]

Ooo, what kind??

Chocolate chip.

[chaotic_diablo]

zu_faul 3- mariyta, Y, viper
Y 2- Al_ko, CD

That's about it.

Yes, it was spam. It was an answer to a rhetorical question. If you want to test the theory, you could ask me again.

[chaotic_diablo]

Account problems solved, thanks to jeep.

[chaotic_diablo]

A goon means to be a 'goon'. Mostly cannon fodder for the mafia godfather. Generic mafia role.

I still thinking of whether kain's evidence has credibility.

Meanwhile, Tobias and Lindsay variously seek legal help from Bob Loblaw concerning their troubled marriage.

Disturbed by both Lindsay's and Tobias's advances, Bob Loblaw chooses to no longer represent the Bluth family. Attorney Jan Eagleman offers to represent the family, on the condition that they participate in a mock trial in a new reality courtroom show, presided over by Judge Reinhold.

Someone clarify what this portion in wikipedia means.

[chaotic_diablo]

PBug, it states in kain's role that he would receive the clue if the cop died. It didn't say Mariyta had a choice in the matter. Kain is Bob Loblaw.

However, kain failed to state clear details in his role. He simply stated that he will be given a clue by the cop. From here, I think he assumed that it was the cop's last investigation. We don't know whether the clue is the investigation or just a phrase/word that Mariyta made up to give to us/kain.

I didn't see any flavor aside from his attempt to cover the gap as a 'cop-lawyer' relationship.

[chaotic_diablo]

Here's what I don't get. If the cop gets an investigation on a player, then wouldn't the result reflect the role, not the player's s/n?

[chaotic_diablo]

CD,
The result reflects the role, but we're assuming the result was guilty. Now the cop is dead, and what Kain is claiming is that the cop, since she died, sent him a hint as to what the target for investigation was, and this hint could possibly reflect the player's s/n as it was player created.

I don't get it, I assumed that the investigation was the mod's answer as stated by kain himself in these sentences:

Im guessing the mod created a vague answer for everyone. Perhaps walking for me, animal for zufaul,dancing for c_D etc. something vague but something to work with.

[chaotic_diablo]

Kain is at the top of my suspicion list now mostly because there is now more hard evidence against him than Y.
1. Role not part of the family
2. Can't confirm his role
3. Jump on the most suspicious player, Y
4. incorrect use of logic
5. Lurker-type actions in the past

For Y
1. Digging for role information
2. Likes to twist the words of others
3. Not clear on what his own role is suppose to do

[chaotic_diablo]

1. What should I do? Ask the scum to be nice and tell us who they are?
2. I don't remember doing so. I might misunderstand or was misunderstood, but what Kain is doing is "Twist the words of others". I didn't do it.
3. I'm a normal town except for a one time night protection. Since the flavour is "Can't be interrogated", I'm assuming it has some holes and isn't a perfect protection. It's good to be cautious.

Any further questions?

1. I don't really think doing so will yield results since the most likely thing to happen is that they're lie to you. My point is that you've shown consistency and that's suspicious.
2. In that case, you might have just misunderstood something and then posted a bad interpretation of it. I agree that Kain definitely tried to do something...
3. Too much exageration on my part. I should have put something like "paranoid/cautious of his own role" or something like that.

Overall, that's why Kain is on top and not you.

[chaotic_diablo]

Okay Im flabbergasted that yall are not understanding things. I've made my some points and I could make some more but im not going to...im done banging my head against the wall here. If I am lynched at least Ill have the pleasure of seeing my NAME in the death scene and listed as pro town. Then you will know I was right about Y....and then I'll get bragging rights at the end of the game....TOLD YALL SO lol!

Actually, even if you are protown, you still can't be right about Y. Your clue does not directly point to him and it's mostly based on your own assumption.

Y has not been consistent. He did not ask for Kain's flavour and try to dig deeper as opposed to how he tried to do so with Pablito. This inconsistency is probably because Kain stated evidence against him.

I have an assumption about Y's night protection, but I'll keep it to myself for now.

[chaotic_diablo]

Again, even if we lynched Y and he's town, we can't be sure that kain is even 100% scum. His clue is extremely vague and probably isn't referring to Y at all.

I don't see any possible explanation on who the clue could be referring to other than Y. However, Kain hasn't presented any compelling evidence and I still doubt the credibility of it.

I really want to hear the opinions of others.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm up for a claim from Kain. I just don't believe in the evidence he presented enough.

[chaotic_diablo]

Well... you can say how your claim fits into the theme. What does a lawyer have anything to do with the bluth family?

[chaotic_diablo]

I just came up with something, if Kain got the clue from Mariyta, then he can quote it. You can't quote the mod, but you can quote pms from players. Of course, Kain asking a replacement poses a/several problem/s...

[chaotic_diablo]

MOD Due to the insanity of my schedule and my life I'm asking for a replacement.

Nice one... You're leaving a really messed up situation to your replacement and give us no explanation for your actions.

I say we lynch him and save ourselves some time and energy...

I say we wait for the replacement. We don't really have any other choice and I'd prefer that we lynch scum than risk it on a game of chance.

[chaotic_diablo]

While we wait for Kain, should we discuss a different issue? Once Kain gets back, we can just jump right back. It might help pass the time and set up for a day four lynch or something.

[chaotic_diablo]

Here's a theory, Kain is scum, but his clue is real!

[chaotic_diablo]

I haven't made any conclusive judgements on anyone yet, though I do have doubts. Im' fine with al_ko revealing his theories and stuff.

[chaotic_diablo]

We already had some bad experience by thinking a character can't be scum (George Bluth, scum? No way <Sarcasm>). That said, the only basis you have to clear you all is gone.

Actually, that would be me. I don't support an outguessing the mod type clue, but if there is something with actually substance, such as information stated in a role, then that would hold more leverage. As such, my role states that al_ko is innocent.

About the "I found c_d and he found me" thing, that could be a scum tale too. The difference between masons and mafia is their allience. Two mafias can claim masons with no problem.

Take your pick, deem both of us scum or masons.

Mariyta also had c_d on her "List". I can't remember who else. Actually, I think I was the only one "Not on her list" (But I'm probably forgetting people).

al_ko was not on her list. Even if he was, I'm pretty sure Mariyta explained why she took him off.

Y, what do you think about pab?

As a side note, we won't come to any actual 'proof' in a while. The best we can do is assume.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm not sure about him. His role claim sounds logical, but it could be either a scum role or a town role.

Since he says he blocked Kain, lynching Kain might give us information about pablito.

I can't say for sure if he's scum or not, but I think we have better options for today (I wouldn't mind lynching him tomorrow if Kain turns up innocent).

Is there a reason why we shouldn't lynch pab instead of Kain?

I'm just throwing out questions to see if I can make a decision.

[chaotic_diablo]

Kain has been far more scummy and pablito has contributed more.

I have a different opinion. I propose a mass roleclaim. We have seven people, and only two without a claim.
Pablito is a roleblocker.
Y is some kind of one-time protection thing.
Kain is some kind of clue receiver.
Both al_ko and I are masons.

That leaves viper and PBug. The roles are a bit sketchy for some people, this includes Y and Kain.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm going to list some points on my assumption of Y being with Pablito as scum partners.

1. Pablito 'guessed' correctly that zu_faul was scum. He also stated that Y was a scum partner to zu_faul. Followed by that, Y questioned Pablito of how pablito could have possibly make such a conclusion and be so sure of it. Pablito's response was that he was merely jesting. Idle talk between scum partners? Maybe, but then again, I'm just trying to see if it works.
2. Pablito's role cannot be confirmed. One of his targets was Y. If they were scum partners, it's a anonymous confirmation. The addition of Pablito claiming that he blocked Kain after Kain had claimed makes it far more suspicious.
3. Both Y and Pablito have been at odds against each other for the entire game, making a match-up very hard to come by. Most likely pre-planned.
4. As of recently, they've been supporting each other, and Pablito slipped up in Post 642.

We have seven players and three scum still alive. Barring cross kills and successful vig hits - we don't want to put it at three vs. three. We need to be careful today and spend the time to make sure we hit scum.

There's no way he could have known that there were exactly 'three' scum left unless he knew beforehand. Given that it could have just been common sense, I still have a slight hunch that it's the forward.
5. Y is playing 'ignorance'.

I haven't notice something really scummy that pablito did. At least not as weird as what Kain did before his disappearance.

Only problem with my assumption is I don't know how zu_faul would fit in. I'm going to reread the thread a bit more.

[chaotic_diablo]

Kain could've confirmed my block, but chose not too. Why - prolong this discussion on Y-pablito pair. Also, if I'm a mafia roleblocker, why would I have chosen Kain? He's got a suspicious name claim and was out there before. Furthermore, I was suspicious of Kain day one. I think Kain is scum and it's getting more obvious now.

Kain had already claimed when you revealed that you blocked him. It wasn't that he chose not to, but he couldn't unless he wants to create a contradiction/paradox/etc.

I'm assuming that the existence of the SK makes four. I take "several" to mean more than two. I was basing the number off the original post.

They claim to have several informants within the family that are willing to testify against them in exchange for immunity.

Well actually, I was more basing it off the current trend in games, since I've never seen a 2 mafia + 1 SK setup.

I knew common sense would always keep me down.

Anyway, I'm not quite sure that lynching Kain is the way to go, at least not right now.

[chaotic_diablo]

I think we

should

lynch Kain. Nobody has been scummier. Yes, pablito has been scummy, but Kain has been scummier. If Kain is lynched and revealed as town, then pablito would definitely be the next lynch, and I would vote him.

Does anyone other than c_d agree that I should claim? And, c_d, if not Kain, then who?

Can you back up your statements that Kain is the scummiest?

My gut tells me Y is the best lynch. The secondary one would be Pablito, followed by kain.

[chaotic_diablo]

We have more than one killing group. We know this because we had more than kill N2.
The most probable is a mafia and a SK or vig.
z_F claimed vig and wasn't counter-claimed, so it leaves us with the SK.
Last night we had only one kill.
The killing method for the mafia did show up, meaning the one that didn't kill is the SK.
There are two options I know of that could cancel the kill (Except for him skipping his kill, which is improbable):
1. My protection.
2. Role-blocker.
Flavour-wise, my protection can't protect me against physical harm.
What's left? Blocked SK.
Who is the role-blocker? pablito.
Who did he block? Guess right: YOU.

Y, last night we had one kill. However, it corresponds to night one when rite was targetted. that was the only thing that happened. Possibly, we have a SK that can only kill during an even night.

zu_faul not being counterclaimed does not mean we don't have a vig. It is a common tactic to claim power roles in order to flush them out and kill them during the night. possibly, the vig isn't that stupid.

We have two unclaimed people, so it's too premature to say that there are only two options that could have prevented the kill. Like I said, the SK could be an even night killer.

[chaotic_diablo]

PBug, there are several problems with your role.
1. You did not state the purpose of hiding
2. Mariyta did not come into the game night one
3. We've had a total of three nights, you did not state your night 3 choice

[chaotic_diablo]

1.

I am hiding because I discovered my mother had evil intentions and I no longer felt safe.

2. I said Mariyta because when I refer to replaced people I usually use their replacement's name instead.
3. That's because we didn't have a Night 3, we had a Night 0, and I forgot so I didn't check my choice. I hid behind you, c_d.

1. I was looking more for the purpose of why he's hiding untheme-wise. Such as, if buster is hiding to protect himself being night killed by lucille, or he is hiding because he's a target? It doesn't make sense since your role is almost like a cop, except you die if you find scum.
2. Makes sense.
3. I don't think we have night choices in night 0. However, I have my three choices during my search for al_ko. Gaspode, commodore amazing, then al_ko.

If your role is correct, then we have me, Pab, you, and al_ko(mason) who are confirmed. That leaves Y, Kain, and viper. Of course, it isn't that easy since there are plenty of other factors.

[chaotic_diablo]

Yes, there is a slight contradiction on me that Kain pointed out. However, my opinion has changed a bit from then and now.

I have to thank Kain for posting that large conversation in one post. It saves me the time in going back to read it myself.

As for Y's one-time ability, here's what I get. Y says he has night protection, Kain points out that Y's role is broken. After that, Y exclaims that he thought it was clear that it was a one-time ability. At that time, I took note of it, and as of now, I think it's backpeddling on Y's part. "During the night" and "Every night" seems like a bad cover up to claim that the wording was 'clear'. I give that point to Kain.

Now the banana part, I give that to Y because it's clear that kain was using bad/unique logic.

PBug, okay, it's night 0. However, I'd still like to point out that we had three nights anyway. As a result, you'd still need to have three results. I sent my choice night 0 and got one.

Kain, can you quote the post that mariyta sent you?

[chaotic_diablo]

Seemingly, I find it impossible that PBug can send in a choice N0, then forget to check it until D3. If he had, then he wouldn't have voted me yesterday and get al_ko to contradict him. However, as impossible as it is, I'm not that surprised. Thanks for clearing that up PBug.

[chaotic_diablo]

Let's see...
1. Viper needs to claim
2. We need Viper to speak more.
3. Pablito needs to speak more.
4. Al_ko needs to be replaced.
5. The mod needs to know who dissed him.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm very close to concluding that Y is antitown of a sort. I'm not liking how he's alway casting doubt around in every corner. His attempt to cast suspicion on the masons is proof of that.

Two scum-buddies confirming each other as a mason is very convenient. No one can counter-claim you, no one can check your past posts for hints ("They just found each other") - Pretty safe claim. [/qoute] Yes, there are hints in the past posts. In fact, al_ko brought it up pretty recently.

(some stuff snipped out to reduce length)
[qoute="al_ko"]I should've known CD was Maeby before because of one of his posts... saying something like

"One reason for this is to find potential mason partners."

We were potential mason partners, and this allowed us to find each other. Both of our roles confirm each other as innocent, and they're pretty much exactly the same.

He was referring to the post below.

However, it could also help us. For instance, if a person needs to find someone to form a 'mason' group, then they can immediately just target the person after the mass nameclaim instead of wasting time.

In addition, we aren't the only ones who can confirm each other. Just recently, PBug confirmed I was innocent due to his role. I'm not quite sure how you managed to come up with your accusations, but it's apparent that your trying to form some kind of doubt in the other players of the mason's credibility. For me, I see no reason why a protown player should do so.

major fos Y

[chaotic_diablo]

... Sorry, quotes are all messed up. Just try to read through the mess, it should be clear since there are plenty of space between them.

[chaotic_diablo]

Why? Because if we always assume that claimed masons are really masons, scum can pretend to be masons with no one to suspect that.

I don't know if you noticed it, but I create doubt about everything. This is my style: Always check all the options.

I'm not saying you're scum, I'm just saying that it's a possibility we can't ignore.

I did notice that you create doubt about everything, however, I haven't been able to do anything about it since your previous ones were 'plausible'. Obviously it's a good thing for town to consider all the possibilities, but it concerns me since casting too much doubt will confuse the town.

The part that triggered my scumdar is when you tried to do so with reasons that were presented just a few pages ago. All of them are apparently/blatantly false.
1. No past posts to hint at masons
2. No one can confirm the masons except themselves

Now this just seems that your making up points to confuse us.

Here's what I think scum will try to prevent/confuse. They will attempt to prevent the town from confirming innocent people by casting doubt. This helps scum because protown will have a lower chance to hit scum if they have to choose between 6-7 players over 4-5.

[chaotic_diablo]

Sadly, Kain is using flawed logic. Y did not say he believed PBug. Y said that no one could confirm the mason's credibility. Since PBug could, it counters Y's argument. Whether Y believes PBug or not isn't important.

I agree, Y's bad memory sounds made up. I'll keep my major fos and withold my vote until viper comes up.

[chaotic_diablo]

I'm not sure we have the time to test and confirm PBug's role. In addition, tesing it would prove difficult if he's lying.

Kain, on the other hand, has become scummy by doing scummy things (Misleading, straw-manning, false accusations, etc.).

umm... where did misleading and false accusation come from?

Something doesn't hold water. Spectrum, who did rite target for his discredits? It's not blatantly obvious to me even if it does seem so.

[chaotic_diablo]

Misleading came from two things:
1. His role. He says that he got a PM with a hint that points directly at me. He says that although some may think that the clue is vague, it must point at me (Thus everybody were trying to lynch me instead of trying to figure out the clue).
2. After I claimed two times that my ability is a one time ability, he kept saying that it is an all time ability. Why did he do so?

I don't see how admitting a clue is vague and expressing your opinion on it as misleading. From what I observed, people didn't jump on because it pointed to you, but because you had displayed some suspicious activity in the past. Both Pablito and al_ko said so and to be honest, you weren't exactly at the very bottom of my suspicion list either. It looked more like a catalyst.

To false accuse me of lying about my role. He also accused me based on his "clue" without even trying to analyze it.

He also accused me for trying to show him as an SK with no logic, thus saying I was straw-manning and making me a liar (A logical explanation was given before).

If Kain accused you of being a liar and a SK, there's no way we can tell if he's right or wrong. It isn't exactly 'false' until it's tested.

[chaotic_diablo]

It is false if you make up your proof.
He said that I'm a liar for not providing logical explanation after I did (Not flawless, but logical). He didn't prove me wrong, he completely ignored my base and said my point is baseless.

And how is this a 'false' accusation? It is more correct to say that he used a 'baseless' accusation to attack a person in order to get that person lynched.

Yes, I make up my proof, but I make them up based off the posts. So it isn't some kind of jumbo mishmash I put together out of thin air.

About the clue:
He didn't say it is vague and expressed his thoughts, he canceled the option of it being vague (As it might appear to

other

people) and pointed it at me as if it was a solid fact.

Here's where your wrong. He definitely said it might not point to you. However, he also said that he didn't know who it could point to and the best he could come up with is Y.

True "alphabet" does not most defeinately point at Y but it is the best conclusion I can come to a this point.

al_ko later came up with the same conclusion.

Here's my thoughts, the masons will be the one of the least likely to be targeted. Why? Because if one of them die, the other gets confirmed, hence it's more harmful than helpful for scum. If PBug is protown, he will not be targetted either because then it would confirm 'alot' of people. So that leaves Pablito, spectrum, Y, and Kain. Pablito is most likey going to die because of his roleblocking ability. Next comes Kain for his unknown and unclear role. Then come the useless townies.

My suggestion is to lynch one of the four. That forces SK and scum to pick one of the 'three' targets left or force a confirmation.

[chaotic_diablo]

So... Pretty obvious what was the intntion: More kills, more chances to nail scum. They probably didn't like the idea.

We got the SK yesterday (Happy me). I guess my logic does have something in it...

I don't like PBuG's 'Role'.

FoS PBuG.

Well, I was wrong about Kain. I blame the underdog for being so under.

Anyway, I didn't see the reason for the SK to go through that. Is it possible that Kain just made it up or that the clue is real?

Only way we could not have a kill is if Pablito blocked correctly or that scum didn't kill.

[chaotic_diablo]

Wait for all the information to come up before you vote. We still need to see who Pablito blocked and for everyone else to post. There are plenty of possibilities to each action, but there is only one explanation.

[chaotic_diablo]

Sigh... Mainly because I want to see his reaction if he's scum...

vote: PBug

Also because he was being selfish by not sacrificing himself. (if he's a townie)

Selfishness isn't scummy.

Anyway, I'll summarize what we have against PBug and Y

PBug
1. targeted someone he already targeted before
2. deviated from a plan that PBug himself agreed to

Y
1. Pablito blocked Y, and we had no NK
2. SK risked some wild act with a 'clue'

At this point, I agree that Pablito is probably the roleblocker.

[chaotic_diablo]

I didn't target someone I targetted before... I've targetted c_d, then Mariyta, then pablito, then spectrum.

Vote: Y

because of the roleblock.

Actually, you did. You targetted rite, who was replaced by viper who was replaced by spectrum. Targetting spectrum was a waste of time since you had already chose rite before.

[chaotic_diablo]

I didn't target rite or anyone who replaced him until last night, what are you talking about?

Hmm... my brain is going dead. Sorry, you didn't target rite, it was mariyta. I think I read some of the previous posts wrong... I'll reread and tell you my opinion.

[chaotic_diablo]

So far, the only people PBug hasn't checked is Y and al_ko. If al_ko is innocent because of the masons relationship, then that leaves only Y. Now, with everyone else being confirmed, it doesn't fit into the assumed two mafia member left. Using this logic, PBug must be scum.

However, if al_ko is a mason traitor, then that would change things since now the supposed number is met. Too many possibilities, I'm going to take a break.

[chaotic_diablo]

Well... breaks over...

Possibilities:
1. Lynching Y
a. Y is innocent. If Pablito is town, he must block scum or town loses. If he manages to block right, then PBug must choose al_ko. If PBug is alive, he's scum. His death would mean al_ko=scum.
b. Y is guilty. PBug must choose al_ko. same as above, PBug's status determines who's scum.

2. Lynching PBug
a. PBug is innocent. Pablito must block correctly, Y or al_ko is automatically scum.
b. PBug is guilty. No result other than the NK.

3. Lynch Pablito
a. Innocent, town loses no matter what
b. guilty, PBug is automatically guilty.

4. Lynch Spectrum
a. Innocent, Pablito must block correctly if he is town. PBug will choose either al_ko or Y. etc
b. Guilty, Pbug is also guilty

5. Lynch chaotic_diablo
a. innocent, Pablito must block correctly if he's town, same as above
b. Guilty, PBug is guilty and al_ko is questionable

6. Lynch al_ko
a. Innocent, same as above
b. Guilty, Pbug targets Y, if PBug is alive, he's scum.

Organization sucks, so correct me if I'm wrong in anything. If you have questions, ask away.

[chaotic_diablo]

Pablito, since you had already blocked Y before, why did you decide to block Y again? Do you really Y's role?

It's very improbable that any of that is right. Kain invented himself a name and had to give us a role. I'm pretty sure it's made up.

Even so, the possibility of it being plausible is still there. It makes no sense for the SK to risk his/her life on something that could also get him/herself lynched. My theory is that the clue was real and Mariyta did send it, but Kain decided to take advantage of it when he received it.

Yup, 1 question. Are al_ko and Y the only ones PBug hasn't hidden behind?

Yes, PBug checked me night 0, Pablito or Mariyta during night 1-2, and you night 3. Since we have six players left, al_ko and Y are the only ones left.

I'm still making a decision on PBug. His role is strange and overall, his actions don't make much sense,

[chaotic_diablo]

Kain was Annyong. We were sure that Annyong, if existing, would be scum, so he lied and said that he's Bob.

Since he was claiming Bob, he had to make up a role based on his character. He didn't do it well, so we found flaws in his behaviour and lynched him. He was also very stressed by worrying of being caught, so he made some stupid mistakes.

The problem is that Kain took the initiative. He supposively made up his role then decided to reveal it to us by himself? That shouldn't be SK play.

[chaotic_diablo]

PBug, you have three votes. Your one away from a lynch. If you attempted to lynch yourself, then your off by a vote since spectrum already unvoted. So it's Y, Pablito, and you. If the rest of us make a post without voting, then it's more likely that the rest of us are not scum. Makes no sense for scum to just leave the oppurtunity open.

[chaotic_diablo]

Need more posting from spectrum.

I'll post more when we get more info. Most likely we will get to the point where we argue and argue until every point has been discussed. In the end, we will end up gambling.

PBug, how do you do that "I win" under your name?

[chaotic_diablo]

Here's my theory about Kain. In his earlier post, Kain implied that his role was not part of the family(before the mass nameclaim), hence he had some time to think about it. The night Mariyta died, Mariyta sent a clue which could have been sent to anyone. Kain, who was selected, took advantage of it and decided to change some of the facts. He did so by claiming that the clue could only be received by him and fit it so that his role was based around it. Of course, since he thought of a role dealing with a cop death, it would make more sense to reveal the clue right after the cop dies. As a result, he went bonkers and got himself lynched. Good idea, bad execution.

If we direct Pab, then there's a slight chance that scum will try to direct it to a harmless person. If Y is scum, then it's safe to say that Pab has some good intuition. I'd go with Pab just doing whatever he wants. As for PBug, he no longer has a choice in the matter, so directing him would be a waste of time since we're just lynch him if he makes a mistake.

[chaotic_diablo]

What is a 'direct'?

As in we tell Pablito who to block. Instead of letting him do whatever we want, we force him to follow our directions.

Dictionary.com
direct: To give commands or directions.

[chaotic_diablo]

Since Pablito had roleblocked Y before, I decided to check back. Night 0, Pablito blocked Y. Night 1, he roleblocked Fritzler.

Role claim: Marta is a roleblocker. I roleblocked Y night one, and I roleblocked Fritzler last night (stupid move I know, but he ended up dying anyway). Fritzler wasn't playing very aggressively, so I thought it might mean he's scum.

If you noticed, I said N0 and not N1. That's because Pablito claimed Day two and we all know that D2 occurs right after N1.

According to D1, we had no NK. Pablito blocked Y twice and on both occasions, we had no NKs.

[chaotic_diablo]

According to D1, we had no NK. Pablito blocked Y twice and on both occasions, we had no NKs.

This is half of a pattern. N0 some one didn't die because he was protected, while tonight no one died because there was no choice.

We had two scum killing groups. Protecting rite only accounts for one of them, however, we can't tell if he was protected from the SK or the mafia. Since one killing group was taken cared of, what about the other?

I think both PBuG and pablito are scum. PBuG's probably dead, so pablito had an idea: He's a role-blocker, but a scum role-blocker. During the night he makes no kill and then implicates whoever he wants by saying he was blocked. Since he used the "I blocked Y and there was no kill" already, I'm the easiest target.

I hope that he's a role-blocker that has no killing choice, thus we have lots of time after killing PBuG.

Pablito blocked the SK and we didn't have the banana kill.

Spectrum, I've never asked, but who did rite target for his 2 night kills? If you don't know, pm the mod for it.

[chaotic_diablo]

Okay, to clarify:

N0 - Y
N1 - Fritzler
N2 - Kain
N3 - Y

Day two I shared my two blocks so that's the order it all happened.

I don't remember seeing you say you blocked Kain before now... Did you ever mention it?

Yes, he did. You just missed it.

[chaotic_diablo]

At the same time, rite was also protected, as Fritzler, the doc, implied. The distracting the guards could have just been Fritzler's doing and not Pablito's.

However, I do see your point. If Pablito had roleblocked scum, then the night choice would not have been sent anyway, hence there should not have been any sort of scene with doc protection. Then again, there is more than one mafia member, so blocking one of them won't block all of them...

[chaotic_diablo]

My point was that you can't prove me scum by saying that there was no deaths at the same nights pablito claims he blocked me.

It's a handy argument, but below the surface it isn't as concrete as it may appear.

There is nothing in this game that will 'prove' anything until the end. The best we can do is look at what we have and make an educated guess. We're guessing that PBug is scum because of all the scummy things that occur around him. It doesn't 'prove' he's scum, but most likely he is.

So far, there is alot of suspicious activity around Y. Everything around him is vague, but it's still there. No NK's when he's blocked, SK claiming "alphabet", being the one of the three to most likely be scum, smokes for night protection, backtracking... None of them prove that Y is scum, but it's still slightly connected with scumness.

[chaotic_diablo]

Fine, I'll see what Pablito has to say first, then I'll hammer PBug.

[chaotic_diablo]

We have a lynch. I'm the best target for pablito to block.

I forgot PBug voted for himself. Well, that's a lynch.

[chaotic_diablo]

good game. My scumdar really sucks.