Newbie 1765 | URW | Endgame

[Nachomamma8]

My point is that I'd like to avoid getting into a long drawn out argument that benefits nobody but scum.

I never said "let's get into a long drawn out argument that benefits nobody but scum" and as far as I can see there aren't any signs that we were headed in that direction. Is there something that I was missing, or did you maybe pull away a bit prematurely?

[Nachomamma8]

Mafia don't know if there is a cop in the setup or not.

Am I correct though that if there is a mafia roleblocker they know there may be a cop (and a doc)?

Mafia roleblocker knows that the setup is either cop and a doc OR Jailkeeper and a BP. They don't know if there's a cop or not.

[ConnorJC]

Guys, let's stop assuming that LQ's hint that there is a doc in necessarily true. Although, I do like the discussion it's generated (And I wouldn't be surprised if that was LQ's intent).
pedit: I see other people have also drawn this conclusion before I could post

[Nachomamma8]

Probably. He's the IC, it was likely a conversation starter.

LQ's one of the three SEs this game.
I'm the only IC.

I agree with your conclusion, though.

[ConnorJC]

Mafia don't know if there is a cop in the setup or not.

Am I correct though that if there is a mafia roleblocker they know there may be a cop (and a doc)?

Mafia roleblocker knows that the setup is either cop and a doc OR Jailkeeper and a BP. They don't know if there's a cop or not.

"Am I correct though that if there is a mafia roleblocker they know there

may

be a cop (and a doc)?"
Yes, yes he is.

[ConnorJC]

My point is that I'd like to avoid getting into a long drawn out argument that benefits nobody but scum.

I never said "let's get into a long drawn out argument that benefits nobody but scum" and as far as I can see there aren't any signs that we were headed in that direction. Is there something that I was missing, or did you maybe pull away a bit prematurely?

You told me to convince you that I'm town. That's basically the start of an argument between you and me if I try to do that directly.

[Rautherdir]

Well I read the player list wrong.

[Nachomamma8]

"Am I correct though that if there is a mafia roleblocker they know there may be a cop (and a doc)?"
Yes, yes he is.

Just clarifying in case what he meant to say was slightly off from what he said.

[ConnorJC]

Well I read the player list wrong.

No problem. Oh, and if you could get an avatar, that would be great.

[Rautherdir]

But anyways: At what point is it good to go lurker-hunting?

[Rautherdir]

No problem. Oh, and if you could get an avatar, that would be great.

Okay.

[ConnorJC]

But anyways: At what point is it good to go lurker-hunting?

Personally I'd wait at least 24 hours from the beginning of the day to make sure that everyone got a fair chance to participate in their own time zone.
Also, with all this conversation we could honestly start scum hunting soon.

[ConnorJC]

To clarify, you can scumhunt anytime. I mean that the post history will actually be useful for scumhunting.

[Nachomamma8]

You told me to convince you that I'm town. That's basically the start of an argument between you and me if I try to do that directly.

Which is why I didn't tell you to do it directly, I just told you to do it and encouraged that you didn't just ignore me in the process.
But, that's neither here nor there; I'm townreading you as a result at this point and pushing a townread will only get me so far.

[Rautherdir]

You mean ISO? But yeah, a full day sounds good.

[Superhans]

LicketyQuickety I have asked you two questions:

1) What does IC mean. (Answered by Nachomma8 (thanks btw))

2) What do you mean with the cop thing.

Instead of slapping a scum read on me, can you at least my 2nd question?

See #42.

I kinda wanted Lickety to respond, thanks ConnorJC. Lickety, perhaps you want to add more to you answer that it was a reaction. What have you observed from this reaction test?

I think he was looking for someone to point out the fact that he looks like he has knowledge of the setup, but maybe I'm wrong.

Again, I would like to point out that although I appreciate your response, I was really hoping I could get a response from Lickety for this one.

In addition to the first question, I've a new question for LicketyQuickety:

You imply frequently that you have alternative ways of playing the game and making reads. This is demonstrated by the posts:

Yes, well, I don't read people in a traditional way.

I don't want the responsibility of having to give "correct" theory. Reason for this is I tend to think outside the box a bit.

And in your blurb thing you've written that "As someone with a creative pattern, you tend to seek unique accomplishments and innovative solutions. On the surface, you may seem to have a contradictory nature. ~Taken from my results regarding motivation from DISC personality test."

What do you think makes your game theory different to traditional game theory?
Also what are you non-traditional reads?

[Nachomamma8]

But anyways: At what point is it good to go lurker-hunting?

Better question: When is it a bad idea to lurker-hunt?
Answer: Never.

Vote: Lovesick

[Superhans]

UNVOTE: TheDominator37

[Rautherdir]

UNVOTE: TheDominator37

May I have a reason with that unvote?

[Nachomamma8]

(For a more complete response, hunting lurkers or people who haven't contributed much at all is generally a good idea - most people are uncomfortable fooling people and thus have more trouble posting content as scum than town; you typically don't want to lynch someone for lurking because people lurk for many more reasons than their alignment, but if you have a bunch of townreads elsewhere and you're not ignoring something actively scummy just to lynch a lurker, then generally lurkerhunting is a good idea. In this particular situation, I prefer Lovesick over the other two since Lovesick's post was the most alignment-neutral; FP and Dom at least tried to do something with their opening while Lovesick just answered a question that she'd have the same answer to as either alignment).

[Rautherdir]

Of those other two I think FancyPants is the scummiest. So,

VOTE: FancyPants

[ConnorJC]

Of those other two I think FancyPants is the scummiest. So,

VOTE: FancyPants

Why?

[Nachomamma8]

Of those other two I think FancyPants is the scummiest. So,

VOTE: FancyPants

Why just focus on the other two?

[Nachomamma8]

Although if FancyPants/Lovesick is the scumteam I hope we all look back at this moment and have a nice chuckle about it.

[Rautherdir]

Because he only has one post, and it's a vote for a pretty riciculous reason:

VOTE: TheDominator37

Terrible name.

Obvious scumlord, lynch immediately please.

Also, because you (Nachomamma) are voting for Lovesick already. Hunting two lurkers at once is okay, right?