What do you need to know from me? Is there something I can say except continuously proclaiming my innocence?farside22 wrote:I think we need to settle this by hearing from the other two who were effected.
mod: please prod literal and landlord
Bit late, but what's a JFK?MafiaSSK wrote: Kay then. I'm JFK and I can vote but I also have a special responsibility which is to make sure my fellow townies don't drink any alchol.
I immediately received (after BM closed the pub) that I decided to go home to sleep off my drunkenness, thus I will be unable to post for the day.Lawrencelot wrote:I'll check the pm which I got again:
Hm it literally said that I went to my home. I don't think that means that I can't be targeted, in normal mafia flavor the kill targets are in their homes sleeping right?
Did everybody tell what their drinks did yet?
I disagree with a hypoclaim. I have to say it gives more info to the scum than to us. A hypocop is different - you get info every day, and it's mainly useful when the days stack up and we think the cop shouldn't have to claim. The scum only gets info when some guy makes the mistake of saying scum is town (and that's assuming there's no evidence of cops with different sanities). But a hypodoc - I'm assuming you mean we claim who we protected - if the scum did in fact kill, they will know immediately which few people are possible candidates (they protected their kill target) and kill the guy. And from this kill we still know nothing about who's scum. I don't even know what sort of information we can deduce from a hypodoc or a hyporb claim, except possibly one more innocent.
It makes sense. By hypodoc-ing and hyporb-ing, we only tell the scum who the possible docs and rbs are, since they can easily tell which ones are valid. If they manage to deduce it, they kill. If they don't, they kill some random guy, and that might still work, but the RB's claimed blocks point to other people. Even if they know, they might just save the information for later and kill randomly. We who are aware of this mindset cannot but be trapped in WIFOM, imagining that they must have killed for a reason, but perhaps it is that they think we consider this reason that they killed for no reason.The Fonz wrote:OK, I'd like you to rewrite this so it makes any kind of sense.forbiddanlight wrote:LEt's say it was a doc protect. They claim and their protection. It matches the scum kill. WHOOOPS! Rb claims, say they blocked a supposed scum. The scum know who they are. They kill the Rb. We might catch a scum. There's still WIFOM. WHOOPS
Except that in this case, scum don't know if the kill was stopped by doc, rb, or jk, so they don't know what they're looking for.
Same problem with Jailkeeper.
We don't have a lot of people. Let's say two scum are here with us. This means that there are only 2 or possibly 3 candidates for the true doc/rbs.Lawrencelot wrote:But this can be solved, I think, by letting no more than 3 different targets in total be claimed.
So in conclusion, my opinion is that the info we can gain is extremely little: for the doc, just a possible inno (not even an inno if we have more than one scum group or third party people); for the RB, a possible scum (but there being an RB is unlikely). However, the info we give to the scum is a lot.
I have to ask something. If we know someone is a third party role, do we lynch them? Because I think MafiaSSK could be a third party role. Drinking alcohol doesn't seem to be an action that is pre-defined as against the town or for the town, so arguing against it doesn't seem to help or harm the town, either.
You can't reveal role info without at least some risk of outing the role.
