Mini 897 - OpenSource Mafia - Game over!!

[Iecerint]

Iecerint, I will wait one day for a massclaim.

Honestly, it isn't massclaim that I'm communicating I want to put off. I'm ambivalent about that, though I doubt massclaiming will be a net-positive for town, so I still think we should wait at least until mylo or lylo, ideally.

Rather, I want you to be vague about what may or may not have happened to you N1 for the time being. Please also keep this request in mind if you are asked to claim or choose to claim before I do.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: There's maybe an apparent disconnect in there from your perspective, I guess, but I just wanted to make clear what my concern was in the event that I was too ambiguous earlier.

[Iecerint]

I see where you're coming from, UK, but it is literally very hard to beat the glory that is Almacrumb.

[Iecerint]

Also: SP is officially very annoying.

[Iecerint]

[Iecerint]

I don't think SSK's claim implies "sanity-check" immunity. It's possible he was hoping someone would extrapolate that for him, I guess, but it'd still be inconsistent with UK's result.

Sanity checker being insane in a bastard game, kinda like the flavor deliberately failing to reflect N1 events, stops being bastard and starts approaching silly.

[Iecerint]

Yes, but I find an insane-cop scum less likely than insane-cop town.

What does this mean?

[Iecerint]

SSK is scum because you didn't get a result, even though Glork-scum defended Vaya, whom SSK believes to be scum?

You do realize

I was voting Vaya

, right? SP is SocioPath.

I didn't get that at first, either. I think you're supposed to read the question as a rhetorical question and with a really incredulous tone. Then it all makes sense.

[Iecerint]

k.

(Is that TWO lines of whitespace? O_O)

[Iecerint]

You're welcome to interpret my question for her if it's secretly easy to understand and you have the desire, though.

[Iecerint]

Not crazy about the one-shot revelation. Not crazy about putting off the Miller claim either, come to think of it, especially given that Fishy had already claimed.

SSK, have you ever been a Miller in a completed game on the site?

[Iecerint]

Yes, it was meant to be read with a lot of sarcasm/skepticism. If you check the context, it was right after I quoted a post from you (UK), and I was agreeing with you. Iec got the tone I meant for the question right.

That's nice. Answer my question, too, please.

[Iecerint]

For the record, I actually don't think it's unlikely that we're both town, that SSK is sanity challenged and Kitten was blocked.

[Iecerint]

(Is a double negative.)

[Iecerint]

SSK, have you ever been a Miller in a completed game on the site?

Also, please answer this.

[Iecerint]

Yeah, yeah. Pome ignored me earlier. I felt ignored.

[Iecerint]

Clearly, being aligned with WinBlows does not make you scum - there is only guilty and innocent.

First, that isn't clear at all. Second...I guess your take on Glork's flip is that he was a death miller? If so, do you have reason to believe that you are also a death miller? If so, why haven't you said as much?

Are you also a "WinBlows Loyalist"? If not, what do you make of Glork's claim?

(You have also ignored the issue of connections to Glork, on both your part and Vaya's part, but that would make sense if you really think he's a death miller.)

What I also couldn't mention before was how my miller status played into this - I thought that if I was targeted by S_B, that would go away.

Possible, but it requires a reading deficit on your part. She advertised her ability as one that converts scum.

The plausibility of your mod-enforced late Miller claim is decreased by a lack of prohibition on Fishy's part IMO. I agree that SSK should have just claimed Miller yesterday, though. There was a chance an investigative role could have wasted a shot on him -- but I guess it at least would've confirmed sanity.

I like a Vaya lynch. I liked it yesterday and I like it even more today with the cop result.

Huh? The cop result is SSK's, and it existed yesterday. The only other thing you could mean is UK's ability, which was apparently roleblocked (unless SSK is lying and has no ability). Also, when did you like a Vaya lynch yesterday?

[Iecerint]

Except for that GlorkDM isn't Alma's position, nothing to complain about. I'm not sure whether GlorkDM or GlorkTraitor is simpler.

The post I thought Glork was alluding to D1 was that pre-game numbers post. Glork made a similar one just after that. I had assumed they were masons who could indicate themselves to one another that way or something.

Alma, can you explain that post?

[Iecerint]

Except for that GlorkDM isn't Alma's position, nothing to complain about. I'm not sure whether GlorkDM or GlorkTraitor is simpler, though.

Alma, I'm aware that you have indicated many times (maybe as many as seven) that you misunderstood SW or thought there was more to her role such that she could also de-miller you or something. That doesn't mean I am required to no longer find it suspicious. I still think it was bizarre.

The Alma post I thought Glork was alluding to D1 was that pre-game numbers post. Glork made a similar one just after that. I had assumed (until the conversion request) they were masons or something who could indicate themselves to one another that way or something.

Alma, can you explain that post? Your claim doesn't really cover it.

[Iecerint]

Well, Glork never said anything to mention that the post you've indicated was the one, either, that I can tell. To the extent that I'm "jumping" (and, as I vacuously could only guess at that Glork was referring to and he never told us, I suppose I am, at that), so are you.

I buy that the GlorkDM view is possible -- hell, I was the first one to mention it -- but I do not agree that GlorkTraitor is impossible or even unlikely. Breadcrumbs make it at least as likely that Glork was a traitor and Alma is scum.

I don't see why a huge conspiracy is necessary, particularly not on Alma's part. As far as I can tell, it just requires one post from Alma to set up the Miller claim (or that's all there is on his part, at least). It's worth noting that, depending on the chronology of that post (specifically, whether it came before or after Faraday's can't-claim-my-name claim; I think he was the first person to mention that), it may be more telling. But Alma certainly didn't say anything matching that claim "too well" early on, except that he is associated with WBs.

Speaking of that -- how did Glork and Alma react to Faraday's claim and subsequent wagon? If you're correct, and the "thing in the PM" he alluded to involved delayed claims rather than a role involving the number business, I'd imagine they'd have backed off after he mentioned that, or at least advocated waiting until D2 for judgment. I'll have to check whether that's what happened.

[Iecerint]

Well, Glork never said anything to mention that the post you've indicated was the one, either, that I can tell. To the extent that I'm "jumping" (and, as I vacuously could only guess at that Glork was referring to and he never told us, I suppose I am, at that), so are you.

I buy that the GlorkDM view is possible -- hell, I was the first one to mention it -- but I do not agree that GlorkTraitor is impossible or even unlikely. Breadcrumbs make it at least as likely that Glork was a traitor and Alma is scum.

I don't see why a huge conspiracy is necessary, particularly not on Alma's part. As far as I can tell, it just requires one post from Alma to set up the Miller claim (or that's all there is on his part, at least). It's worth noting that, depending on the chronology of that post (specifically, whether it came before or after Faraday's can't-claim-my-name claim; I think he was the first person to mention that), it may be more telling. But Alma certainly didn't say anything matching that claim "too well" early on, except that he is associated with WBs.

Speaking of that -- how did Glork and Alma react to Faraday's claim and subsequent wagon? If you're correct, and the "thing in the PM" he alluded to involved delayed claims rather than a role involving the number business, I'd imagine they'd have backed off after he mentioned that, or at least advocated waiting until D2 for judgment. I'll have to check whether that's what happened.

[Iecerint]

Sorry. Having more trouble with the forum than usual today. <_<

[Iecerint]

Could someone explain how SSK's breadcrumb suggests miller?

It doesn't suggest "miller," but it does suggest "something is up." The miller claim fits with that. The crumb is "I have reason to believe that my results are accurate." The ultimate reason was that the information comes at a price (millerhood).

SSK, was the millerhood instant? Did you know you would specifically become a miller when you used your ability?

[Iecerint]

I think that Alma has a clause in his role PM very similar to mine, and

I have reason to believe that another player might have a similar clause as well.

That is enough for me to keep Alma (and that other player) alive until tomorrow, when we'll have a little more information to share.

This is why I think that. Glork took whatever was in the PM as evidence that Alma was town while also indicating that someone else may share thing-in-the-PM. If that thing was a D1 gag order, you'd expect him to behave the same way toward Faraday as Alma given him having claimed the D1 gag order.

I would think that Alma would also back-up Faraday's claim and avoid his wagon, because townAlma was also on gag order D1. I'd especially expect both these players to jump on the claims that Faraday's claim doesn't match, since his claim matches theirs very well.

(I haven't checked back there btw. It could be that Alma and Glork did exactly that. If they did, I'll be more inclined to agree with you.)

What do you think Glork was breadcrumbing with the binary? Deathmiller? WinBlows Loyalist? As far as I can tell, it is neither of those things. Unless he was just goofing off (highly remote), the simplest explanation (or at least the one I assumed all of D1) was that the binary post was role-related, and that Alma's role was linked to his in some way. This isn't a huge jump at all; it's trying to explain something that the current set of claims does not explain.

EBWOPish

Most of your GlorkDM information works fine with GlorkWBL. But --

He had knowledge of what the partial-reveal meant, because as a death miller, he was told what he would flip. He acts just like someone who got such a role would.

This is actually a great point. In fact, I think it trumps everything else.

Unvote

while I think about this.

[Iecerint]

OK. I went back and read. Glork's first real post is indeed of the "I think there are lots of gag order roles around," and then he switches from Faraday (I assume) to me. So this supports GlorkDM in a huge way. The alternative is indeed an absurd conspiracy.

Alma's first post is pretty similar. He says that something someone said (Phate?) is scummy in light of Faraday's claim and ultimately votes Pom. So I think Alma looks really good here. It still really really really annoys me that he asked the alignment-changer to target him, though. In retrospect, assuming this largely clears Alma, the effect of that would've been that SB would've found him guilty and inadvertently made him scum. <_<

[Iecerint]

OK. I think the side-effects of all that means the scum are here:

MafiaSSK
SocioPath
Fishythefish
Pomegranate

I believe everyone else is largely cleared given VayaGlorkAlma-Town.

[Iecerint]

One thing I don't want anyone to forget about is that in the opening scene, we were told that at least one person had their alignment changed last night. I think it's important that we know who it is that might have been town yesterday but scum today, or vice versa. For that reason, tubby needs to tell us what Phate did last night, and if it was anyone else who is town, they should probably come forward now.

The opening text indicated that an unknown number of people were converted. I don't think this implies that the number was greater than zero.

Phate did not convert anyone last night. Tubby should NOT elaborate further on this point at this time.

[Iecerint]

Could you please explain every one of those?

It's not that those players are particularly scummy, but rather that everyone else is largely cleared:

1. Glork is town because he was probably a death miller (GDM).
2. Alma is probably not scum because his reaction to Faraday's gag rule is consistent with his claim. (The numbers post still bothers me, though, tbh. I really expected it to be explained when Alma claimed.)
3. Vaya is not scum for pointing out the situation with Alma in a circumstance where no one had picked up on GDM even after I'd mentioned it.
4. Given all that, UK has to be town, because there was no reason for her to stop the Vaya lynch D1 if she was scum.
5. Phate/tubby is town because of something that happened N1 and early D2. I will elaborate on this later.
6. I think SB is probably town because of her claim on Phate. She claimed it before I intimated any insight, so she cleared Phate, Cop/converter.

That leaves the 4 players on my list.

1. SSK is only town if he is insane AND UK was roleblocked as far as I can tell.
2. SP looks bad in my eyes for the unwarranted Vaya attack D1, and for vacuity.
3. FTF's D1 miller claim looks weird in light of all the gag orders elsewhere. Also, he's been a pretty on-the-backburner player all game. The only post of his I can remember is the one justifying that he wasn't likely to be 3rd party on account of his checking guilty. O_o
4. Pome is just really vacuous, even moreso than FTF. There's no disconnect in her claim, though. Come to think of it, there isn't any claim at all.

There are some holes in my theory:
1. No one is insane. This makes UK's role seem pretty silly. It could be that Faraday was insane, or that UK's role is a red-herring. But this still bothers me.
2. Alma and Glork's big early-game "breadcrumb" posts don't make any sense with their roles. I also don't like that Vaya ignored them in his post, but the GDM evidence is pretty solid IMO.

[Iecerint]

Well, if you think my logic makes sense, you should obviously lynch someone on the list. I'm not convinced it should be Pome (I'm leaning SSK or FTF atm), but I do think I'm at the point where I'd support a claim from her.

Vote: Pome.

She shouldn't do it until L-1, though.

I just reread Glork's numbers post:

01001001111001110010111001001010111100110010000001001011

I don't think I screwed that up, but I might have.

Consider this a partial breadcrumb.

So...there is literally something here. Is this a standardized cipher of the English language or something? Even if Alma was just goofing off or something ( ), Glork clearly wasn't.

[Iecerint]

I think the only circumstance where we should lynch from the not-clear pool is if someone decides that there are severe, problematic Vaya-Alma connections. Otherwise, I'm pretty confident in the other clears given GDM and my secret towntell from Phate.

[Iecerint]

I think "here is some flavor; enjoy" is a common scum help strategy. So is "I like X's popular (but incidentally mistaken) argument. Let me add to it!." I don't think Vaya's case goes like that. Also, he had already established the prior viewpoint (Almacrumb); the perspective he was implicitly discrediting was ultimately his own.

Scum derailing a townie lynch is one thing. Scum derailing a townie lynch given a claimed Cop guilty is something else. Sure, scum can always do something just to appear town, but that's the angle that requires a degree of suspension of disbelief IMO. I would be very surprised to learn that UK was scum.

I think Alma's circumstance is more tenuous than either of those players. I agree that Vaya is maybe slighty shaky, though.

Is your Phate viewpoint based on his repeated desire for a massclaim, or for something else?

[Iecerint]

I think you are both probably town. However, I still have unanswered questions about you. Namely, I don't like that you deny meaning behind the binary confirmation whereas there is evidence that Glork took his very seriously. I'm also (still) not crazy about your conversion request. You have explained these (messing around/thought there was more to SB's role), but those explanations are not exactly excellent IMO.

I don't think this is really new information. I added it to highlight a contrast between the players I perceive to be more questionable and the players SP believes to be more questionable. UK in particular looks good given VayaTown IMO.

[Iecerint]

No, it's not impossible that UK and/or Vaya could be scum, but it's fairly remote.

If Alma was just saying /confirm in binary, WHY THE HELL DIDN'T HE JUST SAY SO? Gosh. How annoying. Is there a cipher somewhere online so I can confirm that?

You seem to know what Glork said, even if you're apparently not sure why he said it. What did he say? I like closure. ^^

Pome, I was answering Vaya's question. SSK's meaning was pretty clear to me. That doesn't mean he isn't scum. Also, I should clarify that the order of the 4 names on my list isn't the order of scuminess. I made it by starting with the playerlist on the first page and deleting players with the logic I mentioned until I reached a manageable set. So that's the only reason why SSK is at the top of my list.

[Iecerint]

Thank ye innit. Mystery solved, etc.

Waiting for some residual discussion and for tubby to catch up.

[Iecerint]

Well, if you have an alternate view of things that take things like that into account, I invite you to share it with the class.

Also, the numbers breadcrumb is now resolved, and I can't even remember why I thought the insanity issue was a big deal. 3/4 of the investigative roles (Phate, Faraday, SSK) still have the potential of having been insane. So that's no big deal, either.

SP, what'd'ya mean?

[Iecerint]

Yep, I really only remembered that post. Could be because it's the only time I've really interacted with you this game. Well, to be fair, that whole exchange was several posts, but you know what I meant.

I think your listed SSK claim is mistaken. SSK claimed 1-shot daycop who checks guilty after using his ability.

I could accept a massclaim if I may be vague about the function of my ability and tubby is vague about its consequences. If those are known, my ability will no longer function as intended.

Why do you have a town read on SP?

[Iecerint]

1. That spacing literally hurts my feelings. It's worse than UK's. <_<
2. Your explanations for your top suspects (except tubby, maybe, who is conspicuously *absent* <_<) are basically other players' arguments, and the one about SSK is particularly silly. Or I think it is. His ability isn't complex at all relative to others that have been claimed in this game. Not that there aren't independent reasons to find him scummy.
3. Did you breadcrumb at all?
4. Who did you target N1? Why?

We can probably check her reaction to the various conversion claims to evaluate the plausibility of her claim.

[Iecerint]

Unvote

to prevent an opportunistic hammer. I believe she was at L-1.

[Iecerint]

Whoa. That literally makes no sense.

Vote: Phate

I misread Phate's early D2 behavior, I guess. If tubby is telling the truth, he is scum, unless I am insane. I would be surprised if my ability has sanity problems, so I'm inclined to think he is scum. This probably means that SB is insane and/or scum.

I can claim how my ability works at this point, if you want, because it may have caught someone. Once I do, it is unlikely that it will catch someone else in the future, though, so please keep that in mind.

This is a major surprise for me, so I've sent a PM to the Mod to see whether my night action was missed or I was roleblocked. I didn't receive a PM indicating that I was roleblocked, though, so I doubt that was the case (because UK has been told she would have received a PM).

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: Ugh, the claimed SB result hadn't really sunk in yet. That hurts my head. <_<

I really don't know how to interpret Phate's claimed result on SB. It also doesn't make sense that he'd come out with a result like that when I'd given him an excuse to neglect mentioning any N1 result and there were already nice wagons elsewhere. Not to mention that Phate bizarrely neglected to convert SB. O_o

[Iecerint]

I just double-checked. I definitely have my night-action in my Sentbox, so I know I sent my action.

I'll let you know when I hear from the Mod whether

she

he forgot to apply it or whatever.

Fixed.

[Iecerint]

I've received a PM from the Mod. My ability was not missed. Either I am insane AND my ability is inherently gimped, tubby is scum, or there's a player who can temporarily/permanently change player sanities/abilities (remote).

The ability claim is kinda weird given my having allowed him to forego it, even though it's how I know he's scum. It could be that he only read as far as Phate's claim D1 and neglected to read all of D2 yet. This would also explain why he doesn't at least allude to my constant requests that he be discreet when he claimed his result.

If the result is actually real (which, even if he's scum, requires me to have slightly misunderstood my ability), it's possible he didn't want to convert a guilty for the more obvious reason (scum!), but that presumes the scum don't know one another. It could also be that he was the player who was late to submit his ability. Maybe he just forgot that he could send a second PM to perform the second half of his ability if he so chose.

[Iecerint]

It's relatively remote because it requires us to imagine up a new player with a nontraditional role AND require that he targeted me last night, even though I don't think I'd insinuated a PR D1. This doesn't really take a lot of creativity.

The setup speculation has been happening for all of fourteen hours from midnight on a weekend. I'm glad you're here to heroically keep us on track.

Anyway, I'm voting who I think the scum us. Feel free to join in if you'd like.

It could be that Phate has some sort of ability immunity -- actually, that makes the most sense, because my ability should have prevented him from doing anything N1 regardless of his alignment -- but then he's scum, anyway, for failing to disclose this during his claim or during my subsequent insinuations.

[Iecerint]

Oh, but ability immunity wouldn't explain SB's result on him.

[Iecerint]

I wanna wait at least a few more real-life days in the event that one of the players who hasn't posted yet in the interim is responsible for what happened. It would make me cry a little if I let the cat out of the bag and then discovered that the hypothetical non-traditional role'd character was out there after all.

[Iecerint]

Oh well. Checking the claim with the Mod.

Also: I noticed something that may potentially explain the situation, so it's no longer quite so mysterious. Still supports tubbyScum, though.

[Iecerint]

I'm GNU Lead Developer, Hacker Saboteur. My flavor is that I care deeply about open-source philosophy, but I sometimes take matters into my own hands.

Each night, I may execute a script on another's machine. If closed-source behavior is perceived, it randomly blocks one of that player's functions for the remainder of the game. Otherwise, it just prevents activity that night (RB). I don't directly receive evidence of which has occurred.

I had (apparently mistakenly) assumed from the flavor that the player would be RB'd on whichever night regardless of the outcome, but that one of the outcomes was permanent (and on only one of the abilities). It looks like no global RB occurs if an ability is perma-blocked. My guess is that I blocked Phate's conversion, but not his investigation. This explains his odd night action choice and supports that he is scum (or a Miller, or I'm insane).

I assumed he was RB'd town at the start of D2 because of his desire for a massclaim. I thought he was operating under the assumption that scum had roleblocked him, so he wanted to massclaim to look for RB-flavored fakeclaims. His response to my private confession was also consistent with that. That's why I thought he was town earlier today, but his N1 result claim makes that impossible. I guess his massclaim request was actually just a continuation of his D1 behavior.

[Iecerint]

That's possible, but my paraphrase is kinda muddying how that part reads. The actual text implies something more like "using software for economic gain + negative context." It implies that the activity must be nefarious.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: negative

context

connotation.

[Iecerint]

What do you want summarized? There haven't been any wallposts.

Phate/tubby is scum. Lynch him with me, please. <3

I wish he would post, though. <_<

[Iecerint]

Pretty much, right? That's why I spent all D2 telling him (well, telling Phate) not to claim he was RB'd so that I could use it to catch scum later on.

You can argue that he had a perfectly good reason to keep tight-lipped about it (namely, I told him to), but that would apply regardless of his alignment. The best explanation for his having claimed a result at all IMO is that he hadn't read D2 very closely (or at all) and so had missed my requests. Coupled with his having had an ability to claim, he is likely scum.

As for the claim itself, I dunno, except that me blocking a hypothetical conversion attempt makes it a lot easier to interpret. Could be that he doesn't know who the scum are and uses his ability to find them. I'm sorta making it up, but my point is that the "spookiness" of his claimed action shouldn't really be a major issue IMO.

[Iecerint]

Innit.

[Iecerint]

Which points are BS? What specifically do you find objectionable?

Anyway, that fact that he apparently doesn't know that a player claimed doctor implies that he hasn't really read D2, so that supports one of the "BS point

" I make in the post he's quoting.

[Iecerint]

Lynching you makes sense because you are almost certainly scum. That is quite literally the best reason to lynch someone.

It is unlikely that I am insane because my ability is doubly nerfed without that (no direct knowledge of outcome + RB on town players). It is unlikely that I was roleblocked because UK was told she her "no result" PM was consistent with her being RB'd.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: On second thought, the fact that I don't get a result could account for the lack of a PM given a RB in my situation, maybe. I'll pester the Mod.

Still, this is a comparatively remote circumstance for the same reason that UK's result on SSK is comparatively remote, but even moreso because of the confirmation that the message was consistent with a RB on UK's part.

[Iecerint]

Reconfirmed that my action was received. No further comment.

[Iecerint]

Lynching anyone other than SSK or tubby today is a mistake IMO. I prefer tubby because the probability that a RB is confounding matters is lesser.

[Iecerint]

Still, this is a comparatively remote circumstance for the same reason that UK's result on SSK

being due to RB

is comparatively remote, but even moreso because of the confirmation that the message was consistent with a RB on UK's part.

Was rereading and noticed that this was not clear. No one mentioned it, but I hope this makes what I meant clear if it wasn't before.

[Iecerint]

^^

[Iecerint]

Oh, I forgot that we were allowed to whine a little bit. How nice.

Go town, etc.

Bah!

Fixed.

[Iecerint]

Congratulations!

I don't know why you didn't just claim vig yesterday, though. You were obviously responsible for the deletion kills, and neither of them was particularly anti-town given rhetoric.

[Iecerint]

I would've gone after you had I been town in that circumstance. Well, maybe if SSK hadn't been there. ^^;

[Iecerint]

I was proud of my fakeclaim, at least. For anyone who wants to know, I was a roleblocker who roleblocked Phate N1. So I was as confused as the rest of you by tubby's claim. I thought a 3rd party player was responsible until SP NK'd me.

Apparently, I was secretly a gimp roleblocker who only worked if I targeted an alignment-changer who targeted scum. Too bad for me.

[Iecerint]

You mean your "case" that I was scum with Vaya?

I wish people had followed me against SP's very silly attack on him. I might have gotten +like points.

[Iecerint]

Oh, and I think SSK's D1 slip about my "nonexistent" scum meta was based on the fact that he had just converted me as scum in EmpKing's SuperUPick into a kinda hopeless situation. I was terrified that someone would figure it out. ^^;

[Iecerint]

Well, maybe you knew that by N2. You had some fairly compelling evidence. ^^;

[Iecerint]

Meh. At least I knew to block SP.

[Iecerint]

All three times, actually. It's cute that you doublechecked that it was your wording that led to no result on SSK. ^^;

[Iecerint]

Oh, I see. Makes sense. It was cuter when it was my explanation, though.

I was surprised no one called me out on sorta believing the RB on you D1 at first in spite of being a kind of RBer myself. I was going to point out that there was also parallelism in Phate's role and SB's, and Phate had been shown innocent. <_<

But then Phate had to go and claim JUST WHAT MADE MY (UNCLAIMED) FAKE ABILITY MAKE HIM GUILTY.

I am inflexible.

[Iecerint]

WAT.

inorite? I think it was Vaya that pointed out that UK was an obvious RB target. I <3 Vaya.

I probably would have targeted her had I not known that she would get a similar result either way.

[Iecerint]

You're right! Comedy gold!

My favorite part is where I call you annoying and no one cares.

Second place is when I give in and decide to totally flip-flop on the RB issue without provocation.

[Iecerint]

At least I was right about Pom.

Socio was my night 1 investigation target Not that it'd have mattered me being paranoid I guess.

We could have lynched SP D2 if you'd stuck around? That's even better than a Pom target. Now my heart is broken. If only I'd saved you sooner.

[Iecerint]

You did innit? And targeting SP would just've led to a town win; I'd rather lose to SPSK.

I was surprised you didn't jump on SP's obvious fakeclaim. You might have been able to get SB to lynch SP with you given that SP was almost certainly responsible for the deletion kills and hadn't taken responsibility. His conversion ability, though apparently real, was hard for me to believe personally. I suppose SSK kinda tied your hands, though.

Alternatively, you and SSK could have rush-voted either of the two players for a certain win. Deadline would have lynched whoever had the most votes first in the event of a tie.

[Iecerint]

It looked awfully fake to me.

[Iecerint]

I asked her about it earlier; she said she was thinking about the RB.