Mini 535: Pick Your Poison 2 (Game Over!)

[JDodge]

Vote: GF + Encryptor

Daytalking is not much of a help, nor is 1 inv. immunity. I think you're all underestimating what havoc a 2-shot roleblocker can wreak.

[JDodge]

Vote: Encryptor

[JDodge]

Sick and busy. Will post content sometime soon, but not right now.

[JDodge]

Guys, skitzer just practically admitted to being scum. Lynch kplzthxbai.

Unvote, vote: skitzer

[JDodge]

How did I do such?

The way you spoke of YvonneSeer possibly being a weak doc implied knowledge, not speculation. There are only 2 possible ways for you to possess this knowledge:

1. You are scum
   
2. You are a weak doc

If 2 was true, you would

not have speculated that Yvonne was a weak doc

. Thus I can only deduce that 1 is true.

[JDodge]

I don't think Skitzer's scum, though. WIFOM games over his ignorance of the weakdoc (and his naïve 96 in general). I think the scum would have gone over the roles more thoroughly.

Ignorance and naivety have nothing to do with it; I'd actually say you just (slightly) hinted at the existance of the weak doc, although that's less of a scumtell for you.

[JDodge]

But ignorance and naivety aren't the

issue

; the issue is implied knowledge. Unless I'm misinterpreting what you're saying entirely.

[JDodge]

I should note that I am

not voting skitzer based on potentially outing a power role

. Am voting skitzer based on

implied knowledge

of the existence of a power role. Weak doc is a role that is

probably

in the setup - however, with the way it is worded it specifically seems to imply the secondary reason as to why I think skitzer is scum: that he is not a weak doc.

[JDodge]

Why would you assume that anyone who has a pro-town power role would actively try to get themselves lynched?

[JDodge]

I thought a weak doc was like a miller in the fact that it wasn't helpful to the town. I thought weak docs failed whenever they protected anyone.

In Green Liquid's How To Mod V2.0, he mentions that it if a player doesn't like the role they have been given they may try to get themselves lynched, and that was what I felt, until I read through the role PM.

So? How is that unhelpful to the town? You still have a semi-confirmable townie. Furthermore, that is a load of bullshit; anyone trying to get themselves lynched over a role should never play mafia again. Seriously.

[JDodge]

Because skitzer's lone tell is still more solid than the various points against perfect.

[JDodge]

Because skitzer's lone tell is still more solid than the various points against perfect.

Agreed, but Yvonne's play is worse.

i see them as roughly equal; if the skitzer wagon loses more steam i'll probably switch my vote over to her

[JDodge]

i am

[JDodge]

Unvote, vote: YvonneSeer

Pardon me, just passing through

continue with your walls-o-text

[JDodge]

This game would be so much less time consuming if I just voted without doing anything else like JDodge. Then I could mock everyone else for providing content.

content is not helpful in the normal sense

the vast majority of "content" is nothing but trumped-up bullshit and rhetoric

towns would win a lot more often if people would shut up and play the game

[JDodge]

It sort of argues that YvonneSeer isn't scum, though. JDodge stuck to his case on Skitzer right through the Perfect thing, and threw some suspicion at Ether (though not even FOS-worthy) during that, but when Mizzy started getting tough questions, he makes a "wall-o-text" comment and votes YvonneSeer.

Could be just a playstyle thing, but it also could be trying to take the heat off Mizzy.

I am not ready to dismiss the second possibility, especially if she comes up scum.

Why don't you just ASK him why he did it instead of speculating?

as i said, when the YvonneSeer wagon was larger than the skitzer wagon, i was going to switch my vote

and i did

[JDodge]

JDodge, how do you define "play the game"? Do you think towns would be more likely to win if we all played like you? We wouldn't have very much to go on, would we?

i say that people need to say what they mean in a concise manner

you'll notice that i was contributing quite a bit to the conversation until it turned into walls of text; this is because my personal criteria for finding scum short-circuits as soon as people start ruining the game by posting half a novel every single page. this contribution before is more to what people should be posting.

but this is more of a playstyle argument and is a bit irrelevant.

[JDodge]

I am now certain that the scum group is one of:

Yvonne-Ether-Mizzy

OR

Yvonne-skitzer-someone else other than Mizzy or Ether.

I would tell you exactly why but the tell I would point out is kind of risky to point out as it can also be used as a light power role tell.

[JDodge]

JDodge had already made the catch since then, too, so it wasn't that.

Clarify please

[JDodge]

I've already given my opinion. You're voting me based on 3 factors that I can tell:

1. My stance on walls-o-text, which is not in any way related specifically to this game

2. You wanting more comments on the walls-o-text, when you had already explicitly said you didn't like those comments which is irrelevant considering 1

3. My vote shift that I said I would make ages ago. Would you rather I had not moved to YvonneSeer like I had said I would?

My opinion, as you can see if you go back long long ago between the walls-o-text on page 10, is that we should lynch YvonneSeer today and one of skitzer/Mizzy/Ether tomorrow.

[JDodge]

let me sum up that post for you all:

People are getting attacked for jumping on the YvonneSeer wagon. I should renounce it!

I'm not really going to think at all.

I don't want to express an opinion over a deadline!

[JDodge]

let me sum up that post for you all:

I'm not really going to think at all.

I don't think that can be used as evidence for/against skitzer... I am still waiting for a post from you(skitz) that doesn't make me think "god, is it me who's going crazy here?"

The insinuation there is two-fold; it is that he either never thinks (pro-town scenario) or is not really going to think (anti-town scenario).

[JDodge]

it is page 14 and it is still day one, with Yvonne still alive

why?

[JDodge]

this game needs a lynch. desperately.

[JDodge]

why has there not been a lynch yet

it is page

16

. Day one started almost

2 months ago

. It does

not take this long to lynch someone

, people.

[JDodge]

nice catch mizzy

unvote, vote: skitzer

[JDodge]

...

So how many PYP2 players does it take to change a lightbulb?

Also,

vote: Gorrad

.

I'd like for you to elaborate on exactly who you're calling dim on this comment; I would find it useful.

Anyways, Yvonne is still scum. Also, I find that Bookie is likely town.

vote: YvonneSeer

[JDodge]

Anyways, Yvonne is still scum. Also, I find that Bookie is likely town.

vote: YvonneSeer

Yvonne, though, didn't vote for Skitzer. She could have helped kill him, but didn't. So why do you think she's scum?

How does her lack of a skitzer vote in any way absolve her?

[JDodge]

How does her lack of a skitzer vote in any way absolve her?

It doesn't, I suppose, but I think there might be better people to prod at for new information. Beating a dead horse, even if it deserves it, isn't as good if there are other unbeaten horses that ALSO deserve it.

Why are you defending Yvonne in such a manner?

[JDodge]

Why are you defending Yvonne in such a manner?

I'm not defending Yvonne, especially, I'm telling you to stop being tunnel-visioned. We ALL thought (cept for the scum) that Skitzer was scum, no? We were wrong. Why be so quick to kill again now? There's a lot to be discussed.

Then why exactly are you trying to steer me away from Yvonne with thinly-veiled words as opposed to just explicitly saying what you mean?

Your "Let's lynch nownownownow!" posts look scummy as hell. You should think about maybe not making yourself look worse.

How is wanting to keep the game moving at a steady pace (which is good for towns) a bad thing in any manner?

[JDodge]

Then why exactly are you trying to steer me away from Yvonne with thinly-veiled words as opposed to just explicitly saying what you mean?

I don't see how me telling you to stop beating a dead horse and look for others to beat is "thinly veiled."

You said, and I quote:

Yvonne, though, didn't vote for Skitzer. She could have helped kill him, but didn't. So why do you think she's scum?

Furthermore, you are not getting my point at all. You are not trying, in any way, to get me to "stop being tunnel-visioned". If you had truly thought that, you would have brought that up

yesterday

. Not today. This is what you said:

It doesn't, I suppose, but I think there might be better people to prod at for new information. Beating a dead horse, even if it deserves it, isn't as good if there are other unbeaten horses that ALSO deserve it.

A wishy-washy, non-committal response in a way in which you also heavily imply that

you too are suspicious of Yvonne

, yet for some unknown reason pressuring her is bad.

How is wanting to keep the game moving at a steady pace (which is good for towns) a bad thing in any manner?

Moving at a steady pace is good, but I feel like you pressuring for a lynch when good discussion was happening. You got what you wanted, and it was a mislynch. Steady pace towards a mafia win isn't pro-town.

Since you seem to be heavily implying that you feel I am scum, why don't you just come outright and say it instead of beating around the bush with shadily-worded, weaselly little responses.

Steady pace is pro-town. Slowing the entire game down because "WE WERE HAVING DISCUSSION OVER WHETHER THE USAGE OF THE WORD 'CHEESE' IN 'HE HAD A CHEESE SANDWICH' SO THAT IS TOWNISH AND GREAT AND GOOD."

You'd never last a second back in the older days.

[JDodge]

jesus christ i go away for 6 hours and there's 3 new pages

i'll work my way through it now including Jordan's meta-ignorant BS and Mizzy's constant defense of everyone who she can get to

[JDodge]

Your vote was on Skitz, and you switched your vote off him just as his wagon was dying down, onto someone who had 3 votes, and was in the lead in terms of votes even before you voted them. Pretty much the definition of Opportunism.

I love how you ignore my earlier post where I

said

I would switch to the Yvonne wagon if it picked up more steam. It's called reaching a compromise, something which is being continually squashed out of mafia by people constantly yelling "OPPORTUNISM" at every little thing they can.

Oh, well how are we supposed to find the scum without any content? And this trumped-up bullshit you refer to are the scumtells that townies look out for to catch the scum, so why are you complaining about it's presence?

I want people playing the game, not bullshit. Go read some games from back in the older days; you'll see what I mean really quick.

Well, that explains the vote swith, but at the same time, it gives you an excuse to be opportunistic, which is worse than before, since it just confirms you were being opportunistic rather than maybe accidently looking so.

YES YOU WEREN'T ACTUALLY BEING OPPORTUNISTIC YOU WERE BEING

OPPORTUNISTIC

Sorry, but sometimes you need a post the size of half a novel to get your feelings across properly, IMO, more content=more text to analyse=more scum/towntells to be found, this should be true to a reasonable extent.

more "content" = more text to

over

analyze = more red herrings to be found, this is true

Why did you include the underlined part?

To acknowledge my finding the tell. Notice how I did not expand on whom it was.

Why did you say you were going to shift votes anyway?

To establish my willingness to compromise.

[JDodge]

@JDodge: You didn't answer my question. Again, why do you still think that Yvonne is scum? I want to know.

I would suggest you read my previous posts, I believe I outlined it fairly clearly way back when although I might be mistaken

Since you seem to be heavily implying that you feel I am scum, why don't you just come outright and say it instead of beating around the bush with shadily-worded, weaselly little responses.

Actually, before saying anything to this, let me ask you this:

I am now certain that the scum group is one of:

Yvonne-Ether-Mizzy

OR

Yvonne-skitzer-someone else other than Mizzy or Ether.

Do you or do you not still believe this and stand by it? The answer is going to mean a lot so please think it over carefully.

This is not conditional. I will answer your question as soon as you give me an actual response.

I did, yup. I didn't expect Gorrad to hammer irresponsibly. Out of the few of us that hadn't voted, I was pretty sure that Scot wouldn't vote (playstyle) and I didn't think Yvonne or Gorrad would vote/post so soon.

You saw the possibility for something, you saw the dangers within, but you did nothing to prevent it because you "didn't expect it"?

JDodge, why do you think I'm likely town?

No comment. I have my reasons.

[JDodge]

This is not conditional. I will answer your question as soon as you give me an actual response.

Because the ANSWER you give to the scum-buddy-groupings you gave will tell me whether you are just moronic town who's extremely wrong or whether you are scum. So answer, and depending, I will either call you scum to your face and vote you, or I will not.

Thank you for your response. Yes, they have changed. No, I will not post new ones now because I need more time to think on them.

You saw the possibility for something, you saw the dangers within, but you did nothing to prevent it because you "didn't expect it"?

That sentence is inherently contradictory. I didn't expect it, so no, I didn't really realize there was a possibility.

But you'd already

said

you saw the dangers and possibilities there. The only person contradicting here is you.

[JDodge]

Ether, confirm or deny.

Mizzy, that was a horrible play and I have no clue why you even claimed like that.

[JDodge]

Ether, confirm or deny.

Mizzy, that was a horrible play and I have no clue why you even claimed like that.

I explained why, didn't you read it? I was a ONE SHOT Masoniser. Me and Ether talking at night (which we will still be able to do one night until/if a nightkill happens) isn't as good as two confirmed townies. We can't do much with just the two of us, now can we?

Wrong. Entirely wrong. There is so much two masons can get out of nighttalking.

Do you not feel like the town going in the right direction is better than the wrong one? Do you think that I'm still useful as a power role? Well, it is and I am not.

It was already going in the right direction. You were still useful as a power role.

I weighed the options sufficiently and after doing much reading and internal consequence review, decided that it would be better for the town to have this info now rather than later.

See above

I don't care how good or bad a play you think it is (I think your plays have been pretty shit-poor but I don't have any say over them and my opinion doesn't matter) but I'd already pretty much outted myself as the masoniser a couple pages back (and Ether already said I'm townie, if not in so many words, after having been against me most of D1) if anyone had been paying attention, as a way to get people to look at the right targets. It failed.

I hadn't noticed. I think you're wrong.

There's a lot of anti-Mizzy sentiment right now, and what should I do? Just LET them lynch me? Yeah, because seeing another dead power role (even if an ex power role) is going to be REALLY great for town.

And pointing the scum to them is better?

Now at least, should you choose to believe me, you have this information to consider and hopefully stop another mislynch before it happens.

No "choose to" about it. We can confirm your claim immediately at no risk.

The confirmed townie list, should you decide to care, is: Skitzer, Ether, Mizzy. Go back and re-read and see if anything else pops into the limelight using that information.

Knowing that I am town, and almost entirely certain that Bookie is town as well, that leaves Setael, Gorrad, Lulu, Yvonne, Prozac, scot and Jordan. Setael seems likely town, scot seems to be giving off his usual town tells, and I don't think Jordan over-analyzes that much as scum, so that leaves Gorrad, Lulu, Yvonne and Prozac.

So yeah, that's my whole list thing for now.

[JDodge]

Hrmmm... I think due to the lack of kill last night, it's safe to say we have a (weak) doc out there as opposed to a vig; if the doc is a weak doc, and they targeted someone but did not die, we have 2 more confirmed town. Does anyone support the remaining power role claiming at this time? I think the benefits outweigh the risks by this point; assuming a doc, the masons get 1 more night to talk, plus the confirmed innocents help out quite a bit.

Opinions?

[JDodge]

True, I hadn't thought of that.

That reminds me - Mizzy, why Ether?

[JDodge]

If a doc (weak or not) is smart they'd be protecting Mizzy and Ether. I don't think we'd get any more confirmed innocents out of a weak doc through not claiming, and by claiming now we prevent the possible loss of the information.

[JDodge]

Question: Are we then assuming that we have the weakdoc?

Even if I have narrowed town possible doc candidates then it's only by two and in order to find the doc, and there's still too many townies to make that possible without a huge amount of luck.

I like option 3 as well.

We're pretty close to positive that the mafia were blocked at night from killing yes? Who all do you think the target might have been? You don't need to answer, I'm just brainstorming out loud.

Everyone (except Mizzy): Who would you have protected last night if you were the weak doc?

I would have protected Bookie.

[JDodge]

If there is a vig, they

should

claim now so we can not think we could possibly have a confirmed innocent.

[JDodge]

Who would you have protected last night if you were the weak doc?

Bookitty.

I am having trouble with this. I think I would have protected Ether, but I'm not sure how much of that is because I know her role now. Leaving the masons aside, I guess I would have protected Setael or you as having the most "town" reactions.

This format is incorrect.

I support Option 3. Throw in a backup plan, even. (A fulldoc can just be left to its own devices; we'll figure it out eventually.) My own vote tonight would be YvonneSeer/Ever. Possibly the other way around--JDodge, help me here?

If there's a vig, I don't support it claiming.

With what, specifically?

[JDodge]

Why are we revealing who we would have protected as doc?

If it's true that there was a successful protect last night, the scum know who they targetted and they can easily narrow down the weak doc through this. Unless you're suggesting that the weak doc lie, which defeats the purpose.

This is not for last night, or wasn't supposed to be, but for tonight. Who would you protect tonight?

No, it is not. It is for last night. Through this we can assure that the weak doc's result is not lost.

[JDodge]

No...Yvonne's right. We should stop now.

I'm getting old.

No, we should not. How does stopping help us in any manner?

[JDodge]

No...Yvonne's right. We should stop now.

I'm getting old.

No, we should not. How does stopping help us in any manner?

The worry is that we don't want our last power role outted when we are trying to help them.

The worry is that it's already too late. We have info from half the town; we need info from everyone else as well or the info from the other half has been in vain. If the scum already thinks they've figured out the (weak) doc, we would have a smokescreen effect to help us out.

[JDodge]

Thank you Setael. You said that more eloquently than I did.

[JDodge]

We need more of the reveals immediately. This is something that cannot wait and those standing in the way of such progress for no good reason will be voted for.

Yes, I am making an ultimatum. Deal with it.

[JDodge]

Setael, if Mizzy had tried to masonize you, she'd have failed.

JDodge is probably also scum at this point. Nice.

Give a reason instead of a blanket statement then. I don't much care for your sudden lack of logic once you become confirmed town.

[JDodge]

'Kay.

As soon as you made your 415, I was sure you were the weakdoc. Bookitty was an obvious doctor choice, and she wasn't in any trouble--the aside that she was probtown was out-of-place. That made me more inclined to go along with you.

But if if you

were

the weakdoc, the optimal play for you would be to get

your

target out and shut up. Yvonne's outburst would have

benefitted

you. So at this point, I'm pretty sure you're just trying to out power roles.

No, it wouldn't have when you considered that if I were the weak doc, then my own personal feeling on the matter (that all claiming is better because it provides a better smokescreen) would still remain logical.

[JDodge]

No.

It's

not

logical.

If you're the weakdoc, you've

gotten

your information out. All claims by nonweakdocs are irrelevent--they're camouflage, and a bunch of people agreeing with YvonneSeer and not giving results would be

better

camouflage because the scum wouldn't be able to eliminate everyone with a fake target. So sit down, shut up and bus Setael.

Yes.

It

is

logical.

If you're the weak doc,

surviving

also helps you out. All claims by nonweakdocs are relevant--they may contain info that we can use to find connections later, and a bunch of people agreeing with YvonneSeer and not giving results would give the scum

more

reason to off correct people as they still have a better chance of eliminating the weakdoc than shooting blindly. You essentially increase the pool of choices. So sit down, shut up and claim who your theoretical target.

[JDodge]

Ether, why are you using your confirmed innocent status as an excuse to be dense about this?

Claiming does not help hide the weakdoc.

Anyone who claims a target that the mafia did not try to kill is claiming non-weakdoc to the mafia.

If the weakdoc's target has already been claimed, more people claiming that helps hide the weak doc.

Think about it - if half the people claim, say, Bookie, and the scum

did

try to kill Bookie last night, who do you think the scum are going to go for first? What if the weak doc has already claimed? Don't you think it's safer to continue along instead of protecting someone who may or may not have claimed already?

Why am I scum for presenting a viewpoint that opposes yours and Mizzy's? Is it because you're confirmed innocent? How does that make you incapable of being wrong?

[JDodge]

If the weakdoc's target has already been claimed, more people claiming that helps hide the weak doc.

Think about it - if half the people claim, say, Bookie, and the scum

did

try to kill Bookie last night, who do you think the scum are going to go for first? What if the weak doc has already claimed? Don't you think it's safer to continue along instead of protecting someone who may or may not have claimed already?

Why am I scum for presenting a viewpoint that opposes yours and Mizzy's? Is it because you're confirmed innocent? How does that make you incapable of being wrong?

I guess my question is: how do we weed out the fake claims for the real one until the doc dies? How can we guarantee that the doc's protected person gets called out by MORE than just them? If the doc, say, protected me, and no one else claims me, then we're fucked because the scum know who they targeted.

We don't try to weed out the fake claims. That is bad.

That is worst-case scenario, Mizzy.

[JDodge]

The people who have not already claimed are a shield for the weakdoc--be it someone who claimed or one of them. More claims do

not

help the weakdoc hide. There is no situation in which they do. None. If the weakdoc isn't in {Jordan, Lulubelle, YvonneSeer}, then their claiming

only

serves to help the scum further narrow down the pool.

If the theoretical weakdoc isn't in {Jordan, Lulubelle, YvonneScum}, then their

not

claiming puts a possible already-claimed doc at risk.

You could argue that we're trying to make sure we know who the weakdoc's confirmed innocent is. But that's the weakdoc's business. Not yours. (And it's a bad idea--more claims will just guarantee that the first innocent it gets is also its last. Right now we have a chance. Maybe.)

No, the confirmed innocent is the

town's

business as much as it is the weakdoc.

Why am I scum for presenting a viewpoint that opposes yours and Mizzy's? Is it because you're confirmed innocent? How does that make you incapable of being wrong?

You're scum for trying to out the weakdoc, and then trying to bully people into continuing even after your craplogic was pointed out. You're also scum for panicking and trying to paint my confirmed status as a sign of mental decay when I started attacking you.

I am trying to out the weakdoc's confirmed innocent. To be entirely honest, I don't care what you say - I want the remaining people to claim a target. Now. You are not thinking this through at all and are using your own confirmed status as an excuse to be lazy.

Mizzy, why is it taking you this long to realize that JDodge is full of shit?

Because she's looking objectively at the facts and realizing that I am not full of shit.

[JDodge]

@Setael:

I'm following Ether because:

A) Because she's the only person here who I know is town (who is alive.)
B) Because I respect her intelligence.
C) There are aspects and posts of yours that I do find scummy.
D) You're nowhere near a lynch and I want to see how you react to this.
E) I want to see how others react to this.
F) It was fun.

So you're essentially blindly following her with no reason to believe she's right except there are "some aspects you do find scummy"?

No it doesn't.

I do agree that Gorrad's post sucks, though.

You're not even offering any counter-points now.

[JDodge]

Having said that, I'll still wait to hear from Jordan and Lulu first regarding this.

My opinion:

ABSOLUTELY ALL FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE WEAK DOC ISSUE IS EXTREMELY ANTI-TOWN AND MUST STOP IMMEDIATELY

. This includes absolutely all claims of who you would have protected and all theory on the subject.

I cannot say a single solitary word about why until day three though, so take it for what you will. We need to drop this right where it is and start talking about who to lynch.

You can say so now, or we can lynch you today. How's that sound?

[JDodge]

You can say so now, or we can lynch you today. How's that sound?

Lynch me today and you'll never find out, I suppose.

If you insist...

Unvote, vote: Lulubelle

[JDodge]

Why is lulu withholding information?

I have very good reasons. However, these are reasons I cannot say at this juncture.

Why are we not continuing with the claiming of night choices?

Continuing to do so is anti-town. I cannot say why at this juncture.

I know this is frustrating to hear. I'm sorry for that. All will be made clear in time.

You can say so right now, damnit. I know what you're hinting at, so why don't you either just come out and say it or continue with the claims? I know

exactly

what you're trying to communicate, actually. Now either we can continue with the claims, or you can say it. If you don't, I will.

[JDodge]

You're hinting that you are a weak doc.

There, it's been said.

Thanks for your time.

[JDodge]

You're hinting that you are a weak doc.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Dunce.

NOTE TO THE REAL WEAK DOC, IF THERE IS ONE

: Please protect me tonight.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

You realize what I know.

NOTE TO EVERYONE

: I just headed off that fakeclaim before it happened. Please note that Lulu knows more than she should, but has admitted to not being a weak doc. That implies knowledge she could not have unless she already knows who the weak doc's target is.

[JDodge]

That implies knowledge she could not have unless she already knows who the weak doc's target is.

Elaborate. How do you figure that I know who the weak doc's target was?

There's only one way you could not be the weak doc and know who the weak doc's target was. If you can't figure out, you are rather dense.

[JDodge]

You didn't answer my question. Why do you think I know who the weak doc's target was?

Now, now then... Telling that would prevent me from catching your buddies later.

[JDodge]

You are so full of it.

I do not know who the weak doc's target was. Prove otherwise or shut up.

My "implied knowledge" is based only on my interpretation of the day's events and the consequences thereof. Premature discussion of those interpretations and consequences is bad.

The flipside of the coin; you act all tight-lipped about something, then demand that I reveal my reasons when I refuse to do so and it casts you in a bad light.

Very interesting.

There is no such thing about premature discussion of the interpretation and consequence of a day's events

unless you have something to hide

. Since we established that you aren't the weak doc, and you have not disputed this at all, it is fairly obvious you are scum. Scum would want weakdoc to target them, BTW. Saves them the effort of killing them off themselves. There is a very easy-to-see tell that has showed your knowledge of the target last night. I will elaborate after I see where this line of questioning goes; rest assured I will inform you all very soon.

[JDodge]

NOTE TO EVERYONE

: I just headed off that fakeclaim before it happened. Please note that Lulu knows more than she should, but has admitted to not being a weak doc. That implies knowledge she could not have unless she already knows who the weak doc's target is.

4 people in total have hinted at being the doc/weak doc. This is not new information.

Which is why hinting at not being the weak doc is such a strong tell. Please read my statement before commenting on it next time. Thanks.

[JDodge]

Which is why hinting at not being the weak doc is such a strong tell. Please read my statement before commenting on it next time. Thanks.

I did, and you're missing something huge. Or hoping that everyone else does. I suggest you rethink things before posting.

I'm missing nothing. You cannot see what I see for reasons you cannot know.

[JDodge]

I'm missing nothing. You cannot see what I see for reasons you cannot know.

The only way you could "know" something I do not is if you are scum.

There's another possibility you're missing.

[JDodge]

I'm missing nothing. You cannot see what I see for reasons you cannot know.

The only way you could "know" something I do not is if you are scum.

There's another possibility you're missing.

And so why does Lulu have to out her reasoning but you don't need to give yours?

Because her affirming what she knows allows me to make more deductions than her not affirming it.

[JDodge]

And regarding my reasoning, I cannot say what it is because I want to be able to use it later should the same tell come up. Don't arm the scum with more knowledge than is necessary.

[JDodge]

And regarding my reasoning, I cannot say what it is because I want to be able to use it later should the same tell come up. Don't arm the scum with more knowledge than is necessary.

I hope you see how laden with hypocrisy that post of yours is.

I do see how someone not paying attention would label me as a hypocrite, yes.

[JDodge]

Paying attention or no, you told someone to do something, which they refused to do, and you gave them shit over it. Then, when asked to do the same thing, yourself, you refuse...

Differences:

A) I gave a reason why I choose not to disclose what I found.
B) I am choosing not to disclose a tell I found; Lulu is refusing to disclose something she knows that is independent of role (unless she's scum).

There are two distinct differences there. See, that wasn't so hard!

[JDodge]

Paying attention or no, you told someone to do something, which they refused to do, and you gave them shit over it. Then, when asked to do the same thing, yourself, you refuse...

Differences:

A) I gave a reason why I choose not to disclose what I found.
B) I am choosing not to disclose a tell I found; Lulu is refusing to disclose something she knows that is independent of role (unless she's scum).

There are two distinct differences there. See, that wasn't so hard!

Those two things do not make it any less hypocritical.

Hypocrite

(noun)

- A person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives.

Has nothing to do with whether your intentions or not are beneficial...just that they are concealing.

They are

different circumstances

.

Different circumstances

.

Different circumstances

.

I hope that by formatting it I might persuade you to, y'know, actually realize my point.

[JDodge]

Mmkay.

Unvote, vote: Porochaz

Go ahead now.

[JDodge]

Townie?

[JDodge]

Mmkay. Maybe a bit later, I think we still have a bit of discussion to do today.

Unvote, vote: YvonneSeer

[JDodge]

I disagree; weak doc is better as a pseudo-cop than as a protector. Instead of directing a weak doc, I want everyone to claim who they would protect tonight if they were a weak doc.

I'd protect Setael.

[JDodge]

I disagree; weak doc is better as a pseudo-cop than as a protector. Instead of directing a weak doc, I want everyone to claim who they would protect tonight if they were a weak doc.

I'd protect Setael.

We did not decide to do this. You can't just tell us all to do something without discussion or agreement and expect us to do it.

Luckily I don't need your info. Quit being so damn difficult and listen to reason for once, k?

[JDodge]

Okay, so the advantage of JDodge's plan over mine, assuming the scum haven't spotted the weak doc, is that they can't be certain of which player is actually being targetted, so they can't no kill if it turns out to be scum. That said, doesn't it put players at higher risk if they do say they're going to protect scum? And we have no way of knowing that.

Plus, if we're going to "protect" the person we find scummiest, doesn't that mean a lot of people will be "protecting" the same people?

Yes. But the advantage of my plan over yours is that the scum don't know who's being protected.

[JDodge]

Luckily I don't need your info. Quit being so damn difficult and listen to reason for once, k?

I will stop being difficult when you stop being a tyrant. So, probably never, in either case.

If by "tyrant" you mean "correct", then no, I will not cease to be a "tyrant".

[JDodge]

If by "tyrant" you mean "correct", then no, I will not cease to be a "tyrant".

No, by tyrant, I mean it's proper definition.

Glad you agree that my definition is correct.

GRAMMAR NITPICK WOO

[JDodge]

The horse is fucking dead now; you can all stop beating it.

We did not decide to do this. You can't just tell us all to do something without discussion or agreement and expect us to do it.

[JDodge]

And I don't feel it's beating a dead horse, because, what's the useful alternative? Are you supporting Porochaz's plan?

Of course she's supporting Prozac's plan, she wants herself alive tomorrow so she can continue making baseless, unquestioned leaps of logic because "she's confirmed".

[JDodge]

We did not decide to do this. You can't just tell us all to do something without discussion or agreement and expect us to do it.

I said CAN...as an option. Not as an order.

@Bookitty:

If you are going by that logic, then having the doc claim

now

would get us the same information without the possibility of the scum killing the doc before we get to hear it. If the scum might already know who the weak doc is, then going to night without them telling us who they protected LAST night is just as shitty for the town.

What I'm saying is that they have an innocent NOW. If you're worried about risking the innocent they might get tonight, why aren't you worried about the innocent they got yesterday?

So the question is, do we want the information we have now or do we want to fish for more? IF we fish for more, do we want to do so giving the scum more info or less info?

Which is why I want to finish with last night's protection target claims as well; it provides all the benefits of your plan with the added bonus of not telling the scum who the weak doc is yet.

[JDodge]

The only plans without the huge drawbacks of the others are mine and Mizzy's, and mine is an enhanced version of Mizzy's.

Get with the claiming.

[JDodge]

Quick question: Who thinks that the weak doc claiming will help the town through confirming 2 more players?

[JDodge]

I would prefer jd's plan over everyone else.

@JD, do you feel that you still caught scum in Lulu? If so are you still unwilling to release the tell that you think you got from her?

I think I overreacted a bit. She's still one of my top suspects, but there are others who are scummier.

[JDodge]

SOMEONE HAMMER MY PLAN WILL YOU

[JDodge]

still here, will talk more when someone says something worth responding too

[JDodge]

Mmmk, we're definitely lynching Prozac today. I like the way he forgot he claimed townie.

Unvote, vote: Prozac

[JDodge]

Unvote, vote: Gorrad

I love the way Yos attacks you and suddenly you want the day to end RIGHTNOW

[JDodge]

Ok, so, um why chaz then?

I could go for either a chaz lynch or gorrad lynch. Pretty sure they are both scum. I still think chaz is more likely, but Gorrad is looking worse and worse. Saetel's last post also scared me, not really sure why though. Just a feeling I guess.

You don't know, but now you suddenly

do

know?

Unvote, vote: scot

[JDodge]

Ok, so, um why chaz then?

I could go for either a chaz lynch or gorrad lynch. Pretty sure they are both scum. I still think chaz is more likely, but Gorrad is looking worse and worse. Saetel's last post also scared me, not really sure why though. Just a feeling I guess.

You don't know, but now you suddenly

do

know?

Unvote, vote: scot

What me get my ass handed to me for this, but I think he was asking Gorrad why he was voting for Chaz. He was responding to Gorrad's post #901 with the question not realizing he'd already answered, I think. I could be wrong.

*headdesk*

Unvote, vote: Gorrad

[JDodge]

can we lynch gorrad yet

[JDodge]

can we lynch gorrad yet

Any qualms with lynching Poro first?

Yes. Gorrad is pushing the Prozac wagon. Prozac is not pushing the Gorrad wagon. Logic would follow that lynching Gorrad would give more info.

[JDodge]

I'd like to propose a theory. Porochaz is scum because it's been a good while since we've gotten out of talk-about-Yos'-ideas phase, he's been at L-1 also a good while, and he's not lynched yet.

And now that the momentum shifts back to you, you're making a last-ditch effort to save yourself.

Nice try, but no.

[JDodge]

i like how prozac worded that in a way that pretty much said "if they target me, they die"

change of plans: lynch prozac, i change my target choice for tonight to gorrad instead of setael. ok? ok.

anybody want to say anything before i hammer?

[JDodge]

Yeah, Gorrad, I dont really see your point here.

Here you essentially say "yeah, they target me, they die, but I don't see what your point is" as opposed to "they won't die if they target me"

[JDodge]

Yos, your leetness has pwned us all.

Don't discount Ether's contribution. I decided to go after Setael because of her thoughts - not to mention she started the eldarad wagon.