Committee Mafia - GAME OVER

[Yaw]

So do we want to nominate people? Have election speeches? Any ideas to narrow our voting down a bit?

[Yaw]

Glork is actually one of my top choices for the job.

But in the interest of making this a vote rather than a confirmation hearing, I'll put forward another viable candidate. (I won't be disappointed by either winning.)

Vote: petroleumjelly

[Yaw]

Aww. *sniff* I luvs me some Pooky.

Although it should be noted that the most verbose player on the site is clearly TSS, who has been known to do post-by-post analyses of the entire game in novel format. Everyone else is gunning for second place.

[Yaw]

Would it be possible to get vote counts for this election, Mod?

[Yaw]

Alright,

fine

.

Unofficial mayoral vote count:

Glork: 4
Coron: 3
petroleumjelly: 1
Colonel Kurtz: 1
Yaw: 1
lordy: 1
Max: 1
chamber: 1

And we need 15. (Just doing this quick. I'm not the mod, so I'm not going to spend the time setting up a more detailed vote count involving who is voting for whom and who isn't voting yet.)

[Yaw]

No, I didn't. I chose not to count what I thought to be a spoiled ballot.

(I also doubt the mod would accept us not having a mayor.)

[Yaw]

Oh, and if you have an opinion on who you think would be the best choice, you could

vote for that person

. Since we need 15 to elect and we need to elect, your vote can be changed later if you choose. For now, contribute to the process.

[Yaw]

hm. I missed that. I think it's better if we start with a mayor, though, just to see how it impacts the game. Since we'll be re-electing mayors, we can always vote no mayor later if it proves to be detrimental.

Mod:

What happens in the event of a deadlock?

[Yaw]

Sure, he's my second choice anyway.

Unvote

,

Vote: Glork

[Yaw]

Random

Vote: Drummer

Welcome back to MafiaScum!

[Yaw]

Well, duh. "Random" means "there is no logic behind this vote".

What does that nightkillers comment mean? As lucky as what?

[Yaw]

I'm the 1% chance of survival guy. As far as I'm concerned,

anything's

possible. (Well, probability-wise.)

For those who missed that reference, see The Hobbit Mafia.

[Yaw]

Unvote

,

Vote: Max

Something's up there.

[Yaw]

"Blow up". Hee hee. So scummy.

And in the unlikely event he is a vig, any vig that would choose to kill night 1 deserves to be lynched.

Drummer -- Hey, this is my first game with you since you've been back. I haven't had the chance on site before.

[Yaw]

Yosarian2 -- Not exactly. He also stated that his role included the words "blow up". In other words, he seems to have been given enough information to know better.

[Yaw]

Obviously, he isn't a kamikaze. (Also, kamikazes don't get night choices.)

And if it kills like a serial killer, I'm going to lynch it like it's a serial killer.

[Yaw]

If you

have

to kill every night, then you're a SK. I don't care what it says your alignment is in the role PM. If your role behaves like a SK, we have to treat it like a SK.

I'm open to hearing a bit more explanation from Max. But either Max or Mariyta must be lynched today, because we have to clear the town of killing roles that act in an anti-town way.

[Yaw]

Also, that vote count is off since Glork's mayoral vote counts double. Max actually has 8 votes.

(I certainly hope vote counts won't be maintained only in the first post. It tends to create issues about how up-to-date the count is, and also poses problems for the players in tracking how votes change easily. I know it looks like a good idea, but from when mikehart tried it in Hobbit Mafia I remember it's more trouble than it's worth.)

[Yaw]

FOS: Masterchief

What's happening now is

not

about a mistype. It's about people admitting to nightkills. You're being deliberately obtuse.

[Yaw]

But Max didn't make the mistype. Mariyta did. So Masterchief must have been referring to her. And the quite legitimate reason she's being considered for lynching today is that she admitted to a nightkill. The mistype no longer has anything to do with it.

[Yaw]

Ok, I believe Max.

Unvote

,

Vote: Mariyta

.

And anyone who mentions the typo as justification for anything is on my suspicion list.

[Yaw]

It's like Nanook in OO1. He was given reason to believe he was a SK (even though he was actually given a vigilante role), and behaved like a SK -- with the result that the proper town action would have been to lynch him. If you are acting like a SK, then the town should lynch you like a SK.

Mariyta has what is in essence the same role. Either she is scum, or she has a role that is forced to behave like scum. This isn't a significant enough difference when it comes to lynching, and I wouldn't trust anyone with a forced vig role -- including Jeep. She has to go before she starts offing beneficial town roles. Getting rid of a night death also slows the game down a bit and gives the town more chances to lynch properly, putting more power back into our hands.

[Yaw]

After the first election, mayoral elections will be conducted at night through pm to

Ibaesha

.

It's in the front material.

Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that there is a committe of 3 forced vigs in the game.

Mariyta said

"I"

. She did not say

"we"

. I'm not about to assume that

every

role in this game is part of a committee. So your argument doesn't hold. (Note also that in arguing against me various people are assuming that a theoretical committee of forced vigilantes both have only one kill as a group and all have to kill on the same night in various places where one possibility suits their arguments. It's quite speculative and inconsistent.)

It's also quite silly to assume there's a committee of forced vigilantes that all can kill, and then to say that nullifying Mariyta through election solves the problem. What about the other vigilantes that are still going to run around killing? Our best use of the Mayoral role is to put players in that role who will use its advantages, not handcuff ourselves to using it as a prison so Mariyta can't nightkill pro-town players.

And again, I'm finding your logic suspicous. A forced vig is not "forced to act like scum"; instead of killing off confirmed people and known power roles, a forced vig would try to kill off scum and avoid killing confirmed good guys, porbable power roles, ect.

And would end up killing power roles that haven't come out and townies. As I said, I would not trust this role even to Jeep, who has the best scum-hunting success rate of anyone on this site. There's no way in hell Mariyta's going to be the super scum-killing machine you assume she will be, even with direction.

Furthermore, scum don't necessarily kill off confirmed people and known power roles, particularly in games with docs. You're just adding one more nightkill into the mix, where it can screw us over.

In fact, by killing Pooky, she's already done more to help the town then anyone else in the game. That's not "acting like scum" by any streach of imagination.

Absolute bullshit. You expect me to believe that because one random shot in the dark on night 1 worked out, suddenly Mariyta's nightkills will go our way? There was no way she could have even had the slightest clue Pooky was scum -- nobody posted in thread between getting their roles and that kill. Crosskilling of scum is going to happen, but it doesn't make the person doing the crosskilling automatically a pro-town role. It's day 1. We need to get rid of killers that don't act in the town's best interest.

Lots of players have been pointing out flaws in your logic, and reasons why what you want is bad. You're trying pretty hard to get a vig lynched, rather than trying to get scum lynched.

Nice try, but there's still quite a bandwagon on Mariyta, most of which started up after she admitted to the kill. I'm clearly not the only one with this policy, just the most vocal in defending it. Also, most of the people against it have only stated they didn't think it was a good idea. The only people trying to point out flaws are you and Yosarian...rather poorly.

I am trying to get an

anti-town role

lynched. In order to be pro-town a vig, the player must have the ability not to shoot if that's the best play for the town. So Mariyta is either forced to be violently anti-town due inability to lay off, or she's maliciously anti-town scum. In either case, it's an anti-town role and more than appropriate for a day 1 lynch.

[Yaw]

First of all, I never said that "the committe" had only one kill.

I said various people, not you specifically.

Besides, it's irrelevent. My point was to show that lynching a forced vig wasts valuable lynches and days that would much better be spent finding scum. I think that's true no matter if there's 1 forced vig or 5.

You're telling me that having 6+ kills a night isn't a problem?

It's day 1. We know she killed. Either she's scum, and we get rid of scum, or she isn't, and we at least get rid of a nightkiller. That's pretty damn good for day 1.

So, how would you suggest we use the mayor role?

In hindsight, I was thinking about the bulletproof aspect, but that's a bit hard to pull off in a way that's effective. It could supplement doc protection, I suppose. The best use is probably as an investigative roleblocker, since whoever gets the Mayor role can't kill. It'd be sort of random -- we couldn't really plan who get the Mayorship since if they're scum they might be able to get around it if they know it's coming -- but it would definitely give far more information than sticking it on Mariyta the whole time to stop her from nightkilling.

A complelty random kill would neither help not hurt the town, statistically speaking.

But you're talking about there being three extra random kills. That going to hurt.

I'm not saying that she's a "super scum-killing machine". She won't hit scum every night. And the lynch won't hit scum every day. Still, we're better off lynching then not lynching, right?

We are better off lynching, yes. But normally we get a lynch, then get feedback from the mod as to what role got lynched before we lynch again. So we can correct for any mistakes with the new knowledge. You're taking that out of our hands with this idea.

Lynching Mariyta also helps to slow the game down a bit, so there will be more days and more lynches. The more we determine things in thread with as much knowledge as possible, the better we'll be able to take out all the scum.

How about this line, "killers that don't act in the town's best interest". Why would you say that? Of course, if she's pro-town, she'll attempt to act in the town's best interest.

No, she won't. Her role as presented

doesn't allow her to act in the town's best interest

. My differentiation is because there are killers that can act in the town's best interest. They're

real vigilantes

. With the ability

not to kill

.

Getting rid of a SK is good only because the SK might win on his own, so his existance lowers the chances of a town victory (say, instead of a 50/50 chance of a town/scum win, it might be a 45/45/10 chance of a town/scum/SK win), and because the SK would tend to knock off people he thinks is a cop or a confirmed townie. Neither of those apply here.

Unless she's a SK!

Which is entirely possible.

The idea that we should make Mariyta the Mayor is also preposterous. You must take me for some kind of idiot if you expect me to believe we should make a night killer bulletproof and virtually unlynchable, particularly for the rest of the game. No chance I'm signing on for that one.

...and I'm now confident that Maritya is not mafia...

I think you're way too sure of yourself to not have some kind of knowledge. And since you're pushing an unbelievably anti-town agenda with it, I don't think it's cop knowledge.

FOS: Yosarian2

[Yaw]

unvote: mariyta

because I do like the mariyta mayor plan.

Have you lost your mind? "Let's reward the night killer by making her unkillable and unlynchable!" Why not just give her a parade while you're at it?

We all know she's not mafia, becuase she killed Pooky.

You've never been in a game with multiple mafia groups? Absolute crap logic.

Anyway, if you're now arguing she's a SK, what kind of anti-town knowlege are you accusing me of having? It's not like the mafia generally has any knowlege of who the SK is anyway.

I don't know what she is. I'm pretty much forced to use the term "forced vig" because everyone else is using it.

I'm

not the one certain that she's pro-town and should get off.

as has been stated, if Mariyta was mafia, she would not have killed pooky,

Why the hell not? It was night 1. Any scum role's making a pretty random shot in the dark. The fact that it was Pooky who died proves nothing other than that she isn't in his

particular

scum group.

Yaw, on the other hand, seems way too keen to have an easy lynch on day 1 on a known NON-mafia.

Again. It's day 1. HOW THE HELL COULD YOU POSSIBLY

KNOW

SHE'S NOT MAFIA? Obviously, you can't, but you can make guesses based on her not being in your group if you're scum.

FOS: slaking master

I'm interested in the mayoral clarifications on when precisely the office gets filled. I don't like the plans around the idea of having people try to nightkill the mayor in the event that it's possible -- it's a role determined by secret ballot, and in a game with scum depending on that is inviting bad things to happen. (I expect as we get towards endgame it will be better not to have a mayor.) If made possible by the clarification, it'll be best to use it essentially as a random role-blocker. We don't plan where it goes, but we all vote for a mayor and then in the morning we can get information by comparing how many kills there were against who shows up as mayor. That gives us an extra pseudo-investigation.

The best plan is to lynch Mariyta. She clearly kills at night, so she is either scum or a forced vig. If she's scum, we catch scum. If for some strange reason the mod was bad enough to screw up the alignment on her SK PM, then Yosarian and slaking_master are highly likely to be scum (well, they're pretty likely regardless, but this makes it go up) and we go after one of them next.

[Yaw]

Never try to outguess the mod. In particular, on day 1 making conclusions based on trying to outguess the mod is poor, poor play.

[Yaw]

I use a known scumtell and now it's craplogic.

Nope, the plan's right. If I had a second lynch today, it would clearly go to Yosarian, who is the scummiest of those who haven't come out.

On the plus side, this makes me feel better. I can take that Yosarian's being this silly because he's scum.

[Yaw]

A known scumtell?

All you said was that if Maritya turns out to be a good guy, then I was scum for saying "you know, we shouldn't lynch a good guy".

Wrong.

...and I'm now confident that Maritya is not mafia...

I think you're way too sure of yourself to not have some kind of knowledge. And since you're pushing an unbelievably anti-town agenda with it, I don't think it's cop knowledge. FOS: Yosarian2

The sad part is that you even

quoted the exact reason I found you suspicious

in your next post. You aren't scum for saying we shouldn't lynch Mariyta. You're scum for being way too sure about her alignment.

Right now, you're not making any sense, and you've changed your reason for wanting to lynch Maritya at least three times, both of which I consider to be scumtells.

I haven't changed my reason for lynching her once. It's always been that she admitted to a kill. I've tried to elaborate on

why

that means she should be lynched (and I still don't understand why there's even an argument here), but the central point has always remained the same.

And to say that

I'm

not making any sense when you wanted to reward a night kill with immunity from kills and lynches is absolutely hilarious.

[Yaw]

I'm really starting to lose patience with this idiocy.

It's a slam dunk lynch. It's the most obvious lynch I've ever run across. The only way it could be more obvious is if Mariyta held up a neon sign saying, "Lynch me! I'm scum!"

Of course

I'm pushing for it. I could understand why she wasn't getting lynched while Max hadn't given a viable claim -- clearly he was more suspicious at that point. But now there's absolutely no excuse.

The argument is mind-numbingly simple.

1 -- Mariyta admitted to killing last night (which ought to be enough as it is, unless we're talking about IS).
2 -- Mariyta stated she

must

kill each night.

That's the

definition

of a scum role! It's clearly anti-town!

So, she claims she's actually a vigilante. Either she's lying, in which case she's scum and deserves to be lynched, or she's telling the truth, in which case she

still

deserves to be lynched because she's an anti-town role that can't help but kill players on the side of the town. It's also good to lynch in the second case for the metagame reason that a forced vigilante

shouldn't

exist in Mafia, and it sends the message to mods not to pull a Nanook.

The benefits of getting rid of a night kill in a game with

five of them

are intuitively obvious. The very idea that Mariyta should be rewarded for nightkilling by making her unlynchable and unkillable, even once, is an affront to rational thought.

Everything else, including that FOS on slaking_master above, is because I've had to

address

the arguments of other people. (In particular that FOS quote, which was clearly taken out of context -- it's a direct response to slaking_master's claim that he

knows

Mariyta isn't Mafia, which was quoted directly above it.) My central points have never changed. My exact arguments have been directed at poor points of others, and so have not necessarily referenced my central points at all times.

Secondly, you seem to think I have information, and seem to be trying to find out what kind of information it is. That kind of fishing is clearly a scumtell. Hypothetically, if I was a cop who had an innocent on someone, I of course would be trying to stop them from getting lynched. And yet you simply state that it's an "anti-town agenda" I'm persuing, as it it was gospal truth you didn't have to explain. The whole tone of this makes me wonder if perhaps you already know she's not mafia, because she's not in your mafia group, and are trying to find out if I'm a cop who got an innocent on her or not.

Nonsense. This sort of thing would only apply if I actually thought you were a cop, which I don't. I specifically said I

didn't

believe you were a cop at all. Besides which, on any day 1, a cop result means absolutely nothing because a cop can't possibly know his/her sanity without multiple results. Besides which, if I

were

a cop and I

had

investigated Mariyta and got an innocent, I'd

still

want her lynched because a) it'd be less of a chance of my getting killed at night, b) it would tells me something definite about my sanity, and c) if she's a SK, it gives me insight into what the mod does for investigations on SKs (some mods give innocent investigations for SKs to give them a bit of a leg up). But all this is hypothetical, because I've got a pretty good idea you're no cop.

[Yaw]

Which...you pretty much have to say. You're on the block. *shrugs*

We also can't read your role PM, so repeating that you're pro-town, despite what your role actually

does

, isn't particularly effective. We have no way of knowing if what you're repeating is accurate.

[Yaw]

There are a total of 5 people I trust with a must vig ability even if they are 100% pro-town, and no offense meant you are not one of them (those 5 are MoS, Yaw, BabyJ, Fritzler, and Mathcam as they are all either superb players or guarunteed random shots, rather than having the possibility of misplays involved.

Amusingly, I don't trust

myself

with a vig role. The last time I had one I only used it twice, and one of them wasn't even my choice...

Especally as you never actually answered the key questions involved here. For example, if there are multiple pro-town vigs who must kill every night, do you really think it would be best to waste several days lynching all of them instead of hunting for scum?

That was a serious question? It's not like I know everyone's role and can make some sort of either/or judgement on this. I'll lynch scum of whatever flavour I catch when I catch it. There's no "instead" here, and it's irrational to think I can somehow wave my hand and have only roles of one type come forward at any particular time.

If you later claimed "On day 1, I got an innocent on person X, but I still tried to lynch them because..." it almost dosn't matter what reason you would give, I would assume you were lying and lynch you on the spot. Lynching a known pro-town person is never a good idea, period.

What if it was the Godfather, and it turned out? What if that person's play so convinced me he was scum that he was worth a lynch, and that lynch proved I was insane? The fact is that it's day 1. We don't

know

anything about a person's alignment. No cop

can

know anything about alignment until a) the results change alignment and b) one of the alignments received is confirmed by a death. The fact that you keep saying that you do know is very scummy, because nobody on the town's side should know.

The mayor role isn't going to be rewarding Mari. Sure it makes her unnightkillable, it actually makes her immune to all night targetting if I'm not mistake. It doesn't make her unlynchable though, the mod changed that rule and I don't remember what's required now to lynch the mayor, but the mayor is now lynchable, and finally, it also prevents that player from making any night actions, so that's another part that hurts that particular person.

It's 75%. Which, judging by the experience with an increased vote total in Norse Mafia, isn't going to happen. It's effective unlynchability, which is the same thing for all practical purposes.

Read this role.
Must kill every night (meaning I would have killed N0 if we'd had one).
Pro-town.

I had never run across that game before. Coron invented a role? No wonder this argument is screwed.

That's a role that shouldn't exist. It consists of the mod deliberately lying to players. It's along the lines of telling a cop he's sane, then giving him the results for an insane cop. (In this case, it's giving a SK the wrong alignment.) If that's what actually happened here, I'll be the first on a bandwagon to lynch the damn mod. I did not sign up for Bastard Mod Mafia.

I don't feel we can take that risk, though. Mariyta

was

under suspicion (thanks to the typo, which I thought was a silly reason for suspicion) before claiming, and it's equally if not more likely (at least under decent mods) that this is a scum cover. I'm not willing to give someone that admitted to a nightkill and admitted she

must

nightkill -- which is what scum

do

-- a free pass.

Masterchief -- Wine In Front Of Me. Watch

The Princess Bride

.

[Yaw]

If a mod creates a situation where a vigilante must act, or believes he should act, like a SK, then the mod is an ass. It's precisely the situation with Nanook that led to the town losing OO1 -- he was given a vigilante role, was led to believe it was a SK role, and killed off too many pro-town people before we got around to thinking about lynching him. If Mariyta's scum, she deserves to be lynched as scum, and in the event she's actually as claimed she deserves to be lynched so the town doesn't get screwed over by this.

The problem I have with your argument is this:

Me: It looks like a duck and acts like a duck, so I'll treat it like a duck.

Yosarian2: It looks like a duck and acts like a duck, but I'm convinced it's really a funny kind of cat.

I simply cannot accept that as a reasonable way to play.

I also note that Mariyta has not once even

implied

that she is part of a committee, or knows of more vigilantes. I also don't see why you believe that a committee of anything would get multiple choices -- the signup post doesn't imply one way or the other, so carrying on as if that's established fact isn't accurate. Your arguments in general are based on a lot of unproven assumptions like that one.

[Yaw]

(shrug) I am asking you somewhat hypothetical question, which you still have not answered, because it is very relevent here.


Anyway, considering the amount of deaths we had last night and the flavor of the game, I do suspect there are multiple must-kill vigs. Just telling all the must-kill vigs to kill the same person tonight, then counting the number of deaths, will probably let us know if I am correct or not on that.

Ok, let me get into some of the underlying assumptions here.

Assume there's a committee of forced vigilantes. Now, since many kills, especially early in the game, is bad for the town, they'd elect to use all their kills on the same person (assuming more than 1). Otherwise, they aren't a committee -- committees discuss things. So since we saw 5 kills last night, the idea that we have multiple forced vigilantes in a committee responsible for the carnage last night isn't worth pursuing. They'd have to be horrible players to have done this.

So there isn't a committee. Now we have to assume that in a game devoted to committees, theres a significant number (Yosarian2 hasn't specified, but seems to be assuming 3 or 4) of individual vigilantes forced to kill. I must say, this seems uncharacteristic for the game, and it seems rather unbalanced for a game this size. So I don't believe this to be particularly likely either.

At any rate, telling all the vigilantes to kill the same person tonight will tell us nothing --

everyone

is going to target that person, including scum. In essence, you're giving scum an alibi for later on.

Except her behavior, her defense of Max and her claiming to have killed Pooky, isn't really how I would expect a SK to look or to act.

Except that her defense of Max happened

after

her typo had started to garner votes. And her initial defense of Max (which was that Pooky wasn't "blown up") would have been sufficient without claiming. Besides which, vigilante is a pretty common role for scum to try to claim.

First of all, Yaw, are you a part of a committee?

It's sort of a "yes and no". I'm not officially part of a committee, but my role is such that I can make certain educated conclusions about committees.

[Yaw]

Max did horrible in his claiming, he took too long, and that is suspicious.

O.K I'll dump my g/f

But from his claim it sounds like the blowup doll would've been given to Pooky to use, not used on him. And I'm still not wholely trustworthy of Max right now, but if he is true about his claim, he sounds like a very useful role to keep around. If we continue to see people blowing up, then he probably will be lynched, but for now I and many others think we shouldn't lynch Max yet.

I just checked all of armlx's posts, and though I was concerned to find he only had two of them, this certainly wasn't among them.

So two questions for Max:

1 -- Who and where did this quote really come from?
2 -- I'm absolutely positive I've never seen at least the bolded section before. I think I would have remembered something that far out of context. Why is that there?

[Yaw]

It's in

quote tags

. Those attribute the quote to the person in the quote tags.

Besides, even when people are two lazy to break the tags up, they usually at least put in a line break so it doesn't look like the same paragraph.

[Yaw]

I'm pretty sure almost everyone else got what he was saying.....

Asking for clarification is not a horrible thing. If Max had responded with the correct quote, and stated that the bold was his own response, I certainly would have accepted it. Especially since I could just confirm that it makes sense that way.

Why are you answering questions directed at other people anyway?

And Yos is scum protecting Max, as is Mariyta.

I have to agree with Glork to some extent on this one. I don't see Yos as scum protecting Max, or at least I haven't noticed any evidence of it. Yos being scum protecting

Mariyta

is plausible.

Is it just me or does it seem like Glork's done a 180?

Actually, he's been supporting FATty ACid's logic for a while now. (And I must admit, she's made some excellent arguments. I completely missed the timing thing Glork just pointed out, which is making me look at Max again.) I was starting to wonder why Glork

hadn't

backed up his recent assertions in favour of Max being scum with at least an FOS, so the vote looks fine to me.

Yos has already explained that the flavor of the game leans heavily towards the existence of one scumgroup. Until I see proof otherwise, I've decided to operate under that assumption.

So you think that there were

four

pro-town kills last night? I think the evidence of how many kills there have been in the game takes a bit of precedence over flavour constraints. If less than two of those were scum kills, I'd say we have some serious balance issues.

[Yaw]

Oh, and

Mods:

Can we have more vote counts? At least one in thread every two pages would be nice. One per page would be ideal. Thank you.

[Yaw]

It was meant as a joke, Coron. Happy tongue-in-cheek smiley. (Though I still believe that role ought not to exist in games; it's sort of like a random cop in that way.)

As I recall Yos or someone like that said that max couldn't have done the cocktail killing and was fairly sure...

Not really. Yos's argument was that Max couldn't have killed

Pooky

. Since FATty ACid's argument is that Max didn't kill Pooky at all, but killed

Colonel Kurtz

, Yos's argument doesn't apply.

I like your vote for the mayor too, but since we elected the mayor before roles were sent out, would MoS make the mayor scum?

I can only assume that the roles were assigned completely randomly, without any regard for who became Mayor first. So I wouldn't take mayorship as indicative that a player is either scum or town. All the more reason to move the role around each night, at least at first -- it prevents scum from hiding behind the mayorship.

[Yaw]

huh. I forgot that too. So much of Yosarian's argument was against Max killing Pooky I figured I didn't have to check.

And has Masterchief said anything that wasn't completely wrong this entire game? Max just posted

today

. You'd think Masterchief wasn't reading the thread at all.

[Yaw]

First of all, Yaw, are you a part of a committee?

It's sort of a "yes and no". I'm not officially part of a committee, but my role is such that I can make certain educated conclusions about committees.

In other words, it's an educated conclusion based on what I know about one committee. If it doesn't apply to other committees, I had no way of knowing that. I assumed all committees had a similar setup.

The analysis being pointed at still stands. You just have to deal with the first case as committees that can communicate, and the second would include committees that don't.

[Yaw]

Well, since they're more likely to hit town than scum, it's more likely to result in a scum win than if they weren't there, particularly if they're forced to kill rather than just pulling an IS. Of course there's a chance they could get insanely lucky and just wipe out the mafia in a couple nights of killing, and though highly unlikely that has to be considered by the mod as well. At any rate, it's far too swingy to reasonably be considered for a game, because in my experience from running games swingy roles tend to break them, which means the game isn't determined by good play at all.

[Yaw]

In all technicality, it is also (statistically) more likely that we will lynch a townsperson over scum every day (considering random lynches in a town with more townspeople than scum). That doesn't mean we should lynch ourselves simply because we're more likely to vote for a townsperson over scum.

But it's a question of scale. The more chances the town has to get things right through lynching, the more chances of winning. But having excessive numbers of night kills denies the town chances to lynch and make informed choices, hence are bad for the town.

Let's be honest here. When you saw the night scene, wasn't your first reaction, "Wow, that's a lot of scum kills!" Mine certainly was. So why does Glork's theory that there's only one scum group have more credence than my theory that the evidence points to a good number of scum? If anything, I have the more intuitive answer based on the information given.

The thing is, we KNOW there were 5 kills night 1. So, which would be more unbalanced, which would be more "swingy"?

A. 1 mafia, 1 SK, 3 forced vigs
B. 1 mafia, 4 SK's.

The question is "swingy for whom"? Situation B actually has 6 groups trying to win, each of which has to get rid of all the others. I would expect more cross-kills, yes, but that in effect slows the game down to get the town more chances to win it through lynches. Situation A looks like it's more likely to get determined all the way through via nightkills, which is generally not how you want a Mafia game to function. In effect, nightkills in A are more likely to favour one group over another than nightkills in B.

[Yaw]

Guess I'd better claim. I'm not a cop, but I get all the night results from their committee. Which is how I can make conclusions about how they operate -- I only got one result. (No, it wasn't a guilty result. No, it wasn't on Mariyta, or Max for that matter.)

Now, can we try to lynch someone who...oh, I don't know...ACTUALLY KILLS PEOPLE?!?

[Yaw]

I actually lost internet access for a couple minutes there. Rogers decided to change around IP numbers, and since I'm connecting through a router, it booted me.

I also had to check with the mod if what you're asking for is considered to be flavour. He says it is. So I can't answer that. Would

like

to, but that isn't up to me.

[Yaw]

In which case I already claimed as a cop role receiver. Though that's more complex than the flavour in my case, which is the actual role name. Which is what you were asking for. Blame yourself for not being more specific.

[Yaw]

*blinks* Cop

result

receiver. It's late, my fingers do silly things when they're tired.

[Yaw]

Of course not. I just receive results.

[Yaw]

I already received clarification from him. I can claim the

role simplification

only, which I had already claimed in the first place. So I naturally assumed you wanted the flavour role, because otherwise why would you be asking?

I received the result at daybreak. Naturally. That's when cop results normally go out. When else would I receive it?

[Yaw]

Do all members of your Committee receive the same result?

I'm not

in

a committee, so I wouldn't know. I'm supposed to receive the results from cops. Since I'm supposed to be able to recieve multiple results, and only got 1 last night, the logical conclusion is that only one investigation by cops occurred. The explanation that makes most sense to me is that the cop committee discussed overnight and sent in only one investigation, though I admit it's possible (though less likely) that all the cops save one got roleblocked.

[Yaw]

Pretty much. I'm a failsafe. It would be much more interesting if I got more than one result each night and could compile the data (which I suppose is possible if the roleblocking case actually happened), but I can only state what I know.

I don't know what Carne did. It's entirely possible there's another investigative role outside the committee that I have access to the results for. (I've noticed one player hinting at this, at any rate.) It isn't worth my revealing the result I have -- it would only result in setting up a list of people for scum to kill (both the innocent, and anyone who comes out to confirm).

I still find this ridiculous. Most players would lynch anyone on sight that was found to have killed night 1 and claimed vig. Claiming something like "forced vig" would result in laughter before lynching. And yet, somehow, this is a "get out of lynch free" card for most of the players here. It's nice to see that scum now have a foolproof claim. I'm not willing to let it go that easy, because playing town in this game means killing the people who are trying to kill you. In the worst case scenario, in the unlikely event that MoS actually did put a role that shouldn't exist in the game, at least by lynching we'd know it's actually there and could adjust accordingly. Now, it's a really good chance you're just letting scum go.

I also can't believe anyone buys into the logic that by lynching anyone on day 1, it would cost the town the game. The idea that by lynching someone who pretty much claimed scum on day 1, it would cost the town the game is even more preposterous.

At least making the wrong lynch for the day will give information, not that I have much confidence in the remaining town after I'm gone (though lynching the people who were absolutely wrong today might be a good start), since you can't seem to even get the obvious lynch right. I'd still like to see the town win, but at this rate...probably doesn't deserve it, sad to say.

[Yaw]

I'm going to have fun watching you backpedal madly tomorrow, petroleumjelly. Much laughter will ensue.

[Yaw]

Yaw, do you know if all the cops know who the cop committe targeted last night?

I'm don't have confirmable information about this. I only know that I'm supposed to get all their results, and I only received one result. My best guess as to why this happened is that the cops discussed amongst themselves and submitted only one person to investigation, but I don't know that for certain.

Upon reviewing, Coron's idea that the cops don't get their own results is also plausible. I assumed that cops got their own results in addition to me, since cops normally get their own results, but I have no information one way or the other. If what Coron said were true, it wouldn't surprise me.

As to the role name, Cop Result Receiver

is

my role simplification. However, the flavour I'm not allowed to claim is considerably shorter, and would fit the criteria petroleumjelly's harping about.

I have no intention of claiming my result at this point. I'm not going to give the scum a target list through my results, nor do I want to set up a situation where any remaining cops are going to out themselves through their reaction. In fact,

FOS: Bogre

for trying to out cops.

If people insist on trying to set up kills for tonight (which I still think is just giving scum a place to hide), Max is probably right in that Masterchief's the best choice. People who are that off-base about what's happened in thread that consistently are pretty hard to analyze, so it might be better to avoid having to waste a lynch figuring out if it's scummy or just a player who refuses to read.

[Yaw]

Trying to out cops? I wanted a confirmation, Yos chimed in with a better plan, and I agree with it. In no way do I want cops outed.

Not the whole story. You suggested I reveal my result

after

I stated I wasn't going to reveal results because I didn't want to give scum a target list of the person found innocent and any cops that reacted to the result being revealed. By the time you posted, you ought to have known better, and you

still

made the request.

[Yaw]

True. But that means a cop coming out, which we don't want this early.

[Yaw]

I can use my brain to interpret them for you.

I've claimed exactly what I do. I receive all the cop results. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Yaw]

The problem is that revealing results gives the cops something to react to, which could be used to pick them out. I don't want to provide an excuse for cops inadvertently revealing themselves either. We've lost a good number of them already, and I don't know how many are left. I'd rather bite the bullet than risk outing any remaining cops.

[Yaw]

I honestly don't know if being mayor would affect my receiving cop results. I'll check with the mod and get back to you. (Roleblocking passive actions is sort of a grey area in games -- think of roleblocking a mason. Would that prevent him from discussing at night? If so, how would you arrange things to enforce that? So I could see this going either way.)

I'd support a Masterchief death, but I don't think we'd gain as much information by lynching him as we would by lynching someone else. If people insist on trying to direct night kills, he's a better target for that. (Although putting a bit of pressure on him wouldn't be a bad idea. If it would make him post more information, it would give us more to analyze.)

One question I just realized has been nagging at me. Mariyta -- Why did you choose to kill Pooky?

[Yaw]

I asked the mod, and I wouldn't receive results if mayor. The answer was definitive.

I also asked about the timing on when someone becomes mayor, and he should be answering that in thread shortly.

[Yaw]

That's what it looks like. So it's probably not the best idea to broadcast our choices for mayor. It creates targets.

[Yaw]

Actually, I find that more suspicious than "Let's test Glork!" We voted him mayor before the roles went out, so we have to consider that he's as likely to be scum as anyone else. Mindless following and sucking up isn't a good trait for townies.

And I can buy Mariyta's answer. I'm not happy with it (if I were pro-town, I'd tend to leave the most experienced player in the game alive for at least one day), but I can understand it.

[Yaw]

Unvote

What the hell?

At this point, "no mayor" might not be a bad idea, or else someone we know isn't a power role.

I was starting to come to that conclusion myself. I don't see a reason we need a mayor, and there seem to be enough arguments against it that no mayor's probably best. The revelation that mayorship gets delayed (in terms of nights) kills my idea of using it as a rotating roleblock -- the entire point of that was that scum wouldn't see it coming.

[Yaw]

Well, it really depends on the mod as to whether double targetting shows up in night kills. My problem with the claim right now is more along the lines of "

Six

night kills?!"

[Yaw]

So you don't know how many are in your committee? (I just want confirmation on this point -- I

don't

want the number if you do know it.)

[Yaw]

You're not sure if you'll be

able

to kill every night? Care to explain that one?

[Yaw]

But anyway, I'm also starting to second guess my defense of Max earlier. I'm no longer 100% sure he didn't kill Colonel Kurtz. I still think he's not a good lynch, though, as his claimed role is so easily testable.

Huh. Why were you 100% sure before?

I think we should consider having both Borge and Maritya target seperate people.

Except that if he's telling the truth that would lead to six night kills tonight. Ew. That's pretty much the opposite of what everyone wants.

[Yaw]

Indeed. Not much point in lynching Mariyta now -- we should be finding out for sure if there really are forced vigilantes in this game when we go to night.

[Yaw]

Remember, wrong a wrong lynch will jsut give the mafia more night kills.

Care to elaborate? The normal setup for a mafia group is that it's a group with one kill between them. So lynching off one of the three, while good to do, wouldn't impact the number of night kills until the group's

all

gone. Why do you think things are different than that?

(And for the love of everything decent, nobody answer for him!)

[Yaw]

Hey, I pointed out that slaking_master quote with an FOS on the 21st.

But what's really suspicious about it (and with the extra information you know now) is him calling Mariyta "

known

NON-mafia" (bolding mine). If he had a pro-town role, he couldn't possibly know if Mariyta weren't mafia -- he could have a pretty good impression she isn't scum with Pooky, but that doesn't rule out an opposing scum group, and with the number of deaths we had night 1 most people would assume one exists. We also know that the cops didn't investigate Mariyta at all, so he can't be an inexperienced cop making an overstatement off an innocent result. Looks like he knows something he shouldn't. (Although I missed the vote flip. Bah.)

I still want to hear Masterchief answer for his second-last post, though. (That would be the post I tagged in 622.)

[Yaw]

By the same token, that is the presice reason why i voiced my theory because, if true, it would let the town know that we will have to find other methods of pinpointing scum, since they won't want to bandwagon one of their own.

huh? If the scum didn't know one another, how would they know if they were bandwagoning one of their own or not?

[Yaw]

So scum wouldn't actually try to lynch anyone for the entire game? Not likely.

May as well go with my own analysis. Helps that it matches up with others.

Vote: slaking_master

[Yaw]

75% Really unlikely to happen. If Glork's scum, our best bet is still to lynch someone else today and unmayor him at night so he can be lynched more fairly.

[Yaw]

Look, Cam's alive! Lynch him!

Besides which, since Glork will continue to be unkillable until tomorrow, and have a higher threshold for lynching until then, I think we can be pretty sure he'll still be around then.

Suggestion -- if we insist on telling people who to kill at night, and also giving people who are under threat of nightkill a chance to claim, the least we could do is create a formalized process. So, if you'd like to see someone nightkilled, write

Nightkill: __________

. (Note: I'm not using "Vig:" so there's no confusion here in the case there are daykillers, or other things we're not aware of yet in this game. There's minimal chance a mod could actually take a bolded nightkill in thread and do something with it.) Then we can count up the votes for vig'ing, and have a quantifiable idea of what danger anybody's in, which gives players a reasonable chance to respond to actual pressure. Sound good?

[Yaw]

Or for the simple version, he's trying to set up the "Why is mathcam still alive? He must be scum!" argument. Which is poor logic -- Cam could still be alive because scum know the argument and kept him alive, which drops us into WIFOM territory.

And since I like my idea, it's worth using it for pressure.

Nightkill: pablito

[Yaw]

Unnightkill: pablito

I still don't think it's a good idea to out someone based on one investigation, particularly an innocent one. That said, can you explain why I only got one result last night?

[Yaw]

I don't think you understand. I don't have the answer to that question. That's why I'm asking. I don't know how the cops work; I just know I'm supposed to get all their results. You're the second cop we've seen (other than the nightkilled Kanaga). So, any ideas why the two (or more) of you only produced one result?

[Yaw]

Looking back at Yaw's posts, it does make sense that he doesn't know how the results are given and why there was only one choice. And if Yaw thinks about the result he received, if he's telling the truth, it should make a lot of sense why he was only given one result.

I've made guesses in thread that would made sense. How I'd be expected to know if I guessed right is beyond me at this point. (If I get only one result, or multiple results tonight I'd be able to refine my guesses...)

Better to check with the mod if you can reveal some mechanics.

[Yaw]

I have a theory as to why we might be having problems. (Well, random speculation, but probably worth considering.) I want to hear the mechanics info from pablito before saying, though.

Er...just previewed before posting, and...have you asked the mod, pablito? Any news?

[Yaw]

Nice to see Vaughn's 10 pages behind the rest of us.

Alright, it's not worth waiting for MoS to get back before speculating -- it was mostly that I didn't want speculation to divert attention from getting some answers out of pablito. This is just a random theory, but I think it's possible we could be dealing with a Masonry Mafia situation. (That is, the scum have infiltrated the committees, so there might be a scum as a part of the doc committee, for example.) On day 1, we can't possibly know one way or the other, but we should be looking to confirm or contradict this as time goes on.

Related to this, we have to be very careful of claims. Even if the scum for their own separate "committee(s)", the town committees provide for easy safe claims, particularly if committee members aren't aware of who or how many people they're in a committee with. If the night does prove we have a forced vig committee, we should be particularly wary of further vig claims past Mariyta -- it's the easiest and most defensible claim for scum to make as it explains their night killing.

[Yaw]

I suppose there's not much point in revealing the cop night choice now. If you have no idea what the other votes were, and you weren't in the majority, my result naturally won't match with your vote. The apparent contradiction would be consistent with what you've said, and we'd gain nothing besides outing whoever was found innocent.

[Yaw]

Max -- Why would you

want

modkills?

[Yaw]

Sigh. Even if he's scum, pressuring Glork today is useless because of the mayor rules on lynching. Try to do something productive.

Although the point on mudbuck is decent. Whether he's town or scum, he really hasn't contributed much so far. (Besides, the argument was for Blackberry to be vig'ed, not lynched. That's pressure enough, though it's probably worth a prod over voting if we want to get him to post.)

[Yaw]

slaking_master -- You're allowed to claim your "role simplification". What is it?

[Yaw]

Let's try this again where it's not buried at the bottom of a page.

slaking_master: What is your role simplification? (Yes, according to the front material you can claim this.)

[Yaw]

Yeah, this is the amazing shifting roleclaim. He's gone from vanilla townie and "'free agent' so to speak" to definitively Free-Agent capitalized. My vote's not changing.

Just vig a lurker.

[Yaw]

"So to speak" means you're claiming "something like". You didn't say, "My role

is

," before, you said, "My role is like a..." Why would you need to hedge? I could understand if you were confused by the role simplification thing, but then you wouldn't have used the words "free agent" in the first place.

[Yaw]

Blackberry's the best of the three, though it probably sucks a bit ot vig him since I believe the mod's looking for a replacement. Nightson actually has 20 posts, and Glork seems to believe mudbuck isn't scum (not that he's been productive one way or the other), so Blackberry's the best vig target of those listed.

Are there any other lurkers to consider? (Other than mark.six, who was just replaced.)

[Yaw]

Um, I did say that it's better to let the replacement for Blackberry stand. After all, it would suck to replace into a role and get immediately nightkilled. But of the three listed...

Basically, it means we should be figuring it out based on all lurkers, rather than just a subset of them.

[Yaw]

This is ridiculous. Just pick someone off Yosarian2's list of lurkers to vig (other than the new replacement) and let's go to night already. We're losing participation as this day drags out, because nobody really has anything more to discuss. If we don't make a decision, this game will die.

[Yaw]

I intend to vote for no mayor. I think it's better to keep all of us equal in terms of lynchings, and the benefit of bulletproof-ness (or roleblock) kicks in too late to be of much use.

[Yaw]

I'm fine with lordy/armlx as well. As Mariyta said, though, she considers our opinions to be advisory, rather than binding, so no matter what we say it's still up to her.

Still, Mariyta definitely has to post in thread with a decision, not only to direct kills, but perhaps equally importantly to minimize the chance that cops will waste investigations on people who are going to be nightkilled.

[Yaw]

For those asking, one result, also an innocent.

Otherwise, happy we got scum who was alive yesterday. I'll do my best to get through the thread and find lordy's partner(s), but am moving on Saturday so it might be a little later than I'd like. (Shouldn't have a drop in internet service, though, and should be able to get to it by the end of the long weekend.)

Interesting mayor mechanic. Is it better to have a mayor and a normal number to lynch, or to have no mayor and lynch at lynch-2? I'm not particularly thrilled with the choices, especially when considering how this could screw with endgame scenarios.

[Yaw]

I'm scared it's door number 3 myself.

If we were to try to resolve this, I'm also not sure how to go about revealing results, since that's the only way to get definite confirmation. (Keep in mind I'm also of the "don't reveal your results unless it's absolutely necessary" school of investigation, so I'm really apprehensive about doing the logical thing and having each of us reveal one result and confirm the other.)

How on earth would this game handle a traditional 3-person endgame? If there's a mayor, only the mayor can lynch. If there isn't a mayor, is it just the first person who votes? I have serious issues with both options here.

[Yaw]

Actually, one doesn't "bus" people in opposing scum groups. One "catches" them. It's only throwing someone under the bus if you know they're scum because they're your partner. (Jeep in DP's Movie Title Mafia would have been quite a bit less impressive if any one of the lynches he had led had been on his own team. They weren't, but they were all scum.)

Partly semantics, partly an underlying problem with the concept as Coron's used it.

[Yaw]

I don't expect this to be relevant, but just to be responsible...

I'm moving tomorrow. I expect to just be able to plug in my computer and have internet access, so I should have no disruption. Having not tried in this place before, of course, I can't guarantee it. At worst, I'll be gone for a few days while technical issues get worked out.

[Yaw]

Working through a reread...

Are they even in this game?

chamber
MrBuddyLee (although, part of that's the long night and that he's at Burning Man)
Max (good early, nothing since this day started)
Vaughn
mudbuck

armlx would be in that list, but he's been better recently. Unfortunately, his lurking for so long takes him out of the scope of what I look for most in terms of scum tells (he wasn't around to interact with slaking_master). Same applies to The Goat/Blackberry, though that's certainly not his fault.

Mariyta's pretty much confirmed in my mind, thanks to the mod reveal on Bogre, combined with the fact she claimed first. I'm still annoyed with the mod for including such a thing, but it's obviously in this game and I can't do anything about it. If we decide it's better to have a mayor, she'd be my first choice (both because she's confirmed enough that I'd be comfortable with her in a position that's that hard to kill, and because the loss of a night kill through mayoring isn't going to lose this game for us -- besides, we still have at least one more to direct).

FATty ACid (now olio) pinged my radar a bit just because she was so heavily after Max yesterday. Ordinarily this wouldn't be an issue, but when you combine that with Max having successfully passed on an item last night and Max's historical lynchability, it's possible that FATty ACid was chasing lynch-bait. Still, no scummy interactions with slaking_master, so if she were scum she'd have to be in a different group.

I really don't like Drummer's response to slaking_master towards the end of yesterday.

arg, not all vanilla townies have this role (i dont think so anyways), just the members of my comitee. I honestly wouldnt be surprised if there were no true vanilla townies in this game, with everybody having some sort of power, however weak.

I'm not sure, but something about this sorta seems like covering up. Especially the way that first sentence was worded. It tripped one of my lie detection sensors, though it's possible that I'm just looking too hard.

This was followed in the next post by a statement he'd probable vote for slaking_master after we decided who to vig, followed the post after that by confirming his vote on Vaughn. Drummer also defended slaking_master's little "scum can't talk to one another" earworm earlier in the day (which we can deduce is false -- if true, slaking_master probably wouldn't have had the "I know X is town" tell). Now, slaking_master has nothing connecting him to Drummer from his end of things, but it's still worth an

FOS: Drummer

. It's being wishy-washy about voting when it comes to scum.

Still have to reread the big three offenders when it comes to verbosity (Coron, Glork, and Jelly), but at least there's some decent information there to work with.

[Yaw]

I think we make a mistake by attributing too much importance to Jelly's success so far. He's correct in how he used it (if you're getting two scum lynched and correct on a number of town alignments, you're not playing badly), but we can't say anything more. Talitha's known for not being comfortable as scum until her partners are dead, so offing two poorly playing partners early would actually be good scum play. As for if catching a lot of scum makes you town, see Jeep in DP's Movie Title Mafia again.

Which isn't to say anything about whether or not Jelly's scum -- I haven't read him over yet. (Hoping to get the other three done tonight, which is also the reason it's only an FOS on Drummer -- I might find Coron, Glork, or Jelly is scummier.) But to determine if Jelly's town or scum, we have to look at more than how successful he's been in predicting alignments.

[Yaw]

Sigh. It's a sad thing when a part of me wishes certain players were dead and town, just so I never have to read their voluminous posting epic novels again.

Anyway, the other player with a connection to slaking_master is Glork. Most interesting is this little switch:

Post 625:

ok, that confirms my theory.

it is my belief that the members of mafia comitee(s) DO NOT know the identities of the other mafia members. if this was well-known, then i guess im slow, because it just dawned on me, and i figured i should post it.

Wait, what?


The reason pro-town players don't know other people in their committees is because each committee could massclaim its members and by process of elimination, the scum would be found.
How does "Vigilantes don't know ohter Vigilantes" translate to "Scum don't know other Scum"?

Post 684:

In my eyes, SlakingScum implies ScumDon'tKnowEachOther.
ScumDon'tKnowEachOther may imply SlakingScum. I'm inclined to believe that this is the case.

Why is the "scum don't know each other" earworm being taken seriously? It would effectively reduce scumhunting down to catching a bunch of SKs. That isn't Mafia at all, because be definition, the minority is

informed

.

What caught my eye more was slaking_master's reactions toward Glork, which seem rather deferential. Rather noticeable when it's directed at only one person in the game. For example:

Just to be clear on what i am saying, i think Glork is acting suspicious, but i am not prepared to say that i am sure he is scum, hence why i have not voted for him (i dont think im voting for him, anyways). I am mearly voicing my opinion, and seeing how others, who have played with him, feel he is acting.

Wishy washy as all hell, but looking at his posts in their entirety, wishy washy

only

when it comes to Glork. In his next post after the quoted one, he just votes for pablito without a second thought.

Now, this is tempered somewhat by Glork's whole breadcrumb thing with mudbuck, where Glork claims to know and share mudbuck's role. If he's telling the truth, he'd be town (assuming the scum groups don't have 4 members). It's entirely possible, though, for a quick scum player to pick up on an obvious breadcrumb (as mudbuck's was) and ingratiate himself into the committee. So I'm still up in the air on where to vote.

FOS: Glork

in the meantime. I'm confident that slaking_master's partner is either Drummer or Glork, and want to hear their responses to what's been dug up so I can better figure out which it is. One of them should be lynched today, and the other vigged if the lynchee turns up town. (Hopefully, we'll get the lynch right and can use the vig better than as a backup.)

[Yaw]

YAW: I wouldn't think Glork as keen enough to pick up the little comment I made as a role claim. Then again, what I did say was (not exact words. Too late to check) ~I think the blow up doll has something to do with me. It shares a thing, I think~ Yes, he might had caught that. Wait, I remember that he said something like "Isn't it obvious what Mudbuck is?" Huh.

Right. I'm not sure about how legitimate Glork's picking up on the breadcrumb is, which is why I haven't voted yet. Without the breadcrumb thing, there'd be enough there for me to throw a vote on easily (particularly the stuff from slaking_master's end). That's why I've presented everything and want some answers.

Since MoS seems to be giving us scum groups in the first post, and most scum groups are traditionally 3 players, we could eliminate a scum group completely by nailing slaking_master's last partner. That makes a Drummer or Glork lynch far better than Coron for today -- both have left evidence connecting themselves to the syndicate scum group. Coron's just been acting weird. I do think he's been abusing logic, but given all the information he can't possibly be more scummy than the other two.

[Yaw]

Except the theory is bullshit for two reasons:

slaking_master was caught by the "I know X is town" slip. If he had no clue who his partners were, he'd appear to us as a SK for the purposes of scum-catching. He'd be alone, but if he were alone, he'd have no clue who was town and who was scum. If someone's saying they

know

a player to be town, they either have knowledge from an investigation, or they just know the player's town by elimination (not a partner). Thus, slaking_master must have known his partners, otherwise, he never would have made that slip.

Note also that Jelly caught lordy based on his trying to divert the slaking_master wagon. There would have been no reason for lordy to try to divert that wagon had he not known slaking_master was his partner.

It might have happened in other games, but it is certainly not the case in this one. There is enough evidence to support the opposite conclusion.

[Yaw]

Slaking calling Mariyta a "known" vigilante can be based on Bogre's modkill combined with Mari's claim/behavior. I certainly thought of Mari as a known non-mafiate at that point in the game.

slaking_master calls Mariyta "known non-mafia": post 333

Bogre gets modkilled: post 594

So no, not a plausible explanation unless slaking_master has time travelling abilities.

Why do you think that Slaking presented the theory he did, judging from his relative inexperience and the unusual nature of such a theory?

I don't know. I don't

care

. He was scum and he was

lying

. Why bother with the WIFOM game trying to figure out why he lied? It's not likely to be relevant even if we could figure it out. Running around in circles isn't going to lead us to scum.

[Yaw]

Yes, definitely. Why slaking_master might have lied about knowing his partners isn't relevant. What other players did when he lied about knowing his partners is useful information.

[Yaw]

Oh really?

This was about the scum not being able to talk to each other. I don't see how the scum would not be able to discuss their nightchoice with each other. It may be possible that the leader chooses whatever he thinks...but he might be killing his own people. I really really doubt that they don't know each other.

This post by Slaking also makes me think he's probably town. Most of the other players in this game who are not scum probably see how it sounds pro-town. Even if you don't get it, please do not ask me to explain.

So on the more important point, definitely not. You thought the earworm made him

town

. That

is

a defense.

[Yaw]

Ok, I guess we're pressuring Drummer. I wanted to hear more from Glork before deciding (he's disappeared after his justifications fell apart as well), but I'm certainly willing to drive either to a claim. There's enough there.

Vote: Drummer

[Yaw]

I believe we're at 7. If it's 9 to lynch, this would be the time to claim.

[Yaw]

Unvote

to put him back at lynch minus two for a claim.

FOS: The Goat

for being daft enough to put Drummer that close before a claim, right after being told not to.

[Yaw]

I'd prefer not to give the scum a target list. I do think we should get some sort of guide up for the vigilantes before lynching, though, even if we're settled on who to lynch.

[Yaw]

There's enough evidence to convince me that scum know one another. At any rate, telling everyone innocent results is like putting up a neon sign telling the scum to kill the investigated players. Whether or not the scum know one another, someone evil's going to take a shot. If it's not necessary, or is too early to be advantageous, I'm not going to do it.

[Yaw]

You need a vig target anyway -- mayorships take effect the morning after the vote.

I'm pretty sure one of Drummer or Glork is scum, so if the one we lynch comes up town that gives a clear vig target. That said, we'd still need another choice in case the one we lynch turns up scum.

[Yaw]

At least one. I don't know exact numbers in scum groups, I'm only assuming 3 because that's the usual number.

In both interpretations, however, if the one we lynch turns up town, it implies the other's scum. If the one we lynch turns up scum, I'm content to re-analyze tomorrow.

[Yaw]

Glork's really twisted just about everything up there.

With Mariyta, yes, I argued poorly. I couldn't believe the mod would put such a poor role into the game, and did believe the claim to be scum. However, since so many people were willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, I ended up sucked into explaining my position by arguing over the best play in the 1% chance I figured such a role actually had of existing in the game. That said, once Bogre got modkilled for flavouring his claim about being a similar type of role to Mariyta, I was largely content to let the night scene prove or disprove my point for me.

Today, since the mod has now told us there are definitely forced vigilantes in this game (a fact for which he still deserves to be beaten, incidentally), we now have to deal with Mariyta as the most confirmed town role among us. Which I have been doing.

We all know she's not mafia, becuase she killed Pooky.

You've never been in a game with multiple mafia groups? Absolute crap logic.

Yaw, on the other hand, seems way too keen to have an easy lynch on day 1 on a known NON-mafia.

Again. It's day 1. HOW THE HELL COULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW SHE'S NOT MAFIA? Obviously, you can't, but you can make guesses based on her not being in your group if you're scum.

FOS: slaking master

A pair of quotes that lend towards Yaw thinking that there may be two mafias. The first can be seen as general caution. The second has some very interesting subtext here. First, he says that Slaking can't know that Mari's not mafia. But he then says that Slaking can make a guess if Mari's not in SLAKING'S MAFIA GROUP. There is a subconscious implication here that Yaw KNOWS of the existence of two scumgroups. Suppse Yaw finds himself in a mafia group of, say, four people. He can guess that there's another scumgroup out there somewhere, since the numbers don't work out with just a 4-man Mafia. He then throws this at Slaking, going "You can't know she's not scum, but you can know she's not in your particular scumgroup, thus making her less likely to be scum." Freudian slip, much?

This might just be the lamest argument I've seen. The obvious conclusion to draw from having 5 night kills the first night is that there are multiple scum groups. As for the catch on slaking_master, it's one of Jeep's Common Tells, as written up in the Wiki. Which is why I noticed it. I've been trying to explain

why

it's a scum tell several times since that post, but it's entirely academic and applies to games with one or multiple groups of scum. There's no implication of anything beyond saying that it's a tell and explaining the rationale behind identifying it as a tell.

Interesting. So first you claim to get results from all cop investigations, and that you have a working knowledge on how the cop committee works, and then you lament the fact that you can only get one investigation per night. Inconsistencies, much?

I've never said anything like this. I stated that I was

supposed

to get all cop committee investigations, but that on the first night (and second, but only the first at the time) I only

had

received one. Since I'm not on a committee and I found this fact puzzling, I tried to puzzle out

why

this had happened. My best explanation in my little non-committee void was that the committee actually discussed who to investigate (like the Senate in OO1, of which I was a part) and sent in the one choice, meaning that the mod was playing with me when writing the role PM (after all, if the cop committee only gets one investigation, it isn't quite a lie to say I receive all investigations). Since the committees do not actually communicate at night, my explanation was incorrect, though it was quite reasonable from the information I had.

Other stuff...

No, I'm not going to reveal innocent investigations at this point. It doesn't help the town to put targets on two people's heads on day 2.

I assumed the cop committee would receive their own results, because that's the normal cop setup. It's an assumption. I have no way of knowing. Only pablito (and any other cops remaining) knows for sure, and he has never said one way or the other.

Drummer's claim, at least about Vaughn, has two serious holes on its face. First, as we know from the front post, a blocked killing role could be a vig. Second (and far worse), since we attempted to direct the vig kills last night, that alone can account for the reduced number of kills (through players being targetted by vigilantes multiple times).

Anything else I'll deal with tomorrow, since I'm exhausted.

[Yaw]

Sarcastro's point 1 is actually a bigger hole in Drummer's case than either of the ones I posted. The only thing keeping me from voting for him right now is the fact that we need a vig target for Mariyta and company first.

Unfortunately, I'm at a bit of a disadvantage on that one, since I reread the game in a very specific way (looking for links between players and known scum). Since Pooky never posted, I don't have an "in" to the other scum group yet. As a default, we can always go for the most suspicious of the lurkers again. (Lurkers are better than AWOL people.) I'd prefer other options, if people have the time to comb the thread for them.

[Yaw]

If a cop says in advance who will be investigated, that person is likely to get killed by the mafia to essentially void the investigation. (Which is another reason it's good to get vig targets down -- it reduces the probability of that happening.)

[Yaw]

MBL's still in this game?

I'm sort of surprised myself, as I forgot he was in this game. Although he went to Burning Man, which explains his recent absence.

1) The mafia doesn't know who it's members are. In this case, they'd be crazy to kill someone based on them being investigated - they might kill their own.

2) The mafia DOES know who it's members are. In this case...the investigation wouldn't reveal to them anything they didn't know already.

Am I missing something?

I've already explained why the first possibility isn't true.

The second one isn't about what an investigation would reveal to the scum, it's about what an investigation would reveal to the town. To put it in the clearest terms, an investigation on a living person is far more useful than an investigation on a dead one. Particularly once an investigator's sanity is known (speaking in general here -- I don't see how the cop committee could possibly work if its members weren't sane), any investigation on someone who gets killed the same night is absolutely worthless, as it gives no information not publicly available from the mod.

With the mayor issue, I plan to vote for Mariyta tonight. She's the most confirmed among us, and it gives us the normal number to lynch. I also plan to keep voting her as mayor until the game ends unless a more confirmed player comes along (though I have doubts that will happen), because unless we have a confirmed mayor in a potential endgame it may be impossible with the reduced lynch rules for the town to win.

[Yaw]

Wait. We explained the extra deaths already through Mariyta's role, and the fact there's a committee of them. Besides, how would a

cult

explain extra deaths?

I'm not comfortable with either Drummer or Vaughn at this point, mostly because of the incongruity in roleblocker claim between Drummer and everyone else. I'm not sure who this means I should be lynching anymore -- Vaughn on the basis that he claims to have stolen Drummer's role, or Drummer on the basis that the parasite doesn't win with the town (and really, doesn't make sense as a win condition if it stays around for long enough -- a good 5+ players could conceivably win simply by making a night choice). Not entirely sure what to think anymore about that one, but I'm content for the time being to let Jelly keep interrogating both.

At this point, I see no reason to think otherwise. Considering Yaw has claimed *NOT* to have the same role as Rosso Carne, and that he's *NOT* part of a committee, and that he's *NOT* a sheriff's deputy (which is what I would expect, if anything), I don't see the point you're trying to make.

I think that Rosso Carne (would have) recieved results from the Cop Committee. I think that Yaw is lying.

Sheesh. You really have to stop doing this "anything Yaw says is only valid for 5 minutes" thing.

This doesn't make sense. Other roles aren't part of a committee, but I don't see you harping on Max anymore. If I were a backup, I shouldn't have received the results from the first night at all, and yet I did (and pablito is very perceptive to have picked up confirmation that I know who the first night innocent result was). I have no idea what Rosso Carne's role did, but it has nothing to do with the cop committee.

[Yaw]

As best as I can remember, your behaviour to date has been to attack me, look elsewhere when I responded, then come back with exactly the same attack as before a while later. I realize upon looking back through the posts that you never did accept anything, although I had that impression because of the constant vote changing.

Nevertheless, your logic doesn't hold up. Do you believe there's a County Sherrif committee? If so and I'm lying, why hasn't one of the remaining Sherrifs come out to nail me? If not, why does my having a non-committee role automatically make me suspicious?

Looking back at your best expression of your suspicion:

And I've already explained my stance on Yaw -- I think Rosso Carne was the "result reciever," and that Yaw is using Rosso's death and unknown role/ability to fake a claim that he thinks he can get away with.

Let's actually look at what would have to happen for this to be true.

1) I'd have to

know

Rosso Carne had such an ability
2) I'd have to know cops don't receive results, as pablito has claimed
3) I'd have to have confidence I could reproduce the exact list of cop choices when pressed (perhaps it is your contention that I have psychic powers?)

Even under the only plausible scenario your contention had any chance of being logical, if I were scum with pablito, one of the remaining real cops would have counterclaimed in order to nail both of us. Or do you think we had only one cop? (And yet, you think I'm suspicious for not being in a committee.)

The fact remains that my actions have shown clearly that I'm not a part of a committee, and pablito has shown that I fill a role required by the cop committee, all without being called out by anyone with insider knowledge of the cops. There is no logical basis for your assertion that I'm trying to fake Rosso Carne's role.

[Yaw]

Also, did Maritya ever say her commitee didn't take the majority to kill someone?

?!

FOS: armlx

Glork: Ok, so say pablito isn't scum. How then do you explain that I've pretty much claimed through my actions who the cops investigated night 1, and pablito confirmed that it's right?

Of course, you'd also have to explain the contradiction between your claim that I knew how the cops worked and my almost getting myself lynched by stating things about the committee that weren't true.

I've already addressed what happened. I'm a strategist, and was trying to mediate an abnormally large number of kills in the way I'm most used to, knowing that in 99% of all cases a role like Mariyta's is a lame scum claim. (For which inclusion, MoS

still

deserves to be beaten.) Of course I was forceful. I should have picked up on slaking_master more quickly after Bogre's modkill, given that I noticed his scum tell, but it had been a while since then and I had forgotten. As for "false dilemmas", this seems to be about you and Drummer. Though if you'll notice, Drummer has contradicted claims you've made about the roleblocker committee, while claiming to be a roleblocker. Not much of a "false" dilemma.

Now, why no response when your last argument in defense of yourself fell apart due to, among other things, relying on time travel?

[Yaw]

So...what's the mayor situation? And Mariyta, any idea what happened with that kill? I thought you were going after Vaughn.

Also, I can make this day really easy on everyone.

Vote: rajrhcpfreak

The investigation on him turned up guilty (the two previous ones were both innocent, so that means the cops are sane). Still have to figure out the next night's vig target, though.

[Yaw]

Wait a second...Pie was never in this game. He has no posts in this thread. The hell?!

[Yaw]

Still only one result. Sorry, I should have specified in the first place, rather than thinking it was implied.

[Yaw]

Now I'm confused. And after getting a clear guilty result. This transgresses all laws of nature.

Pablito, please explain.

[Yaw]

Because it confirms information. Because the result is

already out there

.

Yes or no. Did you investigate rajrhcpfreak last night?

[Yaw]

Oy. Pablito, you said you didn't

want

to investigate raj. That implied that you

didn't

investigate him. See why this is an issue? The investigation gets scum, and instead of actually supporting the result clearly, you dicked around. I've seen enough confirmation that I'm not suspicious, but I am annoyed.

chamber -- Explain why you made the night choice you did.

[Yaw]

Nightson, you're getting the exact details wrong. I revealed quite willingly how many results I had each night, and what alignment they had. I merely stated that I wouldn't out innocent players at this juncture, because that gives the scum a list of desirable people to kill at night. This is pretty standard cop operating practice. When we're at a point where revealing innocents would be more beneficial to the town than harmful, you're getting the results.

Pablito's behaviour is about on the order of scumminess as his behaviour day 1. Basically, I think he's inexperienced enough that he's more prone to what we would consider "odd" behaviour. I thought that confirming a guilty result went without saying, but apparently he had the details of my stance as wrong as Nightson.

Glork has a nice little catch on Vaughn, and I'm still uneasy about there being a claimed individual roleblocker in a game with a claimed committee of roleblockers. Vaughn looks like a good vig target to me.

I still want to hear from chamber before going to night. I don't want a claim. I only want answers to these two questions:

1) Were you aware you were breaking up the kill on Vaughn?
2) If so, why did you do it?

[Yaw]

I'm thinking a roleblocker should be hitting the one we don't lynch tonight (of either raj or Vaughn). It's iffier in raj's case (if he has living partners, one of them would just kill instead), but it's pretty definite if Vaughn isn't lynched.

[Yaw]

Sigh. Let's try this again.

I still want to hear from chamber before going to night. I don't want a claim. I only want answers to these two questions:

1) Were you aware you were breaking up the kill on Vaughn?
2) If so, why did you do it?

No, it doesn't mean giving up any more information than you already had. I don't specify if you blocked Mariyta, protected Vaughn, or did something else that had the same effect. It doesn't matter. We just need to know

why

.

[Yaw]

Being at the top of Mariyta's list isn't relevant as long as she's the mayor -- she can't nightkill. (And since she's the most confirmed among all of the players, she should remain the mayor. There are few players at this point I'd trust with a bulletproof role, and none of the others can afford to lose their night choice.) If there's another forced vig still alive, however, Vaughn's a good target. Besides, as long as Vaughn is blocked, any recruitment ability he might have is irrelevant.

[Yaw]

I feel I've said enough and will say no more.

Not good enough. You don't get to have impunity. You made the night choice and owned up to it, so you're answerable for your actions.

Again:

1) Were you aware that you were stopping Mariyta's kill on Vaughn?
2) If you were, why did you do so?

I don't want to hear anything about your role. I want to hear you explain your actions.

[Yaw]

Going to have to side with Coron on this one. Keep uncompleted games out of here.

I'm thinking chamber's the investigation play for tonight. We need to know if he's fucking the town over because he's scum, or because he's just being moronic. Better than wasting a lynch or vig kill.

[Yaw]

But...there have been two innocents and a guilty, and I get undifferentiated results. You known damn well what your sanity is.

[Yaw]

Defintiely not Vaughn mayor-block. If we think someone's scum, we don't make them hard to lynch and un-nightkillable.

I still support Mariyta for mayor, with an eye to having a mayor we can count on in the endgame if it ever comes to that. Unless someone suddenly becomes more confirmed than Mariyta, and we can afford to lose that person's night choices, I will continue to support Mariyta for mayor.

[Yaw]

Investigate who you want. As long as you investigate someone who doesn't show up dead in the morning, I'm happy.

[Yaw]

Well, I hate putting dealing with Vaughn off again, but...we got another guilty result. It's always better to go for the sure thing.

Vote: Sarcastro

Do watch the vote count -- we naturally have other things to discuss before lynching.

[Yaw]

I trust you, but I have noticed that all killed so far have been syndicate goons. If there are multiple scum groups then we can't be certain about your innocence.

Well, Pooky would seem to be in a different group according to the front post (he's listed as "corrupted"). With roleblockers around it's hard to confirm anything by night scene, but if there were only the usual three syndicate scum, they'd all be gone now, resulting in fewer deaths last night. Which would make Sarcastro corrupted.

[Yaw]

Except that the vig committee people were planning to block Vaughn. So if that happened, and Vaughn really is a vig, depending on how the mod decided to evaluate the situation MrBuddyLee may not have been blocked at all. (That is, a Glork-block would nullify a Vaughn-block.)

At any rate, a bit early for an MBL claim in this situation.

[Yaw]

Umm... Vauhgn claimed to be a RB, am I right?

Ah, yes. Sorry, vigilantes on the brain in this game. Correcting, that should have read:

Except that the

roleblocker

committee people were planning to block Vaughn. So if that happened, and Vaughn really is a

roleblocker

, depending on how the mod decided to evaluate the situation MrBuddyLee may not have been blocked at all. (That is, a Glork-block would nullify a Vaughn-block.)

At any rate, a bit early for an MBL claim in this situation.

Much better now.

[Yaw]

You do realize that if I don't reveal my result, all of the conversation until I do is going to consist of asking for the result, right?

And IS was just thread hijacking. Having him replace a dead guy is the mod's idea of a joke. (Well, I found it amusing...)

[Yaw]

As for the mayoral race, considering that scum aren't as influential in lynches anymore, we might not need a mayor tonight. The decreased 'votes to lynch' isn't going to hurt us as much as before.

Disagree. I'm thinking we want a trustworthy mayor in office consistently for the long game. Even if we were down to one scum remaining, that wouldn't mean we were going to catch that person imminently. We should be keeping Mariyta in power because we can be more sure she's town than anyone else at the moment (at least anyone else we can afford to render otherwise powerless), and it would give her the final choice in a 3-person endgame.

[Yaw]

Fine, let's do the full reveal. I'll be here for help with confirmation when it happens.

[Yaw]

Well, Vraak put silly numbers of cops in his Oval Office games, and scum still managed to do fine. Having 4 cops with definite limitations (in not getting their own results) actually seems a bit more balanced.

Basically, I believe pablito's analysis. For the most part, it's due to the fact that I had been hinting fairly consciously at my night 1 result over the past couple of days, and he clearly responded to that. I don't have any doubts that I'm getting his results, and having only 2 cops reporting to me (one of which is dead) explains the lack of multiple results quite well.

I'd also believe that Rosso was the other result receiver. Otherwise, the investigation on Raj night 2 should have shown up somewhere along the line that day.

Most of my doubts, ironically, are with respect to the guilty on Sarcastro. I glanced back through his posts, mostly to try to figure out a partner, and I just don't see him as scum from that. I'm still trusting my result, because I know myself to be sane, and figure it's entirely possible he's played a good game so far. That said, a part of me wouldn't be surprised if there were a framer who got him. (I must give credit to pablito's analysis here, though -- if there were a framer, I'd be willing to bet it's Eon. That was quite the scum tell there.)

I'd rather go with my results, because my first instinct is to trust the results, but I wouldn't have a problem with supporting an Eon lynch on that evidence. I'd probably support it tomorrow regardless.

Probably best if neither pablito nor I reveal investigations on any living innocents. I have no problem with having scum or dead innocent investigations revealed.

[Yaw]

A townie? In this town? Not even remotely credible.

Doesn't matter much if we lynch Sarcastro or Eon today. I'll go with either. Eon is clearly scum, so an investigation on him is a waste of a night choice.

Also, if Rosso Carne were the other result receiver, then the mod posted his flavour role rather than his role simplification in the front post. I would consider that consistent with my role -- a flavour role that is shorter than the role simplification, and vague about what the role actually does.

[Yaw]

If we lynch him today, you mean? Nope.

a) You're scum and you wouldn't be dead yet.

b) We have 3 dead "syndicate" scum and only one dead "corrupted" scum. Mafia groups normally have the same number of members to avoid giving one an unfair advantage over the other. Even if Sarcastro were corrupted, there'd still be a third one to catch.

[Yaw]

Well, may as well hear what Eon's claiming for a one-shot ability. At the very least it could be amusing.

[Yaw]

What I've seen in total is consistent. The specific flavour Rosso had didn't tip me off that he was another result receiver, if that's what you mean, but I could see now why it would work.

[Yaw]

What's to analyze? We're down 4 scum with half the players left alive, and we'll be down another when we lynch. Our backs aren't up against the wall. As long as we lynch scum, we're good. The mod will tell us what group Eon or Sarcastro belongs to when we lynch.

[Yaw]

Completely unnecessary. We have two perfectly good lynch targets without one. I don't want the scum getting any extra help while we're ahead of them.

[Yaw]

I believe you'd have to wait until tomorrow night.

I'm not quite willing to trust armlx yet. I also have a problem with giving people I don't trust lynch and kill immunity.

[Yaw]

Ok, I can see that working well. The only question is which nonfunctional cop to elect.

[Yaw]

I remember switching to Eon, but I think I'll wait for a new vote count before doing it again. I believe we agreed to go with Glork's plan for mayor (that is, elect a defunct cop -- either olio or The Goat).

[Yaw]

I'll go with that.

Unvote

,

Vote: Eon

.

[Yaw]

And Eon descends to WIFOM. Dude, we

forced

you to claim. Of course you'd lie in a claim.

Any

scum would.

And I count lynch minus 1.

[Yaw]

Ok, 3 corrupted down, 3 syndicate down. I still have that guilty on Sarcastro, but it's worth knowing what's going on with the mayor situation at least before we lynch. Only one kill last night -- not sure if that indicates a successful roleblock/doc protect, only a SK left, or lazy scum on some side. It's entirely possible we have a completely intact group remaining, but that seems unlikely from probability considerations (plus I think we have all the deaths accounted otherwise).

[Yaw]

I see no reason to bother getting any of the remaining three to claim without good reason. We're doing perfectly fine without it. If you have a good reason for somebody being the last scum, let's hear it and go about things that way.

I also see no reason to reveal last night's cop choice.

Finally, didn't I call Glork's roleblock claim a fake a while ago? Feh.

[Yaw]

Wait, you're right. I think something about the colour coding made me think there were fewer kills than there actually were. The only night with 1 kill was night 4.

[Yaw]

I got a result I considered useless. But yes, it was an innocent useless result.

[Yaw]

Ok, I know I've been busy (and there's still about a week left of this for me), but...why are we mass claiming today rather than tomorrow? With a clear lynch today, I think there has to be some justification for not holding it off.

Also, what's holding up our mayoral results?

[Yaw]

I like the Nightson analysis. I will point out that he has posted elsewhere since that went up.

I still would like to see who our mayor is before hitting night. I have voted. Could we have an update from the mod on how many we're waiting on? Possibly with prods?

[Yaw]

Either the mod messed up the result, or pablito did something stupid last night. (Or I got the result of a cop dying during the night, which seems odd considering I have nothing I can point to from when Kanaga died night 1.) I'll let everyone know when I get clarification.

On the plus side, last night's actions seem to indicate there's only one syndicate scum left. I think pablito had a decent argument against Nightson yesterday, so it's probably best to start there.

[Yaw]

Checked with mod. I'm giving my results for the last two nights because they're...interesting. Apparently, both nights pablito investigated himself. And got innocent. (duh) Either this means he's playing poorly (which seems out of character given some of the analysis he's given in game), or there's a redirection role somewhere. At any rate, something to look for clues about.

I'm fine with the mass claim today. Let's get this over with.

[Yaw]

*blinks* I thought I got pablito's results, not yours. What gives?

[Yaw]

I hate to go after the sick like this, but with the status of this game I think the mod is going to have to figure out how long he's willing to wait for Nightson to be active...

[Yaw]

I actually understand Nightson's position -- you normally don't know how long you're going to be sick. Which is why it's up to the mod to balance that against everyone else in the game, and to determine how long is reasonable to allow.

[Yaw]

Agreed. Get better soon, and let us know how you're doing. I hope this doesn't turn out to be too serious.

[Yaw]

Who is Jath?

Also, is this game effectively being abandoned? Can we at least have some indication that something's happening with respect to Nightson so it isn't?

[Yaw]

Nightson

asked

for replacement. I just haven't seen anything happening with that yet.

[Yaw]

I'll admit I was preoccupied and didn't play all that well, but even if I had been playing better I had no chance this game. I track down scum groups well, because it's groupings I look for. Hunting a lot of SKs isn't exactly a strength. I think a lot of people don't have an appreciation for how the simple fact that groups know one another affects game balance.

You did well, Glork. I had an impression your claim was piggy-backed at some point, but couldn't figure out any way to prove it. If not for the night kill, you probably would have cruised to the end.

In a 4-person endgame with only 1 scum, the default strategy

should

be no lynch. Every time. The only exception is if you can prove one player is scum with around 90% certainty. Otherwise, why not increase your probability of nailing the last one? I really think that alko trying to rush the vote after the modkill should have tipped the remaining town off that something wasn't quite right here...

Oh, and I have a real dislike for the randomness. Yes, I understand why it's there, but it made things impossible to figure out when combined with a few role PM wording choices. The town was really hamstrung this game -- you couldn't coordinate to use your role effectively without coming out, and then you're just a target. It's even worse for docs and cops, where trying to coordinate in the thread tips the scum off enough that they can screw with your choices. The idea of having various committees is some interesting ground to explore, but I think there has to be a better way to do it.

[Yaw]

Though it raises the more interesting point -- was this really a game of Mafia? Or was it something else?