Newbie 800 ~ Mafia: The Reality Show (Game Over!)

[Echo]

/confirm

First online game, good luck everyone

[Echo]

Vote Sidney

cuz he was (second) last confirmed ;P

[Echo]

Where's our IC? >:|

Unvote
Vote Anticollie

[Echo]

*remembers to disable smilies before posting next time*

[Echo]

It would have been really bad for town if I had been quick lynched

lol?

[Echo]

Oh btw what does FOS mean?

[Echo]

Thanks for the link, Raeil. I spent most of the day reading through that ^^;

It would have been really bad for town if I had been quick lynched

Back to this quote: are you suggesting something, Cyren? Sounds to me like you're hinting at a role :/

[Echo]

^ Not even a joke explanation?

[Echo]

@raeil:

I saw it more as a scumtell. The reason I put it that way is because the exact same thing happened in the last RL game I played, and eventually led to identifying said person as scum.

But since anticollie described it as a null tell, I didn't see much point in pursuing it any further.

[Echo]

I'm sorry guys, I have 3 important exams coming up this week (first one tomorrow), so I can't be as active as I like. I will catch up asap.

For now,

unvote

[Echo]

From Forum Rules and Guidelines:

Do not talk outside the game thread about an ongoing game except where allowed to do so by your role.

Likewise, do not use bbcode to hide secret messages - this equates to discussion outside the thread.

Now although technically it's not a "secret message", it

is

hard to read, especially when you don't have much time and are trying to skim through the posts.

Mod:

Can I get a verdict on this?

No action will be taken for now. ~Vi

[Echo]

Also, I don't like how auditor's talking in poetry. You can't pick apart posts written in poetry; it's just not possible. I think that's exactly what he's trying to avoid.

vote: auditor9006

[Echo]

I will only be a little less active this week (just one week) due to exams, like I said in one of my earlier posts.

I didn't say that understanding is not possible, I can understand it fine. But, in my opinion, writing in verse avoids a certain *something* that makes dropping tells much less likely, and thus my vote. It's not a "i-hate-you" vote, it's a "you're-trying-to-hide" vote.

btw is there some search I can use to find all the posts made by any one person? I tried

Code: Select all

search.php?t=[topic]&author=[name]

which works on another phpBB board I use but it doesn't seem to work here.

[Echo]

Firstly, I take back what I said about skimming. I have found some time to thoroughly read all the posts so far and have come across some interesting points.

The first section is mainly in response to Anticollie and Raeil.

Main suspect

auditor

Auditor has been posting in verse since the beginning of the game, and has tried to install a game within a game by adding riddles to his poetry. This seems to me like a move to try to distract the town. However, he did at least stop this aspect of his posting.

In (104) auditor claims that his posts encourages proper reading of each post. This is true to a certain extent. However, what bothers me is that he claims his posts are easy to read. This, to me, is like saying Shakespeare is easy to read - which is true, but there are so many

possible

layers of understanding because of the nature of poetry (speaking through similies, which auditor says he does (65, 82) and actually does do), anything that could sound scummy can be explained off as poetic license. Therefore, I believe it will be almost impossible to catch auditor in a lie if he keeps up his poetry. The only people who need to avoid being caught in a lie are scum, so I don't see the need for this level of indirection if auditor is townie.

Auditor also claims in the same post that "the more that scum know helps us less". Raeil also picked up on this, and I have to agree with him. Knowledge is, as far as I know, the basis for a townie win, and preventing the spread of knowledge severely limits the ability of townies to find scum. The only way to undeniably catch scum is to catch them in a lie.

The final point is the buddying up with Cyren in his last verse.

Why did you feel the need to do this?

While the majority of these points were picked from his post above, the main point (paragraph 2) holds for all his posts and is my main concern. This is the basis for my suspicion of him.

One other thing is when auditor bolded Anticollie and FOS'd Onion with no reason in post (49). This in itself is a little suspicious, but what struck me as odd is when he claims to "know what he was doing" and that he never intended it to be a vote (55) when the mod rejected it as a vote (51). To me, that post was definitely an intention to put a vote on Anticollie.

What was the reason for bolding on Anticollie? What future reference are you referring to?

Other thoughts

Onion

Onion has about the same level of suspicion as auditor from me. He goes from:

anyone who hammers would be scum

to

only scum or townies who are stupidly anti-town would hammer

and finally settles on

either Cyren is scum and/or whoever hammed is scum

(53, 75, 101)
In other words, initially, only scum would hammer. Then, perhaps stupid townies would hammer. Finally, either scum hammered

or Cyren is scum

suggesting that

whoever hammered might have been a normal townie after all.

Why are you so indecisive about the nature of the person who might have hammered?

ric

The first time ric made me suspicious was when he immediately released his vote on Cyren (79) when sideney applied a minute amount of pressure. To me, keeping the vote was not scummy at all. Cyren was only on L-3, so there was no danger of a quicklynch, and it feels perfectly natural to retain a random vote until you have a better idea on who to vote for.

ric also goes from defending Onion (58), to agreeing with the case against Onion (61), to again blatantly defending Onion (85), but finally claiming Onion is the "most suspicious by far" and giving him the FOS sticker (106).

Why are you changing your mind so often?

sideney

Sideney hasn't made a post that lasts longer than a few sentences yet. While the reason for his vote (110) is somewhat valid, the lack of detail is a little suspicious, and

I would personally prefer to see some references.

Haylen

To me, Haylen hasn't posted much original or new opinion, even with the latest vote. She reiterated the major suspect, Onion, but did not bring any fresh evidence for her position against him. Likewise, she simply reiterated auditor's view that ric panicked when he unvoted Cyren (105).

I don't mean to say that everyone

must

come up with new points during discussion, but Haylen hasn't brought any new opinions into the current situation. Furthermore, both Onion and ric had made new posts by the time you posted (101, 106 respectively). This is potentially scummy in my opinion because I feel scum would find it much harder to focus and find evidence against innocent people, and therefore need to resort to quoting others.

Do you have any original opinions or new evidence against people that you can share?

Anticollie, Cyren, Raeil

I don't see much evidence against you three, or any need for criticism. Your posts are logically sound and have convinced me, at least for now, that you are all protown.

As a side note, like Anticollie, I also prefer to have nicely set out posts when they are fairly long. It makes reading much easier when the layout is fresh.

Oh, and @anticollie I just use good ol' humble notepad for my note keeping

[Echo]

Echo, you quote me out of context, how scummy of you. 075 is stated as a refinement from my previous statement, while 101 is a much more generalized statement taking into account all possible alignment flips. are you having trouble with the inclusive Or in that statement? i solidify my position because other players want to know it, and i stand by my statement that if someone hammered, Cyran and/or the hammerer is scum.

(115)
I don't think I was quoting out of context? The "refinement" and progressive "generalisation" of your position is exactly what I'm getting at. The posts are taken in chronological order, and the two posts in between (75) and (101) are not regarding the case at point.

---

when someone is at L-1 on the first day, no townie would hammer, which means that

anyone who hammers would be scum

.

(53)
This is the only sentence in the whole post that deals with the topic at hand. At this point, you are

completely sure

that anyone who hammered would be scum.

i was concerned that

someone else (scum/otherwise) would quickly hammer

and argue that they were writing while i posted, which would have been a great move for scum or a catastrophe for town, and i'm glad that didn't happen. i would not believe someone saying they mis-counted because our mod announced it, and i expect most of us can count to 5. thus i suppose i should

refine my argument

to '

only scum or townies who are stupidly anti-town would hammer

.' doesn't sound quite as good though.

(75)
Under pressure from others to explain your action, you've diluted ("refined") your assumption to include stupid townies.

it seems like an acceptable practice because if a trade will prevent lynch-or-loose day 3. remember that i'm not voting for a confirmed townie here. she has a chance of being scum only a sqeezey bit higher than anyone else.

so if someone hammered, either Cyren is scum and/or whoever hammed is scum.

either way, we get at least 1 scum in the first 2 days. that seems acceptable.

(101)
And finally, when Anticollie asked to to state your position clearly, you "generalise" even further to include Cyren as scum.

Now, if you "stand by my statement that if someone hammered, Cyran and/

or

the hammerer is scum" (115), why were you so sure back in (53) that the "anyone who hammers would be scum"?

If

Cyren is indeed scum (this is assuming one of the "or" possibilities, and I am certainly not suggesting she is), I highly doubt her scumbuddy would hammer that early in the game, which means your generalised statement in (115) is a clear contradiction of your statement back in (53).

In short:

053: anyone who hammers would be scum
115: either Cyren

or

the hammerer is scum, meaning the person who hammered might not be scum after all

Until you explain how you can generalise to a degree where your general statement contradicts with your more specific statement, I think my point stands.

Unvote

[Echo]

Exams have finished for me, so I should be getting back into the hang of things. In other news, my hard drive died on me two days ago, but that's another story. Oh, I also got around to watching a few scenes from The Princess Bride ;P

There were a few posts beforehand (eg. 116, 117) that discussed the benefit/drawbacks of revealing information. I would personally never choose to withhold information unless it's a lure to trap scum in a contradiction or something like that. In general, I feel that as individuals we'll be bound to miss certain points no matter how carefully we read, so with more information flowing we'll be able to combine our resources and might even be able to find links between people in ways we never thought of before.

Thoughts

Onion

Yes, Onion is still my top suspect. No, I'm not willing to cast the final vote. We still have a week to go, and perhaps some new, interesting information will be revealed during this time which might turn the current vote on its head.

By the way, your reluctance to call Cyren "she" ... is that just stubbornness/preference, or are you actually not reading her posts?

Sideney

Sideney has moved substantially higher in my list. He says a full week before the end of the day phase

I think i will stay with my onion-ric dynamic pair scum until this day end, so don't think i will write much more ... and i vote onion because he seems more near to a lynch this day.

which sounds to me like saying "I don't care if we get any new evidence in the next 7 days, I'm still going to vote onion because he was the scummiest a week into the game and he's got the most votes." He posted his suspicion on the onion-ric pair in (78), a week into the game, then voted 2 days later.

It's ironic to note that he also says

Generally speaking i feel thaty every players that spend much words to analyze is pro-town.

when he doesn't actually post that much himself. And I have to disagree with him on this point; in my opinion a lengthy post doesn't reveal anything about the poster's identity.

Anticollie

There's one thing you've done that makes me a little uneasy; perhaps I'm misinterpreting?

However, we need to see if the scummiest person, Onion, is truly the best option for a lynch- and to see how he turns based upon that data, first ... Onion is probably our choice, but scum slips are anything than uncommon in newbies- and so i encourage you to keep your reasoning fresh and activity high.

You seem to be pretty settled on voting for Onion yourself and you seem to be pretty aggressive in retaliating against any attack onion uses against you (141, 148), but at the same time you still call Sideney to "keep your reasoning fresh" because "scum slips are anything than uncommon in newbies"?

[Echo]

Hi to the new replacement people

Another big-ish post from me. I started typing immediately from the first post after my last, so there may be a few repeated points.

Thoughts

Anticollie

Anticollie tends to write a lot yet say little. sure, he's getting into the whole IC thing and proving us with all sorts of good information, but it is proportionately low game content wise.

I have to say I agree with this.

anticollies style makes me a tad uncomfortable but i buy that he is an analyzer who chillaxes for a while and then comes in with kind of a....surgical post.

I hope we get to see this "surgical post" before the end of Day 1.

By the way, you missed my question in (156).

There's one thing you've done that makes me a little uneasy; perhaps I'm misinterpreting?

However, we need to see if the scummiest person, Onion, is truly the best option for a lynch- and to see how he turns based upon that data, first ... Onion is probably our choice, but scum slips are anything than uncommon in newbies- and so i encourage you to keep your reasoning fresh and activity high.

You seem to be pretty settled on voting for Onion yourself and you seem to be pretty aggressive in retaliating against any attack onion uses against you (141, 148), but at the same time you still call Sideney to "keep your reasoning fresh" because "scum slips are anything than uncommon in newbies"?

Sideney

Wow. Just wow. (163, 173), need I say more?

I hope someone place that hammer-vote on onion, this will sure give us more information than any so called post analysis.

Can you explain what you think is wrong with post analysis? The only basis for any evidence in an online mafia game are the posts made by people, since there are no reactions/emotions/etc. that you also get from a RL game. To me, you're suggesting that you don't want us to analyse the posts that have been made so far. That in turn sounds like you're trying to bury some information that has been posted by you, or even perhaps your scumbuddy?

Raskol

I mean he gives strong signs of being scum, but even if he is town, his play has hurt us quite a bit, and getting rid of such a person helps us out.

I've read about this sort of reasoning for a lynch but I can't say I agree. The vibe I get from this reasonining is along the lines of "Even if we end up lynching townie, it's OK because he sucked at being town anyway." Can someone please explain to me why this sort of reasoning is valid?

If anything, I think Sideney is even (slightly) more likely to be scum than Onion. The only reason I still prefer Onion to Sideney as a lynch target is because, on the chance that either of them is town, Onion would be a better mislynch than Sideney is.

If sideney is more likely to be scum, then why would onion be a better mislynch? You even have a much longer attack against sideney than onion back in (174). Can you explain your reasoning here?

Nikanor

... has yet to make a proper post.

@Haylen: why not write it in Notepad or whatever editor you prefer first, then just copy and paste it into the posting box?

[Echo]

it has to do with being realistic and knowing that even our best D1 guess is very likely to hit town.

...

You may or may not agree with the analogy, but this is kind of how I see it: which is better for scum and allows them to keep attention off themselves better: a townie who doesn't add anything but doesn't particularly stand out either, or a townie who takes attention off the scum by drawing it all to himself?

Despite stating this is an analogy, the way you're asking this question makes it sound like you've already decided (or already know) that neither sideney nor onion are likely scum and the *real* scum are manipulating the Day 1 votes. I disagree with you on both counts.

Your post sounds to me like, "They're both acting scummy, but they're probably townie because we'll probably miss scum on Day 1 anyway." If that's the case, are you suggesting it would be better for us if we vote for the seemingly protown players? Or the players in the middle of our suspicion lists?

[Echo]

Independence Day

[Echo]

Couple that with his response, in which he seems indifferent to being lynched, and moreover stays consistent with his (admittedly strange) attitude that getting a lynch is going to give us more information than post analysis (even if it's him!), and, well...he could still be scum, but I'm much less confident of it now.

I think getting a read from his indifferent attitude just leads to WIFOM thinking.

In the same post, the Haylen link doesn't work for me.

---

(206)

Your equation looks a bit wonky to me; shouldn't it be P(scum) * weight + P(townie) * weight?

---

it has to do with being realistic and knowing that even our best D1 guess is very likely to hit town

Maybe I should rephrase my question:

Like I said before, that line (and the analogy you write at the end of the same post) makes you sound like you're pretty sure the lynchee today will turn up townie. If you think that way, then doesn't it make sense to not lynch the scummiest, who apparently turns up townie more often than scum, but maybe the third or fourth scummiest?

That's first thing I'd think of doing in that situation. (Not that I'm suggesting we do such a thing.)

[Echo]

...and now I realise that that just leads to WIFOM thinking as well. So never mind me.

[Echo]

Anticollie is ignoring me >:| Can you answer my question in (156) that I asked again in (195)?

Sideney, if you ever happen to log on and read this, can you also please answer my question in (195).

Oh, and hi Lynch [insert some witty comment about lynching here] :P

[Echo]

(filtering posts again)

Do you check posts before/after for context?

by lost, I mean I've either lost it because the systems logged me out, lost it because microsoft crashed, or lost it because because my computer's crashed.

At least three people (myself included) have suggested this already: type it in Notepad or your favourite text editor, and save as you go along. Losing your post six times isn't exactly a great reason for not posting. You'd think you'd learn your lesson after you lose it the first time >.>

[Echo]

Seems I missed a lot of posts from when I loaded the thread to when I posted...

Rereading

[Echo]

Sorry for the triple post, everything's fine, I didn't miss anything.

[Echo]

I find things difficult at the beginning of games, you see, I'm a Meta Queen, meaning I read as many games as possible from the players in the game to check out their game technique as scum and town ect and similarities with the game they're in with me. But it has recently been drawn to my attention that meta-ing is inappropriate in Newbie games so I must refrain from doing it. Trouble is, because we usually have very little information Day One, this is where I tend to get the majority of my info from.

Oh dear! I have a selfconfessed controversial playstyle. Other people say the same, it's still developing.

Are you referring to the same playstyle in these two posts?

Telling me to stop "tunneling" you because someone might find me scummy for it (ohnoes!) is super scummy.

Um, no it's not! I've done it plenty of times and people have actually said they agree with me, if you'd actually taken note of the posts you linked, you would've seen that.

I couldn't find an exact article, but that sounds like something along the lines of Appeal to Majority or Argument from Repetition (in a sense) to me. Also, Haylen is telling Raskol that

someone else

will find him scummy for focussing only on her. I don't think anyone here can speak for anyone else.

but i don't support later two points. Haylen posting less content than Auditor should not be a factor in determining which one has a better point, nor is Haylen (who seems rather scatterbrained)

forgetting who replaced who

out of the question.

Your sentence here doesn't really make sense, but since you said you don't support the later two points, I assume you mean that you don't think Haylen forgetting who replaced who should be used against Haylen?

If so, I disagree. Bringing up the first post of the topic only takes one click from any page you're on - clicking the "1" or the topic title. Saying you don't know who replaced who so you don't extend your argument to the person who replaced sounds either like laziness, which can be anti-town, or trying to avoid plotholes in your argument, which is scummy.

Tunnelling or selective scumhunting is a scumtell. By not questioning other players and concentrating on me, you're tunnelling.

I'm curious now. When does this apply?

[Echo]

raskols been going after haylen pretty hard. she fights back because raskol is being kind of unreasonable and very aggressive - they literally have a post war where its like every other post, haylen vs raskol for a couple pages....it just doesnt seem suspicious at all that she should forget who replaced who

Ok, so first of all, I've never played a game where a player has been replaced - that never happens in my rl games.

However,

in my opinion

, there's no point in

only

pointing out possible inconsistencies in the post of someone who has been replaced,

unless

you extend it to include the person who has done the replacing. Two different people would have two different playstyles, which may be completely different.

Regardless of alignment, what if the first person acts protown but the replacement acts scummy? Or vice versa, what if the first person acts scummy but the replacement acts protown? Does either player's play negate the other player's scumminess/townieness? Because of this, I feel it's necessary to examine both the first

and

the second player's play before making a decision.

Since Haylen has given advice to other players on how to play the game, which means she's pretty confident about her skill at this game, I completely expected Haylen to have at least looked to find out who the replacement is and extended her argument to cover the new player in her post. (Yes, I know she posted the advice

after

her post, but the point still stands, since a person's skill level (or perceived skill level) would be pretty much constant within such a time period.)

If I'm barking up the wrong tree, I would like an explanation as to why this sort of reasoning is incorrect.
_________________________________________________

Sideney, on the other hand, is acting so scummy, he can't be scum, right? But then he would have known we'd think that, so he must be scum. But we would know he'd think that, so... What's this called again?

Not to mention ignoring questions, lurking, openly pushing for lynches without any good reason, etc.

I totally intend to vote Sideney for his completely anti-town and destructive behaviour. But first, I want to hear from

Anticollie

and

Lynch

, who have both been pretty quiet, before putting sideney on L-1.

Oh, by the way, if you feel like answering questions, please answer mine. I'm truly curious as to why anyone would think post analysis is pointless in a game where that is all you can do to win.

I hope someone place that hammer-vote on onion, this will sure give us more information than any so called post analysis.

The only basis for any evidence in an online mafia game are the posts made by people, since there are no reactions/emotions/etc. that you also get from a RL game. Can you explain what you think is wrong with post analysis?

[Echo]

When I say no reactions/emotions that you get from a real life game, I mean that any reactions or emotions that a player exhibits can be easily faked due to the delay in the response.

[Echo]

It seems as if he tried to establish himself as a player new to mafia concepts in his opening posts ("what's a FOS?"), possibly to permit the playing of the newbie card later on. Yet in recent days, he seems to come off as an intelligent player with knowledge of various phrases and terminology.

Raeil pointed me to the Wiki soon after that, and iirc I acknowledged that in a post soon afterwards. I've read and reread the Theory sections in the Wiki many times since then, and I like to think of myself as a person who learns fast. I'm still ignorant about details not discussed in the Wiki (or at least the Theory section) such as replacement and the generally accepted way to deal with analysing such players. I never intended to "play a newbie card", and if I ever do feel free to lynch me for it.

I am well known for overloading myself with work, and all that work piles up whilst I'm being distracted. It's not crap, I'll give you a full list of what I've had to do if you like, everything I've said has been true. The games i have on my wiki are not a complete set of games I'm in right now. And don't yell at me for overloading myself, I can't see that changing anytime in the future.

If you are knowingly overloading yourself, do you think that would hamper your ability to scumhunt? If not, why not? Personally I need to spend quite some time reading and rereading each post in order to find contradictions or to note ways in which it might be possible to trap suspected scum in lies.

[Echo]

Great to see you guys fervently discussing the lynch from 2:00am to 2:30am my time >.>

Echo, Anticollie, Lynch, Raskol
If any of these people post without hammering, they are scum. Only scum would have reason not to hammer someone at this point.

That's not true - even if I were awake at 2 in the morning, I would have been hoping against all hope that Anticollie would come back 3 hours before the deadline and make his long awaited post.

[Echo]

I'm not gone, I'll make a summary of my thoughts so far tomorrow. Too tired right now to think >.>

[Echo]

Sorry for the wait guys. I've read through the thread again and don't really find anyone *that* suspicious, certainly not suspicious enough to warrant a vote.

There are a few things I want to clear up with Nikanor though:

I assume he doesn't want to lie by saying he's town. That's the only reason I can think of that someone would not roleclaim when put at L-1 on the deadline.

A townie who's got some degree of sanity wouldn't roleclaim either, right?

Err, that's what I meant, sorry. Just trying to get as much posts in as possible before leaving for work, as I won't be home before the deadline.

That sounds kinda like an excuse to be not around during the deadline in case anything unexpected happened.

Also~

I'm aware that I hammered, but I was not aware that apparently we still had half a day or so until the deadline would have arrived (or so somebody said earlier).

Yeah, time zones screw me up, too. I was under the impression the day was going to end really soon when I posted that. >_x

Can someone link me to the post which made both Nikanor and Lynch think the deadline was early? I can't find the post that implies this :/

[Echo]

A townie who's got some degree of sanity wouldn't roleclaim either, right?

I don't see any reason why a Townie wouldn't claim when he's about to be lynched. Am I just missing something?

Oh, you mean claiming vanilla townie. For some reason I was under the impression "roleclaim" only applied to claiming power roles >.>

[Echo]

I'm waiting for posts to come in >.>

I guess this is as good a time as any to ask for everyone's opinions about lynching lurkers.

The way I see it, when I play as mafia in RL games, I tend to not want to participate in anything because 1) I'm afraid of saying something scummy, and 2) I'm afraid that by fingering innocents all the time people will catch on to me. Therefore, lurking/staying silent is usually a scumtell for me, especially in games with new people. Why do some people say it's a null tell?

[Echo]

Nikanor's quoting (365) out of context.

The way I see it, when I play

as

mafia in RL games, I tend to not want to participate in anything

I'm asking for opinions on why lurker lynching is bad, since it is very natural for mafia to not want to post.

[Echo]

Is it just me, or were the last few posts blatantly buddying-like?

[Echo]

Hi Erik! I'm looking forward to your thoughts on the game too.

[Echo]

I'll start with the meat and work my way to the outside. I can't be bothered with all the formatting stuff anymore, so from now on it'll just be plain posts.

Nikanor:

Nikanor's interesting. He hopped onto me claiming he misread (366, 371). Well... hard to make a call on that. He could potentially have misread, but then again, would anyone really think the mafia would make such an obvious slip? (wifom, I know, but only borderline considering it's a bit *too* obvious)

Nikanor ignored onion three times (374, 388, 406) when onion asked for reasons as to why he voted ric (I'll look at the onion-ric relationship later). It's pretty hard to miss something that many times, so I'm inclined to believe Nikanor is either intentionally skimming over onion's posts (because on page 16 he reads every single Haylen post) or avoiding answering the question.

Finally, promising to make a post citing the prod as the reason, then ducking out less than 3 hours later (417, 419). It's not the first time he's done that either, he used hot weather as an excuse in (395). The problem isn't with the lurking itself, but promising posts sounds scummy since it feels like you're trying to maintain presence in the game without doing anything.

Haylen:

Lynch all liars policy. This is a policy that I really don't like but can see the use of. I get accused of lying quite a bit, but it's generally not true in my case because I tend to be a different kind of thinker to others.I don't do things the way most people do it and they see it scummy.

I don't see how the two things in here are related. How does not doing things the way most people do them lead to being accused of lying? Being accused of scumminess, I can understand, but lying? Quite honestly this looks like you're trying to set up a soft landing in case you ever get accused of lying, for a reason that doesn't actually tie in logically.

Also, your conversation with Nikanor on page 16 is a bit :/ ... I'm not sure what I make of it. You're also making excuses for not posting (396, 401, 402, 407, 410, 413) - basically in every single post. I eagerly await your big, detailed, referenced post on Lynch.

Onion + Ric (Erik):

oh noes Ric got replaced. i liked that guy.

dammit i keep having high opinions of ric! i don't want to give more credit to what he says simply because we share a major, but i agree with what he says and don't suspect him much at all

+ ric's general wishy washy attitude towards onion (don't mix up with wishy washy voting please)

Onion "liked" having ric around. Now, is that because ric is nicely deflecting all attacks against onion for him? Onion admits to be reluctant in having suspicion against ric, while ric's "attack+defend at the same time" attitude due to some "grey area" read is actually pretty suspicious. Suppose you're playing a game as town, and someone attacks you every now and again BUT defends you every other time, would you be suspicious of that person? Yet onion isn't.

Onion also says that he doesn't suspect ric because they share a major and because he agrees with what ric says, both of which aren't really valid reasons. Personally, I'm not too sure about ric - it could just be his play style. I'll have to see how Erik behaves, and how onion reacts to him. (btw "

ric

" "e

rik

" )

i didn't know America Has shortens to America's.

Of course "has" can be shortened to "'s" - eg. he has got a bike, he's got a bike

Conclusions:

I will refrain from voting until I get some replies.

[Echo]

...although i do believe that eRic is townish and you [Nikanor] are scummish.

Erik's made a "hi" post and a "i'm catching up" post... how does that convince you he's townish?

[Echo]

@saberwolf: "rereading"? You've been following the thread?

btw welcome to the game

@haylen: you said you had a post about the inconsistencies of Lynch (now replaced by Cain). Despite it being at a level of quality that doesn't satisfy you, do you want to post what you've got anyway?

[Echo]

I was under the impression that you said you had it partially written, just not to a standard that you were willing to post it.

[Echo]

I lied, it isn't ready. I'm a perfectionist and a procrastinater, If i have to much to do, I say i've done things and put them off and off and off until I get called out on it. I should've gone V/LA days ago just so I can keep up with everything. But that's me, I overload myself with work. A combination of perfectionism and procrastination usually leads to dramatic explosions. And yes, I haven't got the hang of knowing my game limits yet.

The combination of "perfectionist" (as in it's there but not perfect yet) and "procrastinater" (you've been working on it but keep getting distracted) is what gave me that impression.

[Echo]

In fact, if voting didn't put someone on L-1, I'd happily vote for Cain :/

[Echo]

For his hasty vote of course.

[Echo]

vote: haylen

[Echo]

yeah it was a bit too easy at the end :/

[Echo]

"How much stuff did you bring, anyway?" Echo asked. As he walked over to examine the retractable blade that slipped from under saberwolf's wig, he pulled out his own gun and casually shot Haylen.

I love being the cool one

[Echo]

the reason why we killed anticollie was because he had political pull. he would say something and people seemed to listen and respect it. it seemed like he was building a case against everybody.

I wanted to kill anticollie because I didn't want someone replacing into the game (and therefore possibly giving new insight for town).