Newbie 848 - The Bunny Mafia Family - over finally!

[Nachomamma8]

Uhh... even more blatant hypocrisy.

It's obvious what Bronco is trying to accomplish. He's trying to scumhunt; someone brought up the subject of Jase's scumminess, so he added his input to the argument.

You basically agreed with the poster before you and voted who he did.

Mind explaining that?

Also, why is Jase or me not scummier to you than bronco?

Is that not what you just did? You agreed with the poster before you and voted the same person... adding on more reasons to it doesn't matter, because when I tried to explain my own personal reasoning, you said I wasn't actually scumhunting, I was just regurgitating information! Does it matter if it's been said before if I agree with it and find it accurate?

In my opinion, you're looking for ME to be the easy target and jumping on MY bandwagon (I had the most votes at the time of your post... would that not make me the EASIEST target?).

The italicized one.

[Sposh]

Oh! Okay... Um, I don't really understand the point of the question, but I'll answer it the best I can!

I think bronco is scummy, and Jase was the one he was pseudo-questioning. While that does not make Jase town, it alleviates my day one concerns.

As for you, your vote on me was understandable... but then Teh voted me and threw out "piggyback" reasoning (I like that word!). He also said I voted randomly and without reason.

Bottom line, it seems like you and Jase are actually trying to scumhunt, while bronco was more poking around with a stick but not really hunting.

But for right now, I'd much rather lynch teh than anyone else.

[MichelSableheart]

I have to apologize. Appearantly I have much less time available then I thought I had, and am having a bit of trouble motivating myself.

After my post last friday, I haven't looked at the thread at all till now, and even now I only have very limited time available. I will scan the last couple of pages, looking mainly to things adressed to me. I hope to be able to make a better post tomorrow, but unfortunately, I can't make promises. It will probably be wednesday before I have time to look at the thread thoroughly.

MichelSableheart, Nachomamma8, Tehstefan, mind explaining your votes for my sake?

My vote is based on rather poor reasons, as it was made during the beginning part of the game. I explained those reasons at the beginning of post #64. I haven't seen anything more suspicious though, and haven't yet finished my analysis. Therefore, I haven't seen any reason for unvoting or changing my vote yet.

On Bronco #148: I'm not at all convinced by his explanations. I believe this post

Unvote: MichelSableheart.
Vote: Jase

Please answer all questions addressed to you.

is clearly voting Jase because Jase didn't answer questions. Bronco's remark that Nacho didn't say anything of the sort feels extremely strange to me.

Unfortunately that's all I have time for, for now

[Incognito]

Vote Count #7 of Day 1

Sposh (3) <-~ MichelSableheart, Nachomamma8, Tehstefan
Jase (1) <-~ broncofaninmd
Nachomamma8 (1) <-~ Jase
broncofaninmd (2) <-~ Sposh, foilist13

Not voting (2) <-~ TheBeanBurrito, Haylen

With 9 alive, 5 will do it.

Tuesday, October 20th at 6 P.M. EDT.

[Incognito]

I'd just like to remind everyone that the Day 1 deadline is a little more than a week away. Please note my deadline rules.

Having said that, according to this thread, we might be having "Moving Day" (for the site) this coming weekend. If that's the case, I will consider extending the deadline by however many days the site goes down. Please keep this in mind if you try to visit the site this coming weekend. And feel free to send a PM to me if you have any questions. Thanks.

Your loving and attentive mod,

Incog

[Jase]

Unless you have a suspicion on a certain person, and you believe the night's actions might clarify something. Or if you're a power role. Or if you enjoy the game of mafia and don't want to die on the first night.

The first to reasons are only valid if you've been a boon to the town and are actually likely to be night killed. The third is just anti town.

[foilist13]

@Nachomamma8 - You still win if you die, assuming the town wins. Being alive is not necessary to your win condition, and deceiving the town to try and not be nightkilled only makes it more likely you will be lynched. Obviously it is infinitely more valuable to the town for you to be night killed rather than lynched. If your night killed they might still catch scum, if they lynch you thats 2 town down.

[Haylen]

Your loving and attentive mod,

Incog

You dont love us

Feeling a bit better now. Will probably be able to post something proper tomorrow

[Tehstefan]

Oh! Okay... Um, I don't really understand the point of the question, but I'll answer it the best I can!

I think bronco is scummy, and Jase was the one he was pseudo-questioning. While that does not make Jase town, it alleviates my day one concerns.

As for you, your vote on me was understandable... but then Teh voted me and threw out "piggyback" reasoning (I like that word!). He also said I voted randomly and without reason.

Bottom line, it seems like you and Jase are actually trying to scumhunt, while bronco was more poking around with a stick but not really hunting.

But for right now, I'd much rather lynch teh than anyone else.

The italicised part is the part I have beef with.

You say Bronco scummy, yet in the same breath say you'd rather lynch me, without giving any real reason's as to why. So I voted you for piggy backing, and that you seemed to put little thought into your votes, just trying to start a bandwagon. As well, I voted you because you seemed to panic, and throw the blame everywhere.

Still, if you think someone's scummy, you go for that person, you don't go "Well, he's scummy, but lets chase after him for a bit instead!" You go after the scummy guy, and don't let up.

[Nachomamma8]

@Nachomamma8 - You still win if you die, assuming the town wins. Being alive is not necessary to your win condition, and deceiving the town to try and not be nightkilled only makes it more likely you will be lynched. Obviously it is infinitely more valuable to the town for you to be night killed rather than lynched. If your night killed they might still catch scum, if they lynch you thats 2 town down.

But you also gain a lot more information. I can be the most pro-town player throughout all of day 1, but I may not have a proper analysis on anyone; no one really tries to frame me, and I get NKed by day 1. As a result, the town has no information on me whatsoever.

Second scenario comes around, and I'm a fairly scummy player; I accuse players quite easily, and whenever a bandwagon doesn't form on that person, I move on. When the bandwagon comes full circle to me, it's a lot easier for Day 2 people to look at my interactions with others; who was on my bandwagon, who wasn't. Personally, I don't have much faith in an D1 lynch, so I think it's better to draw as many reactions from people as possible, whether it makes you the first one lynched or not.

[Jase]

@Nachomamma8 - You still win if you die, assuming the town wins. Being alive is not necessary to your win condition, and deceiving the town to try and not be nightkilled only makes it more likely you will be lynched. Obviously it is infinitely more valuable to the town for you to be night killed rather than lynched. If your night killed they might still catch scum, if they lynch you thats 2 town down.

But you also gain a lot more information. I can be the most pro-town player throughout all of day 1, but I may not have a proper analysis on anyone; no one really tries to frame me, and I get NKed by day 1. As a result, the town has no information on me whatsoever.

Second scenario comes around, and I'm a fairly scummy player; I accuse players quite easily, and whenever a bandwagon doesn't form on that person, I move on. When the bandwagon comes full circle to me, it's a lot easier for Day 2 people to look at my interactions with others; who was on my bandwagon, who wasn't. Personally, I don't have much faith in an D1 lynch, so I think it's better to draw as many reactions from people as possible, whether it makes you the first one lynched or not.

Scenario 1: Unlikely that you're the most pro town without a proper analysis.

Scenario 2: In this case you're interactions with others are suspect, even if you're confirmed town. If you're trying to make yourself just a bit scummier, the interactions that are meant to accomplish this aren't helpful, as it's just you trying to protect yourself. This also seems like something scum would say to justify their actions

Sposh: I'm going back to look at the teh piggybacking accusations now, and barring something pulling me away, you can expect something in the next few hours.

[Jase]

Well alright. Teh did pretty much the same thing. He did a better job of defending against the accusations but after examining it, it doesn't really hold up.

First of all, Sposh, exclamation points don't stack. No need to put more than one on. Secondly, I'm not voting you for regurgitating reasons. I'm voting you because your lurking, trying to find easy targets, and jumping on a bandwagon, instead of actually trying to scum hunt.

Sposh wasn't really lurking so far as I'm concerned, and certainly not more than teh. As for trying to find easy targets, and jumping onto bandwagons, well, these aren't really different than to regurgitate reasoning while jumping onto a bandwagon.

[Sposh]

Oh! Okay... Um, I don't really understand the point of the question, but I'll answer it the best I can!

I think bronco is scummy, and Jase was the one he was pseudo-questioning. While that does not make Jase town, it alleviates my day one concerns.

As for you, your vote on me was understandable... but then Teh voted me and threw out "piggyback" reasoning (I like that word!). He also said I voted randomly and without reason.

Bottom line, it seems like you and Jase are actually trying to scumhunt, while bronco was more poking around with a stick but not really hunting.

But for right now, I'd much rather lynch teh than anyone else.

The italicised part is the part I have beef with.

You say Bronco scummy, yet in the same breath say you'd rather lynch me, without giving any real reason's as to why. So I voted you for piggy backing, and that you seemed to put little thought into your votes, just trying to start a bandwagon. As well, I voted you because you seemed to panic, and throw the blame everywhere.

Still, if you think someone's scummy, you go for that person, you don't go "Well, he's scummy, but lets chase after him for a bit instead!" You go after the scummy guy, and don't let up.

Just because I find someone suspicious doesn't mean I don't find you MORE suspicious. I think you fail to realize that I find bronco mildly suspicious... but you are on a whole different level than him in my mind.

[Haylen]

hmm...

Vote Nachomamma.

[foilist13]

Which is the difference between town and scum. Town aim to make things sound as bad as they are, scum aim to make things sound worse than they are. I might be sticking my head out here, but mafia is not a very honest game to play; it's mostly about manipulation. As a townie, you don't want to be too honest or else you set yourself up to be NKed the first day; you always want that iffy aspect around you. On the other hand, you don't want to lie enough to get yourself lynched. As a townie, it's all about finding that balance.

Ok, here you clearly state that you do not want to be lynched under any circumstances, just for the record. You've stated that you don't have a problem misleading the other town so long as you are misleading the mafia as well, am I right? (This is not pertaining to anything later in this post, I just want to have his views on record so that they may be cited later).

But you also gain a lot more information. I can be the most pro-town player throughout all of day 1, but I may not have a proper analysis on anyone; no one really tries to frame me, and I get NKed by day 1. As a result, the town has no information on me whatsoever.

In this scenario if you haven't posted much analysis then there would be no reason for the scum to kill you unless they are just really dense players or have some personal issues with you. Not posting analysis is not pro-town. The rest of us would have to be pretty poor town players for you to get that one.

Second scenario comes around, and I'm a fairly scummy player; I accuse players quite easily, and whenever a bandwagon doesn't form on that person, I move on. When the bandwagon comes full circle to me, it's a lot easier for Day 2 people to look at my interactions with others; who was on my bandwagon, who wasn't. Personally, I don't have much faith in an D1 lynch, so I think it's better to draw as many reactions from people as possible, whether it makes you the first one lynched or not.

There is not much to be gained from seeing who jumps on a bandwagon. A scum player could lead the bandwagon, they could sneak in without making a big show of it, or they could stay off the bandwagon entirely if they see that the town will lynch them anyways and they can use that as a defense later.

Tell me, wouldn't a decent scum player focus on one person and try and form a bandwagon, and if it does not, move on until one does?

[Incognito]

broncofaninmd and TheBeanBurrito have been prodded.

[Sposh]

Foil, why are you avoiding commenting on me?

[MichelSableheart]

OK, I've finished my analysis. I'll give my opinions on each player, in order of the first post.

---
Sposh

During the random voting stage, he was joking around a bit, and wasn't too concerned about scumhunting or getting serious discussion started. That's slightly anti-town, but unfortunately it's behaviour that's generally common for both town and scum.

His vote on Bronco in post #107 is potentially pressuring newbie mistakes in order to get an easy mislynch.

His defense against the accusation "you added nothing original to your Bronco vote, but made it appear like you did" is a mess. In particular, the contradiction between "to say I added NOTHING new is a bit harsh" in post #160 and "But... based on what I saw, there was nothing more to add on" in post #162 is striking.

Overall, I can see myself voting for Sposh today. However, he didn't make any large scumtells IMO. I believe there also are players around who are more likely scum then he is.

---
TehStefan

Post #28 by Tsf struck me as very weird. Why would Tsf give an easy explanation for TBB's unexplained vote? There is a possible connection there.

Post #33 by Tsf is weird too. He's asking other players for reads, when he hasn't contributed anything whatsoever himself. Does he want to know the general opinions of the town before making comments that can draw attention to himself?

I don't like how, in post #104, Tsf accuses Jase of being overdefensive when all Jase is doing IMO is giving and explaining a clear, logical explanation for why he didn't answer Nacho's question immediately and answering to the discussion that follows from that.

His vote of Bronco in that same post is also bad, especially considering his later opinions. His accusation that Bronco is tunnelvisioning doesn't really hold water, because Bronco pressured Tsf earlier in the game too. It is potentially trying to take advantage of simple newbie mistakes. But later, when Bronco has made a post that only confuses me and doesn't clear anything, Tsf unvotes because "Bronco gave a decent reason for what he's doing". And even later, in post #156, he has changed his opinion on Bronco completely when Bronco's posts still haven't been very clear IMO. Stefan, can you explain why you originally suspected Bronco, what in his explanation you found convincing, and why you changed your mind on him?

Tsf's vote on Sposh is just as much following Nacho's reasoning as Sposh vote on Bronco was following the reasoning of Tsf. Nacho accused Sposh of piggybacking and not bringing in original content, Tsf accused Sposh of the same. For the other two accusations ("bandwagoning", "voting without reason" and "lurking"), no support whatsoever was given. It feels like Tsf is simply throwing some scummy words around.

In the rest of the discussion with Sposh, Tsf is making reasonable comments.

Overall, Tsf did some scummy things, particulary in the beginning of the game. I could see myself voting for him. But again, there are more suspicious players around.

---
Sxizzor/foilist

Sxizzor was inactive, which is completely different from lurking and not much of a tell either way IMO. Foilist's analysis is well thought out, and he is contributing greatly. The only thing I disagree with him on is his Bronco stance. He feels pro-town.

---
TheBeanBurrito

As far as I can see, TBB has not made any contribution that is relevant for finding the scum in any way. He has been completely unhelpful, even though he's posted regulary and posted more then me. His behaviour is, in my opinion, a good example of (active) lurking. I believe it is very well possible that he is avoiding commenting to stay out of the picture. The fact that his general behaviour is anti-town and his lynch therefore won't hurt the town much makes him the best lynch for today. I much rather lynch him then Sposh, Tsf, or Nachomamma, who are all contributing and hunting scum.

Unvote: Sposh

Vote: TheBeanBurrito

---
staroftheshow/Haylen

staroftheshow's posts gave me mostly newbie vibes, which isn't much of a tell either way. Haylen has simply been inactive. Overall, neutral read.

Haylen, I really hope your unexplained Nachomamma vote is not what you had in mind when you said "you would post something proper tomorrow". I really would like to hear your opinions on all players in the game.

---
Jase

Even though Jase is one of the most active posters around, I haven't got much scumtells listed for him. The only problem I have with him is that, in the beginning of the game, he tended to express suspicion without giving reasons why (posts #35 and #55 are examples of this.

I like his defense against Nachomamma's accusation of not answering questions. He gives a good reason ("I didn't post at all"), and though he is getting annoyed, he makes good attempts to keep the discussion that follows clear and civil.

I like his comments on Nachomamma's reasoning in the last couple of pages too.

---
Nachomamma

Nachomamma feels scummy to me. He makes very little comments that make me think "good point!". He takes strategic stances that are in my opinion antitown ("RVS is good", "the other town players don't need to get a read on me", "the point of anything you say should be to misrepresent it", "town players should behave scummy"). Furthermore he tend to argue a lot, seemingly more interested in being right then in comprehending the point of the other player.

In his attacks against Jase, he looked pretty badly. Jase gave understable, clear explanations, but Nachomamma kept pressing the point. The case he makes against Jase in post #113 doesn't make sense to me at all.

Nachomamma was also the only player who ignored foilist's request for explanation of the Sposh votes (#133).

On the plus side, Nachomamma is active and contributing. We need players like that. I would prefer not to lynch him today.

---
Bronco

Bronco is mainly giving me newbie vibes. I'm not getting a read on him at all. His accusations against Jase were strange and incomprehensible, but I don't see how that would be to his advantage if he's scum. The main thing it does is draw attention to him.

Bronco, can you please explain clearly where you originally believed Jase lied? You said you read the post wrong. What did you believe he said?

A positive tell is his post #37, where he pressures Tsf when Tsf asked for reads without giving any himself.

Overall, I have a neutral read on him.
---
MichelSableheart
I have problems with his activity level. He regulary is away for days on end, though he didn't need to be prodded yet. IC's are supposed to give a good example, and his inactivity is simply unacceptable. I really hope he finds motivation and time again.

I've seen his rolepm though, and I know he isn't scum.

---
Conclusions:
TheBeanBurrito is the best lynch for today, but I will support a Sposh or Tsf lynch too.

[Sposh]

Let me clarify my contradiction in 160 and 162:

I meant to say I absolutely added nothing is harsh, because I saw what I saw and put it in my own words, then pointed out a post which I thought was suspicious. Yes, the post was an example of what had already been stated... but I was just calling out something I saw suspicious.

[broncofaninmd]

Bronco, can you please explain clearly where you originally believed Jase lied? You said you read the post wrong. What did you believe he said?

Jase post 80

It seems a bit early to vote me for "not answering questions"...this seems a bit suspicious, and I'd like you to address it. Now, I said three votes was too much because it's only one more vote and there could be a quick lynch.

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.
__

At first I wasn't sure what he was getting at. I assumed with little to go on but the not answering questions, Jase found him suspicious for the vote.

Nacho post 83

Why is it too early to vote you? Are you at L-1? *checks* Nope. L-2? *checks* Nope. L-3? *checks* Again, nope. Yeah, I don't see any problem from attacking you based on your refusal to answer a question. I am currently the first person to vote you, as far as my knowledge goes.

Yeah, I completely ignored your post 62 because you didn't ask me a question. Wasn't obliged to answer it, so I didn't. What were you looking for in response to that post?

Nacho clearly is confused by the post himself. Then responds to the remark about him ignoring the post Jase mentions.

Jase post85

I didn't say it was too early to vote me, I said it was too early to vote me for not answering questions. Fact is that you asked a question that wasn't particularly intense, and then voted me roughly 24 hours later without even waiting to see if I would respond with my next post (my first post since you asked the question). I still perceive this as scummy and would still like for you to address it.

Additionally, I may not have asked a question in my post 62, but I did indicate that I had a problem with it, and you failed to clarify or elaborate in any way.

FoS: Nachomama I'm not ready to change my vote yet, but I really don't like the way you're playing right now.

Then Jase changes his wording around to fully compliment his feelings. I found it awfully scummy, to me it allowed him to change on Nachos response.

Nacho post89

Alright, what's the difference? And how is it scummy? I saw something suspicious, I went for it. Did I miss the memo where scumhunting was scummy?

Clearly Nacho points out that Jase was trying to use two different approaches on the subject.

bronco post94

This post specifically claims hes suspicious of you for voting him for not answering questions.
Not for answering questions fast enough.

I saw the difference, and pointed it out.

Jase post94

No, no I was suspicious because he voted me for not answering questions before waiting a reasonable time to answer.

Also, Jase himself recognizes the difference and even confirms his action.

The reason I think Jase did this, was the fact he tried to turn it around on Nacho for the post he ignored, and then rebutted once Nacho responded.

[broncofaninmd]

Also, I injured my arm in a softball game sunday. Waiting on the doctor to read the xrays and go from there. I might need to be replaced depending what the doctor wants to do. He thinks I might have tendon damage in my elbow.

[Nachomamma8]

hmm...

Vote Nachomamma.

Hmm... Why?

[Nachomamma8]

@Michel: I missed his question at the beginning, but I certainly articulated the answer to it:

I agree with most of your bronco points, but I'm not following your last point. Sure, it's a Captain Obvious comment, but I don't know why that's scummy. Doesn't really seem like a scum-defense to me, not an effective one, anyway.

I still think Sposh is scummy.

The first thing that stands out to me is his attempt to extend the RVS as much as possible, as in his post 45, where he states "is it really possible to have a case this early in the game with two pages of information?". This sounds to me like he's suggesting that scumhunting is impossible that early in the game. And I'd like to clarify: while I find shortening the RVS scummy, attempting to extend it is just as scummy. In a nutshell, I just disapprove of people trying to manipulate it...

Second thing is his piggybacking, as demonstrated on page 5. Tehstefan votes bronco, and, one non-mod post later, Sposh votes for bronco, simply what Teh just said. He then says he doesn't need to add anything new because "there's nothing left to add". This is definitely anti-town in my book, for it discourages more scumhunting on bronco, and sets up for others to vote bronco while following the "there's nothing more to add" reasoning.

I wouldn't have a problem with the second quote of foil's analysis of him, had he tried to explain said "personal reasoning". I told him that he was regurgitated information; he said he didn't, although he himself inferred that he didn't add anything new by saying "adding on new reasons doesn't matter".

[Nachomamma8]

EBWOP: To clarify, that should read: "I missed foil's question..."

[Nachomamma8]

My Defense:

[

Nachomamma8

- I'm getting a scum vibe here. His accusations of Jase seems like an attempt to start a bandwagon rather than joining one, but to me is equally scummy. He doesn't have any kind of real argument, but he words it well and it sounds convincing. I'm not sure here, but there is a lot of content to sift through.

What gave you the idea I was trying to start a bandwagon? It is extremely ineffective for townies to tunnel on one person, or simply to only focus on people that have not been thought to be scummy yet because you have not gauged each player's reaction to pressure; it's like failing to read all of your choices on a multiple choice question. Thus, I prefer to jump from person to person and gauge their responses and make sure I'm making an informed decision when I vote to lynch.

Nachomamma

Nachomamma feels scummy to me. He makes very little comments that make me think "good point!". He takes strategic stances that are in my opinion antitown ("RVS is good", "the other town players don't need to get a read on me", "the point of anything you say should be to misrepresent it", "town players should behave scummy"). Furthermore he tend to argue a lot, seemingly more interested in being right then in comprehending the point of the other player.

In his attacks against Jase, he looked pretty badly. Jase gave understable, clear explanations, but Nachomamma kept pressing the point. The case he makes against Jase in post #113 doesn't make sense to me at all.

Nachomamma was also the only player who ignored foilist's request for explanation of the Sposh votes (#133).

On the plus side, Nachomamma is active and contributing. We need players like that. I would prefer not to lynch him today.

I'll admit, you're first post rubbed me the wrong way. And as a person who has read his fair share of mafia games, I am slightly paranoid of ICs who influence and lead the town into bad decisions by telling them bad strategy. To me, your first post seemed like you were setiing up for that such manipulation, so I decided to try to "test your ideals" with some bad logic of my own mixed in with a bit of personal beliefs (I will clarify in a moment). In doing so, I hoped to get you to agree with the obviously anti-town points of mine (unfortunately, foilist, Jase, and your inactivity kind of got in the way...). But in your stolidity in refuting said ideals, as demonstrated in your analysis, definitely helped me in disproving that fear.


As before, I said I used "good logic" and "bad logic".

Good Logic:

"The RVS is good." ~ The RVS is the birth of the game of mafia in itself. It is extremely important to the game itself, especially when it starts to become later in the game. Day 1 is the scum's easiest time at getting a mislynch, and it is also the time when newbie scum are first trying out their wings; thus, it is often an extremely effective tool in catching scum. And despite popular belief, I don't view the RVS as having ended when the first accusation is made; it's still everyone groping around in the dark. The RVS has ended when the first valid accusation is made, and people become confident that they have singled out a scum member. For an example on how the RVS can be used to catch scum, check out Echo's play in Newbie 826, found at http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12091.

"Game-relevant questions are good for scum." ~ Even if you aren't the one who initiated the change in procedure, the scum end up benefitting more from the information than the town does. If you can come up with some game-relevant questions to dispute that fact, then be my guest.

Bad Logic:

"Townie players should appear scummy." ~ Obviously false. Townies should act as pro-town as possible to give MORE information on their deaths. After all, it's much easier to pinpoint a scum who makes a case against a pro-town player than vice-versa. When you act pro-town, you take away the scum's choices for who to try to get a mislynch on.

However, acting excessively scummy is NOT a bad town strategy, but expect to be lynched if you do try it. If you haven't read any Mastin games, I'd highly suggest doing so. He usually is a HORRIBLE scum, but quite a good townie. Everyone gloms onto him, and scum see the opportunity for the mislynch to happen. Townies normally reanalyze people's interactions with him, and their questions put scum in quite the tight position, who normally don't think of valid reasons to get someone lynched.



Naturally, I could be lying, and I could be telling the truth. No one but me knows (HOW annoying is that?). So, to avoid ANY confusion about Good Logic - Bad Logic, I urge you to ask any questions you want of me. Then, after all of your questions have been asked, lynch me to verify that I'm telling the truth. If you don't lynch me or until I have been lynched and declared scum, don't even try using any bad logic for your own to get a mislynch.

Yes, I just dared you to lynch me. How does everyone feel about this?