Mini 199 - Time Travel Mafia, Game Over!

[mole]

Everyone had a dull weekend, it seems. Let's make things more interesting.

Unvote: SinisterOverlord

Vote: Mr Stoofer

First of all, I don't agree that we should settle for "not much to go on" for

any

lynch, even if it is day 1. Remember the mechanics--it is likely that we will

never

find out if the guy we lynch today is scum, or a doctor, or whatever, since they all show up as "non-townie".

Second, you're being a little too opportunist for my tastes. I agree with Nox, I think your posts do lack content, and in fact I don't feel that we've ever heard

your

thoughts on who is suspicious.

Case in point: you said you wanted to focus on "catching scum" rather than my (admittedly convoluted) plan, but you never did anything to further that purpose. Instead, you waited until Someone had posted a list of people he felt were innocent, and then attacked him for not providing reasons.

Then, this, again with no thoughts:

I strongly agree with those that say we should be sharing our suspicions. FWIW, the only previous time I have come across a player saying that they thought they knew who was scummy, but wouldn't tell, he turned out to be the scum.

Also, when SO made his post about Someone, you agreed with it, adding no comments of your own, and then complained about how little progress we'd made. And then when N_lich found it odd that SO "lurks, then upon being voted comes out firing", you basically said "Hey, I noticed that too!". I'll ask you the same question: why didn't you share those thoughts earlier?

Finally, there's something about your posting style that just doesn't seem right. It looks like there's more to your posts than there actually is after a closer look. All the above posts about "we need to catch scum, yeah!" fall into that category, but so does the most recent one. It was just a rehash of what you/N_lich had posted earlier, only you've added a reference to the post number, and pointed out that his behaviour is "not a pro-town strategy". Did we really need that again?

It looks to me like you are capitalising on what content other people post, and not contributing anything yourself, while maintaining the

illusion

that you have something to say. Nox is right--you have been lurking, it's time to come out.

[Mr Stoofer]

There are 2 main points there.

First:

I don't agree that we should settle for "not much to go on" for any lynch, even if it is day 1

There is never much to go on, on day 1, and we have a deadline here so we have to do our best. All we can do on day 1 is (a) make an educated guess, or (b) no lynch. I favour (a). Do you favour (b)? If not, what?

Second:

It looks to me like you are capitalising on what content other people post, and not contributing anything yourself, while maintaining the illusion that you have something to say. Nox is right--you have been lurking, it's time to come out.

Frankly I have not had much original thought, though you are exaggerating if you are saying I have had none. But the real point is that I have had no hesitation in pointing out my suspicions and commenting on what I agree/disagree with. I have pointed suspicion at at least 3 players. If I was psuedo-lurking (posting but without adding content) I would have been much more circumspect (See for example my dust up with Nox. There is no way I would have got drawn into that if I was scum and I knew she was innocent.)

[N_lich]

So, those are my thoughts for now. More to come as I read upcoming posts (especially Someone and SinisterOverlord).

[quote="SinisterOverlord]Sorry. Many shifts at work. Just got in, it's past 1 in the morning and I'm too tired to post a decent post. I'll be back for a proper post in about 10-12ish hours. [/quote]

I see promising but I don't see delivery.

[Someone]

If I was psuedo-lurking (posting but without adding content) I would have been much more circumspect (See for example my dust up with Nox. There is no way I would have got drawn into that if I was scum and I knew she was innocent.)

WIFOM

Anyways, the deadline looms closer and the town looks undecided about who to lynch. I still like my vote on SO. Although the Mr.Stoofer/Changeling Bob issues are intriguing, I just think SO is more scummy, especially now that he goes into another bout of lurking, right before the deadline, no less.

As for my scumminess, I must say I really don't see it. I have made mistakes, but hey, who doesn't? I think that people that are after me for no reason but my miscalculation about lynching townees are scummy...I made a mistake, and immediately caught it and apologised. What would I have been trying to achieve as scum?

All other accustions have been made because of "inconsistencies" in my posts. However, this is completely not true. Only one specific accusation has been made...that I changed my position on the FOSing issue. However, my post about the subject was blatantly misquoted by SO. My real post goes like this:

I believe that I am an active enough poster to be able to change my votes before any imminent deadline. Therefore, I'll be slightly more liberal with my voting. My plan was to make sure we had the 6/3 voting pattern at the end of the day. However, now that Mr. Stoofer mentions it, it may be better to use FOS's instead of votes until we choose a lynch target.

Which is completely uniform with my other posts on the subject. Note the use of

may

. I'll FOS everyone who agreed with this logic.


That being said, I'd like to volunteer myself for the 3 part of the 3/6 voting pattern...but I think that either SO or Mr stoofer should be the 6 part.

[Fishbulb]

Tell you what, you say something that I don't find scummy, then have people say "that's scummy", and I'll come to your defense.

So, what you are saying is that the only person that has done that has been Mr Stoofer? And, it has happened four times? Nope, don't buy it.

At this point, Changling bob is definitely the highest on my scum list. Even if Mr Stoofer isn't scum with him, it's still just as likely. Scum try to defend an innocent if it looks like a lynch so they can come back and say "See? I told you so." Anyway, it doesn't look like there is enough interest in this theory, so I guess I'll have to let this go for now. I just hope everyone did read these posts so it is in the back of everyone's minds if I end up dead any time soon. (Obviously, I don't mean auto-lynch him if I'm dead, just something to consider for the future.)

Of course, Mr Stoofer just ignored the whole thing entirely, so I will be surprised if he doesn't turn out to be scum. Since it seems we've narrowed it down to Mr Stoofer, Someone, and SinisterOverlord, I guess I'd have to go with:

Vote: Mr Stoofer

[Mr Stoofer]

I don't really know what I can say about the changling bob thing. I don't disagree with anything anyone has written on the topic. Yes, his defences of me raise an eyebrow, but from my point of view they are all entirely rational (because I know for certain that he is right). Perhaps the explanantion is that we have recently played a game together (Mini 167), where we were both pro-town: so he knows that this is my pro-town style. And yes, if I am innocent that doesn't mean he is too.

I suppose mole will say that the above is "capitalising on what content other people post, and not contributing anything yourself" (although the 4th sentence is a new point). But I really don't know what else to say on the topic.

[mole]

I suppose mole will say that the above is "capitalising on what content other people post, and not contributing anything yourself"

You missed out the "maintaining the illusion" bit--that part's important too.

Also, you should probably respond to the points I'm

actually

making, rather than those hypothetical ones. I don't see anything wrong with your responding to an accusation involving you. It's markedly different from the pattern of behaviour I noted above.

More to come soon, related to the other post.

[mole]

There are 2 main points there.

I think we can have this discussion without restating each other's points. Things tend to get lost in the translation, whether deliberately or accidentally.

First:

I don't agree that we should settle for "not much to go on" for any lynch, even if it is day 1

There is never much to go on, on day 1, and we have a deadline here so we have to do our best. All we can do on day 1 is (a) make an educated guess, or (b) no lynch. I favour (a). Do you favour (b)? If not, what?

This is a pretty generic complaint about Day 1, and doesn't take into account the mechanics of the game (or the rest of my paragraph). What do you hope to gain by lynching based on an "educated guess"? We aren't going to be able to tell between a doctor or a cop or a mafia, so we'll still be just as blind going into Day 2.

What the hell, I'll advocate a no lynch in all circumstances unless we're confident enough that someone's scum that we want them dead. The mafia kills are going to give us more information than lynching (since we know the mafia aren't going to kill their own members), and the doctors can revive the people who were killed--we can't do that if we lynch a pro-town player.

I'm really interested in people's responses thoughts on this issue, even if some of you dismissed it the first time I brought it up (SinisterOverlord?). We don't want to end up in a situation where we spend all of Day 2 arguing over whether we lynched the right person on Day 1, so we need to keep it in mind.

Second:

It looks to me like you are capitalising on what content other people post, and not contributing anything yourself, while maintaining the illusion that you have something to say. Nox is right--you have been lurking, it's time to come out.

Frankly I have not had much original thought, though you are exaggerating if you are saying I have had none. But the real point is that I have had no hesitation in pointing out my suspicions and commenting on what I agree/disagree with. I have pointed suspicion at at least 3 players. If I was psuedo-lurking (posting but without adding content) I would have been much more circumspect (See for example my dust up with Nox. There is no way I would have got drawn into that if I was scum and I knew she was innocent.)

But it's my contention that you

haven't

given enough (if any) commentary where you agreed or disagreed with a post, and that you are pseudo-lurking. I don't want to argue generalities: I've given examples of this behaviour (e.g. three posts that say "let's focus on catching scum" without any attempt to achieve that). Do you have a response to those?

[Nox]

(See for example my dust up with Nox. There is no way I would have got drawn into that if I was scum and I knew she was innocent.)

Whoa whoa whoa.
Wait a minute.
Is it just me or did he just

confirm

me innocent?

We know for a fact that there is a possibility of several mafia families, or several killers, right?

So if you were scum, it didn't necessarily mean I was innocent, and even if I was, I was on your case; you wouldve defended yourself all the same.

This leads me to think that you do, in fact, know that I'm innocent.
And who knows this other than the mafia?
I highly doubt that a cop had a chance to investigate yet.

[Quagmire]

Whoa whoa whoa.
Wait a minute.
Is it just me or did he just

confirm

me innocent?

We know for a fact that there is a possibility of several mafia families, or several killers, right?

So if you were scum, it didn't necessarily mean I was innocent, and even if I was, I was on your case; you wouldve defended yourself all the same.

This leads me to think that you do, in fact, know that I'm innocent.
And who knows this other than the mafia?
I highly doubt that a cop had a chance to investigate yet.

My guess is that his quote may have been a little slip up. But if he's mafia, then he knows you're at least not part of his family. Still, whether it's a little slip up or not,

unvote: Someone.

FOS: Mr. Stoofer. MOD: Can we get a vote count?

Another thing I don't like about Mr Stoofer:

Perhaps the explanantion is that we have recently played a game together (Mini 167), where we were both pro-town: so he knows that this is my pro-town style. And yes, if I am innocent that doesn't mean he is too.

With this, I view that he's trying

too hard

to shove in the town's face that he's a protown. If he was protown, he shouldn't panic and he should just come up with some rational arguments instead of defensive defenses. It's a common mafia tactic to try and force-feed innocence.

My vote on Mr Stoofer is pending. When the vote count comes.

[Quagmire]

Whoa whoa whoa.
Wait a minute.
Is it just me or did he just

confirm

me innocent?

We know for a fact that there is a possibility of several mafia families, or several killers, right?

So if you were scum, it didn't necessarily mean I was innocent, and even if I was, I was on your case; you wouldve defended yourself all the same.

This leads me to think that you do, in fact, know that I'm innocent.
And who knows this other than the mafia?
I highly doubt that a cop had a chance to investigate yet.

My guess is that his quote may have been a little slip up. But if he's mafia, then he knows you're at least not part of his family. Still, whether it's a little slip up or not,

unvote: Someone.

FOS: Mr. Stoofer. MOD: Can we get a vote count?

Another thing I don't like about Mr Stoofer:

Perhaps the explanantion is that we have recently played a game together (Mini 167), where we were both pro-town: so he knows that this is my pro-town style. And yes, if I am innocent that doesn't mean he is too.

With this, I view that he's trying

too hard

to shove in the town's face that he's a protown. If he was protown, he shouldn't panic and he should just come up with some rational arguments instead of defensive defenses. It's a common mafia tactic to try and force-feed innocence.

My vote on Mr Stoofer is pending. When the vote count comes.

[SinisterOverlord]

Okay. Sorry about the lack of the promised post. Stuff happened... a bit with my internet, and a bit with real life issues, meaning I didn't have the ability or time for a proper post.

Secondly, mathcam, I voted Someone back in post 109.

In any case, I'm gonna

Vote: Someone

.

Now, to respond to Someones' response to my attacks;

Try to read some of the posts we've made, SO. There HAS to be an SK or some alternative killing force. There is no assumption there.

We know someone was killed last night. This means that a killing group either doesn't time travel or chose not to. Says nothing about multiple roles. If I'm misinterpreting what you were referring to, please point it out to me.

Also, what keeps mafia from being revived? I think it's you who's making the assumption...better safe then sorry, no? The only person who would want not to follow my plan is scum...

The only way reviving would work that it wouldn't normally due to the mechanics of the game is a back-in-time doc protect. The only other way I can think of someone being revived is a more 'normal' reviver role - and either a) they're on the side of the town, and so SHOULD NOT REVIVE NON TOWNIES, or b) are mafia revivers, which is an extremely powerful role - but I'll admit not out of the question.

Yes, I agree, docs should not go back and protect power roles...However, this is not the opinion of the whole town. Unless you suggest that everyone in the town is SURELY as good as attentive as me or you, there's the possibility of a screw up. Again, the plan is a backup measure, just incase something happens.

I prefer this as a backup plan. If a non-townie is revived for whatever reason, we lynch them.

Argh. Completely not true. If Mr. Stoofer had info on me, me dismissing it doesn't make it go away, does it? Mr stoofer would still come out...and I would still get lynched...

But, as I said, you would've at least forced a cop claim, whereas he might've been able to get you lynched without claiming if it wasn't dismissed.

What??? This is completely out of context. Firstly, note that it was Mr. Stoofer's idea, and not mine to do so. I was just assuming that was the better plan was to FOS. As you may have noted, there were no objections to the FOS plan, which means that most of the town agreed with it at the time...why am I the only one to be singled out?

Okay. Firstly, Mr Stoofer did gain suspicion from me for this, but so do you for agreeing with it easily. And yeah, there were no objections at the time. That by no means means that it's agreed with, that's an assumption right there. And foremost, you're 'assuming that the better plan is to FOS' to quote you. You're agreeing with this because you think the town agrees. That's classic scumminess... just agreeing with the town, attempting to lie low on that issue, at least, not actually going 'Hey... that's actually pretty stupid' and picking up on that.

The logic of witholding your vote is this: if we're going to follow the plan cleanly, we're going to have to have everyone unvote whoever they're voting for at the end of the day. Now, for me, that's no problem since I log in almost every day. However, as you can see at mafiascum, everyone is not as active as us. If we had been using votes, I'd be willing to bet that there are some people that would have not been able to get back to unvote. It gives scum an excuse to leave their vote hanging on an innocent. The less people voting aimlessly, the better, IMO.

I'll concede you do have a point here... though the only case in which I can see us needing to change votes quickly before the deadline is if new information comes to light at the last minute, which is improbable but possible. So I'm prepared to be more cautious with my vote if I survive this day and night, cause given my difficulties of late there's no guarantee I'll be able to change my vote at the last minute, and no vote's better than one on a protown. Though I don't think the votes are as aimless as you suggest... I certainly think mine right now is in the right place.

With regards to the 'it's an advantage for townies to be lynched' issue - I'm guessing you responded to my attack in the same way I formulated it - going through everything in order, responding to each thing as it comes up.

And I'll accept your explanation on the topic, and withdraw my attack on that particular remark.

You haven't. It's just, thats the general attitude of a lot of lurkers here at scum. I'm sorry for categorising you as so. Clearly I was wrong.

Thank you. Though I realize the irony of this, that you said this and then I go and give a short contentless post and not post for days. Again, I'm sorry for that.

The plan is not useless if we don't revive non-townees. It also prevents other weird goings on like scum leading two or three alternative bandwagons who aren't really scummy, and then killing the main one.

I think we have enough decent players in this game that unscummy bandwagons wouldn't happen. And even if this does take place; scum make a false bandwagon then kill the main one - then we'd have an excellent lead on said scum.

Fishbulb, re my somewhat aggressive post on The Plan; while it may seem hypocritical to talk about this, one scum tactic is lurking, not attracting attention, letting everyone else point fingers at each other and lynch each other. The Plan gives them something to talk about, so they can say effectively nothing of consequence yet look like they're contributing.

[quote="Mr Stoofer]While I actually agreed with a lot of what SinisterOverlord said, I too found it interesting that SO had so much to say. He obviously had lots of thoughts in the game so why didn't he share them earlier? [/quote]
I didn't pick up on all of that as it was posted. Some of these things drew my attention to Someone, and with my attention on him I noticed more things as I wrote my initial attack.

I'm mostly bothered by his attacking Someone for his stupid comment. My experience is that obviously stupid statements aren't scummy, but those most eager to pounce on them are.

Wow. Speedy managed to say what I was trying to say for like 3 humungo-posts in like three lines.

Yeah, scum would joyfully jump on a town slip. But a town player should just as joyfully jump on a scum slip. If you care about winning this game, if you want to win, wouldn't you take advantage of what you saw as a big slip by your opponent in a heartbeat?

Now, I still don`t quite understand the 6/3 strategy, but as most people seemed to agree that it was a good plan, and you`re all more experienced than I, I`m going to assume its good. All I really got was the obvious; that the votes were to be separated into one main(6) and one secondary(3) bandwagon. If somebody could explain the concept to me a bit further though, I`d appreciate.

Here's the deal. Since 1) scum may be able to travel back in time for their kills and 2) the person with the most votes at deadline is lynched, then what could happen is Person A has 6 votes, everyone else has none. Scum B, who was dead, privately votes for Person C, who is protown. Then, if they can kill Person A with their nightkill before this day, so those 6 votes are null and void, and bring Scum B back from death, all the votes for this day are the one Scum B vote on Person C, so the timeline changes so Person C is lynched, and the mafia got a free lynch.

Hm. It seems this was already answered. Oh well, I'll leave this here anyhow. Doesn't hurt.

Mr Stoofer goes from agreeing with my large attack to attacking me. Going with what he sees as the flow much?

Similarly, Someone goes from [/quote="Someone"]I'm looking foward to your response. I don't think you're scum, just town that didn't really think through the posts you made.[/quote] to

I just think SO is more scummy

with very little in between. And furthermore, in post 117 he unvotes me, and I haven't seen him revote me since, so why is his vote on me?

What the hell, I'll advocate a no lynch in all circumstances unless we're confident enough that someone's scum that we want them dead. The mafia kills are going to give us more information than lynching (since we know the mafia aren't going to kill their own members), and the doctors can revive the people who were killed--we can't do that if we lynch a pro-town player.

We will win this game by eliminating the scum. Either we can rely on possible vigs guessing well, or we can rely on educated guesses. I prefer the latter, myself.
A no lynch allows the scum an extra night to kill someone else. True, we get more information. However, I think that a cop who may be killed gaining information is not worth an additional protown death.
Yeah, we could lynch a protown player. That's just the risk you take playing this game. That's the point of the game - try and figure out who the scum are with deduction, logic of just gut instinct - and lynch them before they kill off the town. Yeah, we won't know if we made the right decision or not, but that doesn't mean we can afford to let them pick us off.

So for now, my vote stays on Someone, but a big

FOS: Mr Stoofer

. He's my second suspect by a narrow margin.

Heh, more irony. The way things are shaping up, even with all I said against The Plan, looks like I'll end up contributing to making it happen, even if it's not deliberate.

[N_lich]

(See for example my dust up with Nox. There is no way I would have got drawn into that if I was scum and I knew she was innocent.)

Whoa whoa whoa.
Wait a minute.
Is it just me or did he just

confirm

me innocent?

We know for a fact that there is a possibility of several mafia families, or several killers, right?

So if you were scum, it didn't necessarily mean I was innocent, and even if I was, I was on your case; you wouldve defended yourself all the same.

This leads me to think that you do, in fact, know that I'm innocent.
And who knows this other than the mafia?
I highly doubt that a cop had a chance to investigate yet.

I think it's just you. However, his post definitely suffers from WIFOM.

As long as SO keeps posting Someone as top of my scum list( at the moment). I'd still like to hear more from Quagmire as well.

[SpeedyKQ]

That being said, I'd like to volunteer myself for the 3 part of the 3/6 voting pattern...but I think that either SO or Mr stoofer should be the 6 part.

This bothers me. If you're pro-town, why would you volunteer to be the backup lynchee? How does that help out your side? The 6/3 voting plan only works if we have suspicous people in both slots. This feels more like scum trying to ingratiate themself, because a good guy volunteering to put themself in the 3 slot doesn't help the town.

FOS Someone.

[mathcam]

Official Vote Count:

SinisterOverlord (3, Someone, Speedy, Stoofer)
Stoofer (3, Nox, mole, Fishbulb)
Someone (1, SinisterOverlord)

Not Voting

: Changling bob, Gaspode, N_lich, Quagmire

Cam

[Quagmire]

Alright, I'm going to put a little more pressure on Stoofer. He's two away from a lynch now, so don't stock-pile the votes on him quite yet.

Vote: Mr Stoofer

[Gaspode]

I've started to read, but I'm not done yet. Just wanted to let you know I haven't forgotten about the game; a post will come soon. I have some things to do, I'll finish reading later.

All I'm getting so far is that this is a very tough day.

[Someone]

There's no number to lynch Quagmire. The day ends on the deadline, and not before.

Firstly, I assume that we have at least two killing groups, because if not, all dead people would be confirmed innocent since scum wouldn't kill themselves.

But, as I said, you would've at least forced a cop claim, whereas he might've been able to get you lynched without claiming if it wasn't dismissed.

I'm saying that if he was not a cop, there is no reason for a bandwagon on me, because it is essentially a random vote. Therefore, he would not have been able to start a bandwagon on me with a mere vote, unless he was a cop.

We must assume it random, because the alternative is that it's a cop investigation, and for it to mean anything, the cop must come out...which at that point it would have just been easier to come out in the first post anyways.

That's classic scumminess... just agreeing with the town, attempting to lie low on that issue, at least, not actually going 'Hey... that's actually pretty stupid' and picking up on that.

The point is, I did agree partially with the point. I didn't think that "that's actually pretty stupid". I thought, "That's not what I had in mind, but I see where you are coming from".

As for the issue...I certainly don't advocate holding back votes when you think somebody is scummy, but random votes and whatnot have no place in this game, since it could have dire effects on the game since history can be changed.

Someone wrote:
The plan is not useless if we don't revive non-townees. It also prevents other weird goings on like scum leading two or three alternative bandwagons who aren't really scummy, and then killing the main one.

I think we have enough decent players in this game that unscummy bandwagons wouldn't happen. And even if this does take place; scum make a false bandwagon then kill the main one - then we'd have an excellent lead on said scum.

The problem is, without following the plan, innocent votes could hang around, and complicate things for the town...even if there's a false wagon and the main one gets killed, it's just as likely it's a townee with a stray vote than scum, With the plan, we are increasing our margin of error...stray votes will not hurt us as much.

SpeedyKQ wrote:
I'm mostly bothered by his attacking Someone for his stupid comment. My experience is that obviously stupid statements aren't scummy, but those most eager to pounce on them are.

Someone wrote:
Wow. Speedy managed to say what I was trying to say for like 3 humungo-posts in like three lines.

Yeah, scum would joyfully jump on a town slip. But a town player should just as joyfully jump on a scum slip. If you care about winning this game, if you want to win, wouldn't you take advantage of what you saw as a big slip by your opponent in a heartbeat?

Misquoted. I wasn't referring to that part of Speedy's post, but the other part. (Which incedentally, actually was three lines)

Similarly, Someone goes from

I'm looking foward to your response. I don't think you're scum, just town that didn't really think through the posts you made. to
Someone wrote:
I just think SO is more scummy
with very little in between. And furthermore, in post 117 he unvotes me, and I haven't seen him revote me since, so why is his vote on me?

Just lurkishness, I guess. I really was looking foward to your response, and was a bit mad that it wasn't coming . I'd unvote, but you're right, I did unvote you already.

That being said, I'd like to volunteer myself for the 3 part of the 3/6 voting pattern...but I think that either SO or Mr stoofer should be the 6 part.

This bothers me. If you're pro-town, why would you volunteer to be the backup lynchee? How does that help out your side? The 6/3 voting plan only works if we have suspicous people in both slots. This feels more like scum trying to ingratiate themself, because a good guy volunteering to put themself in the 3 slot doesn't help the town.

FOS Someone.

Not necessarily.

A) We want to keep the very important roles off of the 3, so that scum can't go back and "lynch" them by killing N1. I'm mostly talking about townees, but other important roles apply somewhat here as well.

B) I'm not one of the roles detailed in A, so I can comfortably take the 3 spot.

C) The town obviously thinks I'm scummy to a certain degree, so it's not like I just volunteered out of the blue to be there.


Of course, if I've miraculously convinced the town of my innocence, we can put somebody else on the 3 spot...

Again, the deadline is pressing, so I'll

vote:Mr.Stoofer

[Mr Stoofer]

Given the vote count, and the impending deadline, there is not much I can do to save myself now. This will actually be the first time I've ever been lynched and I feel bad that I've let the town down by drawing suspicion on to myself.

FWIW, I'm the back-up doc. That is why I made the point in postpost 44 that there was a back-up doc in Time Travel 1 and that he got lynched when he claimed back-up doc.

Since my role won't be revealed on my death, this won't help the town much. All I can ask is that if anyone else claims back-up doc you look very carefully at the claim.

[mole]

Unvote: Mr Stoofer

Hrm. That is a powerful claim you have there... I'll need to think about this.

[SpeedyKQ]

Stoofer, how much time fuel you got?

[Mr Stoofer]

Why?

[mathcam]

Official Vote Count:

Stoofer (4, Nox, Someone, Quagmire, Fishbulb)
SinisterOverlord (2, Speedy, Stoofer)
Someone (1, SinisterOverlord)

Not Voting: Changling bob, Gaspode, N_lich, mole

Deadline in 48 hours.

Cam

[SpeedyKQ]

Strategic planning. Could give us a hint as to how powerful doctors are in this setup.

[N_lich]

Firstly, I assume that we have at least two killing groups, because if not, all dead people would be confirmed innocent since scum wouldn't kill themselves.

...........

Not necessarily.

A) We want to keep the very important roles off of the 3, so that scum can't go back and "lynch" them by killing N1. I'm mostly talking about townees, but other important roles apply somewhat here as well.

B) I'm not one of the roles detailed in A, so I can comfortably take the 3 spot.

C) The town obviously thinks I'm scummy to a certain degree, so it's not like I just volunteered out of the blue to be there.



Again, the deadline is pressing, so I'll

vote:Mr.Stoofer

1. Good point, but it dosn't make 2 groups a given at all. The fact that multiple killers is a possibility combined with time travel somewhat negates this. Furthermore, there are these things called lynches.

2. Is this a claim or not?