Newbie 848 - The Bunny Mafia Family - over finally!

[Nachomamma8]

My other two suspects will probably take a good long while to figure out, and I've got things to do. I'll try to get it done later this evening as I don't want to make you wait too long for it, and if I might not be able to do it until Sunday if I don't get around to it today.

Can you provide good cases on them with original content?

Thanks in advance

[Incognito]

Vote Count #5 of Day 3

Haylen (1) <-~ Netopalis
No lynch (1) <-~ Haylen

Not voting (4) <-~ Bwian, Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon, Nachomamma8

With 6 alive, 4 votes will do it.

Monday, December 7th at 4 P.M. EST.

[Jase]

Haylen: I'm skeptical that it was a pressure vote. He only had one other vote on him at the time (me), and your reasoning of "Hmmm..." isn't going to frighten a decent player.

HAYLEN ANALYSIS

D1 was full of fluff. With an unexplained vote for nacho, and the infamous unvote before deadline.

D2 Accuses michel of trying to lead the town. WIFOM in iso 12 (Why wouldn't I have lynched nacho if I was scum?). Iso 14 "Do you really trust the mod?". Posts an analysis in iso 17 but of the three suspects she pulls from it only sposh is well reasoned. Iso 26 apparently is where she realized that she shouldn't have unvoted D1, and apparently she needed the wiki to know that, difficult to believe for an experienced player. Her case against VRK seems to be held together by bits of chicken wire and string. Iso 32 dismissive attitude.

D3 Lurking as a defence mechanism, the rest is yet to be seen.

Not very impressive. VRK covered your day 1 analysis in a post of his own:

So then should I have just pointed to that with a big "What he said"?

Haylen, who ought to know better, has dropped votes with no reason (188), continued her predecessor's lurking, and managed to unvote 24 hours before deadline to prevent a quicklynch. Seriously? You're trying to prevent a quicklynch after 20 RL days and 11 pages? What kind of crap is this?

We know your next point, again, from VRK:

No I'm not attacking you. Your attack against Michel, as I stated in this post, was predicated on the fact that you attacked Michel for "using his IC status" to lead the town around. That's not attacking you. That's pointing out the fact that your only points against Michel (see post 364) was that you thought he was trying to lead the town around and that he was forcing others to suspect you, neither of which can be found to be true.

As for your next point, you're taking Iso 14 out of context. She was referring to a quote by our mod about her meta. I took it as a joke, why didn't you?

Iso 17: If you find that action scummy, then why are you doing it yourself? If you don't find it scummy, then why post it?

What action are you referring to?

Iso 26: Why are you holding experienced players to a higher standard?

Because they are better?

She unvoted me because she had a strong feeling she was town, something she herself stated.

She also unvoted you at an wildly inappropriate time to do so, and then did not attempt to push through the other lynch.

Why do you bring the point up without responding to her initial defense? Also, don't attack someone based on their cases when your own is held together with some Walmart glue >.< Say, would you care to outline my case against haylen, and hers against VRK?

Even if I thought my case was weak, why would I not point out somebody elses weak case? You don't need to answer that, the only answer is if I was scum and didn't want anyone to notice. It's just like Haylen calling out VRK for calling her out for lurking saying he had also been lurking, it's just bullshit.

D3: You didn't even have to say this. That was NOT an analysis of her day 3 play. You failed to comment on her position on no-lynching, or anything of the sort.

Did you think her avid support for a no lynch was significant? Huh...

Overall, I'm greatly disappointed by your analysis. Try harder, Jase.

Sorry, I didn't realize you had your hopes up.

If you want I could do an exhaustive analysis of her play, but you said you weren't that interested in it so I just did a simple list of a bunch of things she did that where scummy. I get the impression that you don't find haylen suspicious. Do you not think she's a good candidate for a lynch?

[Jase]

My other two suspects will probably take a good long while to figure out, and I've got things to do. I'll try to get it done later this evening as I don't want to make you wait too long for it, and if I might not be able to do it until Sunday if I don't get around to it today.

Can you provide good cases on them with original content?

Thanks in advance

I had wanted to provide a good case with original content, but I think now I won't just to spite you and your smug little smiley.

On a serious note, I have to get up early to drive out to Michigan to see relatives for thanksgiving. So I probably won't be able to finish sorting out my last two suspects before I have to go to bed, and I'll not be able to be online for long periods until sunday.

[Nachomamma8]

So then should I have just pointed to that with a big "What he said"?

Or provided something original.

What action are you referring to?

Making a valid case about a single person.

Because they are better?

Is that truly what you believe?

Did you think her avid support for a no lynch was significant? Huh...

Don't you? It's practically the only thing she's done today...

I get the impression that you don't find haylen suspicious. Do you not think she's a good candidate for a lynch?

Nope, not really. I have a town read on Haylen.

I had wanted to provide a good case with original content, but I think now I won't just to spite you and your smug little smiley.

But the smug smiley will still be there when Incognito says "Jase, Mafia Goon, has been lynched."

[Haylen]

Nachomamma8

He loves nachos but is not your mamma

Post 2 - Explains why asking questions in the RVS gives scum the upper hand. I agree with this, I've seen it done before:

@Miteymouse - Did you speak to your scum buddy/ies pregame? Yes or no?
@Nachomamma8 (better ask this now or I'll be wandering all game)- Do you, if fact, like Nachos?
@Sarag - What would you say is the most affective way to catch scum?
@Koursethrough - Do you think scum are more likely to claim townie or power role?
@Naga - What do you think of emotional appeals in townies? Does it make them look more town or more scummy?
@Civil Scum - Is there such thing as a true WIFOM? I've read somewhere that there rarely is.
@Someonesetupthebomb - Are OMGUS votes scummy in the random vote stage?
@Konowa - Do you believe it is acceptable to vote somebody just because the deadline is approaching

As you can see, each of these questions (barring one or two random ones) relates directly to how people in the game perceive scum. By asking these questions at the beginning of the game, Alex was able to use the answers given as information later in the game. He knew what players personally found scummy and was able to play on that throughout the game to win it.

Which is why I agree with Nachomamma that RVS hinders the scum more than the RVS and that he was right to vote Michel for it.

Post 16 - Says that he has no obligation to answer posts that arent directed to him. If it keeps discussion going then it is your obligations to weigh in wherever you can. Otherwise we can't get a read of your opinions ect. Anti-town.

Post 17 - Makes it clear that he wants to stay under the radar. This isn't protown, if people have town reads on us then we wont fall under suspicion, therefore his argument for why he doesn't want people to get a read on him is void. It's anti-town to not want town to have a read on you.

When under suspicion, he defends himself aswell as scumhunts. Pro-town.
The rest of his posts have a town feel, and I would not be willing to lynch him tomorrow.

Conclusion - Gut says town, logic says a little bit anti-town.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

TheBeanBurrito / Netopolis

TheBeanBurrito

Contributes all of nothing...tells us to lynch him if it helps us along...wth?
Says he wasn't going to random vote, then votes TheStarOfTheShow. Again, huh?

Netopolis

- Most of his early posts are about useless fluff, saying that he can't post because he has nothing to say. If you have nothing to say, then ask questions so there is things to say. It creates discussion and is good for the town.

- In his suspicions, he seems to go with the players everyone else finds scummy. Basically. he is following like a sheep with is bad for the town. And is also scummy, because it allows him to just agree with others and not come up with anything original = coasting.

Post 13 - Asks why someone suspects Michel when everyone else has him cleared. This again indicates that he is just following the crowd. If you see someone do something scummy and if you have suspicions about them, write them down and make them known so a proper discussion can be made.

Post 51 - Says he is extremely convinced of my guilt and then votes me, after saying that if we mislynch we lose. This is inconsistant and is thus scummy.

Conclusion = Scummy, I could easily see a VRK and Neto scumteam.[/area]

WHOOT! Second installment in Haylen's analysis. Now only Jase to go...i've been avoiding it due to the fact he's had so many posts...

[Haylen]

OMG IM GONNA CRY, I FORGOT THE AREA TAGS

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Why why WHY are we not no lynching?

6 players
4 townies, 2 scum.
Mislynch today and we go to night with 3 townies and 2 scum.
Scum kill during the night and it's 2 townie and 2 scum.
That means we lose.
If we want a better chance of winning, we NEED to no lynch today.

The fact that VRK is an experienced player and should know this, but is pushing for a lynch does not escape me.

So you're calling yourself town and are saying that if we lynch you, we lose. Nice Appeal to Emotion here. I don't believe for a second that you are town, considering all of your previous actions.

I understand HOW a LyLo/MyLo works. That's not the problem here. I'm pretty sure you're scum. To me, lynching you today or No Lynching and lynching you tomorrow gets us the same results.

I'm actually tending to think that lynching your scummy hide and getting you out of the game may actually help us focus on others tomorrow, since we won't have to worry about having you around to muddy the waters. And we still get a MyLo tomorrow when you flip scum. Giving us even more information sans your nonsense to muddy the waters.

My whole counter point to the No Lynch argument is that, since most people seem to think that there are no clear-cut Townies in this game, how is a No Lynch going to give us more information tomorrow? We're still going to have the same scummy people in the game, so what is getting rid of one more going to do for us?

If as a group we want to No Lynch, I'm game. I just don't see how it's going to help given the current state of the game and the players in it.

I also would like to know how he can be so convinced about my alignment when he can't know my role. It is ridiculous to for a person to suggest that they are 100% certain a person is scum, a person can only have confirmed guilt or innocence in a newbie game if they are dead; didnt hammer in 3 player lylo or there is a cop result on them. An IC SHOULD know that.

I like how you're trying to make every statement I've ever made a 100% black and white clear cut situation. This is crap. I've already stated that I don't know your role. No one can without a cop claiming or you dying. But I've seen enough bull$h!t from you that I'm willing to vote for you today. I don't see how you can't possibly be scum the way you're acting.

And whoever brought up the cop softclaim, I'm not. I AM NOT the cop. If I was I would have investigated Haylen and gotten a guilty result, in which case we wouldn't be having this discussion about No Lynching in the first place.

And I LOVE the way you're trying to take control of the Town and tell everyone what to do. YOU should know better than to lead the Town, which is something you yourself accused Michel of trying to do. Screaming about "we are not going to lynch today" isn't going to help.

Your point against me that you've made your case against me is so horrible it's not even funny. I refuted every one of your points against me, and all you were able to come up with was emotinal appeals and bad logic and dismissive behavior as counter points. So you don't have a case against me - at all. Not a one. I have to go over the nonsense you've brought against Bronco, but if it's anything like what you brought against me I'm not too worried about it.

I am not going to be able to post again until I get back from Thanksgiving vacation. Sunday or Monday, probably Monday.

[Haylen]

That entire post was scummy.

So you're calling yourself town and are saying that if we lynch you, we lose. Nice Appeal to Emotion here.

Misrepresentation. No where in that quote did I call myself town. You're just creating scumtells in an effort to get me mislynched now.

how is a No Lynch going to give us more information tomorrow? We're still going to have the same scummy people in the game, so what is getting rid of one more going to do for us?

So what you're saying is that you want a lynch today? You state that you know how a lylo/mylo situation works yet you condone a lynch, admitting that you are not the cop and therefore dont have any information regarding any other players allignment. If it didn't go against the optimal town play, I would suggest lynching your ass right now.

And we still get a MyLo tomorrow when you flip scum. Giving us even more information sans your nonsense to muddy the waters.

You sound 100% sure that I am going to flip scum. Why is this? Nobody can be sure of anothers alignment until their flip. This is just another example of you using crap logic to create a mislynch.

My nonsense? We'll see how much nonsense it is when people start realising that I may be telling the truth.

And I don't think you considered it nonsense a few pages ago when I was pushing for your lynch. You pushed back quite hard then, it seemed like I got you worried. I think you need to re-evaluate your definition of nonsense.

If

as a group we want to No Lynch, I'm game

. I just don't see how it's going to help given the current state of the game and the players in it.

Following the crowd. Think for yourself.
It's going to help by giving us an extra day to sort out the scum from the town. And prevent any possible mislynches that may occur if we lynch today. Mislynch = Lose. Suggesting lynching = Scummy.

If I was I would have investigated Haylen and gotten a guilty result

I think the above quote can be completely disregarded since you dont know what result you would have gotten if you'd investigated me. You should know better than to even say something as ridiculous as that in a mafia game.

This is crap. I've already stated that I don't know your role.

Then how do you know what result you'll get if you investigate me? This is an inconsistancy. Backtracking. In the same post.

But I've seen enough bull$h!t from you that I'm willing to vote for you today.

You're telling me that I should know better than to lead the town? Why are you trying to lead the town to do something that could potentially harm them? The difference is that I am leading the town towards the only ending of the day that should possibly be considered.

And also, did you accuse me of using reverse AtoA? Isn't that exactly what you're doing here?

Well guess what,I find it hard to believe that a town IC would even want to lynch today. That's is one of the main reasons I find you scummy.

Screaming about "we are not going to lynch today" isn't going to help.

We aren't going to lynch today. I wont allow it. I'll do everything in my power to prevent it. I can't BELIEVE you're even suggesting I'm doing a bad thing by leading the town to a no lynch in mylo. That's just ridiculous. You've taken the whole thing out of context. If I was leading the town on anything else, yeah that would be bad. But it's also scummy that you're delibrately taking the whole situation out of context.

So you don't have a case against me - at all. Not a one. I have to go over the nonsense you've brought against Bronco, but if it's anything like what you brought against me I'm not too worried about it.

I love that you're trying to ruin my confidence in the game. Sorry. Aint gonna happy. Haylen's back and she wants to catch scum.

I refuted every one of your points against me, and all you were able to come up with was emotinal appeals and bad logic and dismissive behavior as counter points.

Where's the emotional appeal?
Where's the bad logic? (That by the way is entirely subjective.)
And where is the dismissive behavious?

I don't believe for a second that you are town, considering all of your previous actions.

My previous actions include a mistake I've already admitted to. And lurking, which is a null tell. Go for it, what other examples of scummy play do you have from me? And I want quotes, and an explanation as to why they are scummy. With diagrams if necessary.

[Haylen]

TL;DR: VRK's post was scummy.

[Incognito]

Netopalis has been prodded.

[Haylen]

Jase

Post 4 - Mentions suspicions of Michel, yet does not explain why he is suspicious. Looks like he is trying to add to the game without actually adding to the game.

That isn't true. Bronco made a case against Sable, you could add to it or give your opinion on it. He hasn't made any attempt to move the game forward after his first post.

And you did? That's hypocritical, you only said someone was suspicious before the post above, and FoS's someone for an OMGUS...in the RVS.

Post 8 - Unvoted because the game was getting serious. Were your accusations towards Michel not serious then?

Post 9 - Says Nacho is one of his top suspects when he did not previously state any suspicion of him. He then didn't explain why he finds him suspicious. It appears as though he just latched onto two random people in the game to accuse of being scummy. This, btw, is scummy because it shows he isn't atually thinking about the content about posts, just who he wants to lynch.

Post 16 - His post looks as though he was just voting for the sake of voting, because he vote wasn't on another player. Shows he wants a lynch. Scummy.

Explains why he's voting in next post. This is why people should write why they're voting for someone in the same post as they vote. Otherwise, it looks like you've just thought on your feet, and made your case after voting which is scummy.

Post 20 -

3.Ok, so, my version of events here, you ask me why three votes are too much at this point in the game, then you wait roughly a day, and I haven't posted yet, so you vote me, claiming that I'm not answering questions.

I actually think he was fair to suggest you weren't answering his question. We are expected to post at least once every 24 hrs.

I'm mostly just irritated. At least from my point of view it seems a little silly that he's still clinging to this.

Probably because he believes in it? It's like you're annoyed that people aren't going to believe you and just want to stay out of the spotlight. That isn't protown play. As town, we're meant to answer all questions without getting annoyed about being in the spotlight.

Post 24 -

Also why would you be suspicious of me for answering a question in grater detail than my previous reasoning?

Because it looks like you've just made stuff up to try and help support it. It's scummy because it looks like you're lying.

I don't believe that you didn't know TBB had votes on him already, a townie knows who is voting for who so they don't accidentally mislynch.

Post 25

1. Fair enough. Though I still say it was too early, though if you thought that I was here because I was online I can see how you'd be suspicious.

Lies. The site logs you off if you've been inactive for more than 30 minutes. I've had it happen to me before, and so have other players.

Post 49 - Again, does not give a proper case for voting.

He says that 5 people could have voted on Day One but didn't bother to, he then changes his mind as says that Bronco can't be as much to blame as me because he was already voting. This is another inconsistancy.

Post 65 - Confirms his vote on Splosh without giving a reason again. Did he actually ever make a case against him?

Post 78 - Reverse AtoA. I wish people would stop that.

He's hypocritical again, in post 79, when he condemns Neto for voting me using the reasoning of others, when he previously has done the same thing.

Post 81 - Disagrees with a no lynch. In mylo. *twitch* It's scummy. We don't lynch in mylo.

Post 91 - Bad analysis. Bad bad analysis. It's IIOA.

I notice that at no point in his posts does Jase accuse Bronco or VRK of anything, despite them doing a lot of things that people have found scummy. Indicates that he does not want to be connected to him.

I could easily see him as scum.

[Haylen]

And now I analyze the voting patterns.

Vote Count 1, Day 1,
Nachomamma8 - Sposh
Sposh - Tehstefan
Tehstefan - sxizzor
MichelSableheart Nachomamma8
TheBeanBurrito -

Jase

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito

, StarOfTheShow,

broncofaninmd

, MichelSableheart

Vote Count 2, Day 1
Sposh - Tehstefan, MichelSableheart
Tehstefan - sxizzor, Sposh
MichelSableheart - Nachomamma8
TheBeanBurrito - StarOfTheShow
StarOfTheShow -

TheBeanBurrito

Not voting -

broncofaninmd, Jase

Vote Count 3, Day 1

Sposh - Tehstefan, MichelSableheart
Tehstefan - Sposh
MichelSableheart - Nachomamma8
TheBeanBurrito - StarOfTheShow

Not voting -

broncofaninmd, Jase, TheBeanBurrito,

sxizzor

Vote count 4, Day 1

Sposh - MichelSableheart
Tehstefan - Sposh
TheBeanBurrito - StarOfTheShow
Jase - Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Nachomamma8 -

Jase

broncofaninmd - Tehstefan

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito,

sxizzor

Vote count 5, Day 1

Sposh - MichelSableheart, Nachomamma8, Tehstefan
TheBeanBurrito - StarOfTheShow
Jase -

broncofaninmd

Nachomamma8 -

Jase

broncofaninmd - Sposh

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito

, sxizzor

Vote count 6, Day 1

Sposh - MichelSableheart, Nachomamma8, Tehstefan
TheBeanBurrito - Haylen
Jase -

broncofaninmd

Nachomamma8 -

Jase

broncofaninmd - Sposh

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito,

foilist13

Vote Count 7, Day 1

Sposh - MichelSableheart, Nachomamma8, Tehstefan
Jase -

broncofaninmd

Nachomamma8 -

Jase

broncofaninmd - Sposh, foilist13

Not voting (2) <-~

TheBeanBurrito,

Haylen

Vote Count 8, Day 1

Sposh - Nachomamma8, Tehstefan
Jase -

broncofaninmd

Nachomamma8 -

Jase,

Haylen
broncofaninmd - Sposh, foilist13
TheBeanBurrito - MichelSableheart

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito

Vote count 9, Day 1

Jase -

broncofaninmd

Nachomamma8 - Haylen, foilist13, Bwian
broncofaninmd - Sposh
TheBeanBurrito - MichelSableheart,

Jase

, Nachomamma8

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito

Vote count 10, Day 1

Nachomamma8 - foilist13, Bwian, Sposh
TheBeanBurrito - MichelSableheart,

Jase

, Nachomamma8

Not voting -

TheBeanBurrito

, Haylen,

broncofaninmd

Note: Bronco only unvotes Jase when it's close to deadline.

Final Day 1 vote count

Nachomamma8 - foilist13, Bwian, Sposh
TheBeanBurrito - MichelSableheart,

Jase

, Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Not voting (2) -

TheBeanBurrito

, Haylen

--------------------------------------------------------

Vote count 1, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart

Not voting - Sposh, Bwian,

TheBeanBurrito

, Haylen,

Jase

, Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Vote count 2, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart, Sposh
TheBeanBurrito -

Jase

Not voting - Bwian,

TheBeanBurrito

, Haylen, Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Vote count 3, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart
Sposh -

Jase

No lynch - Sposh

Not voting - Bwian,

Netopalis

, Haylen, Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Vote count 4, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart
Sposh -

Jase

No lynch - Sposh

Not voting - Bwian,

Netopalis

, Haylen, Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Vote count 5, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart, Bwian
Sposh -

Jase

No lynch - Sposh,

Netopalis

Not voting - Haylen, Nachomamma8,

broncofaninmd

Vote count 6, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart, Bwian
Sposh -

Jase

, Haylen

Not voting - Nachomamma8,

Vel-Rahn Koon, Netopalis,

Sposh

Vote 7, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart,

Netopalis

, Sposh
Sposh -

Jase

, Haylen, Bwian

Not voting - Nachomamma8,

Vel-Rahn Koon

Vote 8, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart,

Netopalis

, Sposh
Sposh -

Jase

, Haylen, Bwian,

Vel-Rahn Koon

Not voting (1) <-~ Nachomamma8

Vote count 9, Day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart,

Netopalis

, Sposh
Sposh -

Jase

, Haylen, Bwian

Not voting (2) <-~ Nachomamma8,

Vel-Rahn Koon

Vote count 10, day 2

Haylen - MichelSableheart,

Netopalis

, Sposh,

Vel-Rahn Koon

Sposh -

Jase

, Haylen, Bwian, Nachomamma8

Final Day 2 Vote count

Haylen -

Netopalis

, Sposh,

Vel-Rahn Koon

Sposh -

Jase

, Haylen, Bwian, Nachomamma8, MichelSableheart

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vote count 1, day 3

Netopalis - Nachomamma8

Not voting - Bwian,

Netopalis

, Haylen,

Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon

Vote count 2, Day 3

Haylen -

Netopalis

Not voting (5) <-~ Bwian, Haylen,

Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon

, Nachomamma8

Vote count 3, Day 3

Haylen -

Netopalis

Not voting (5) <-~ Bwian, Haylen,

Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon

, Nachomamma8

Vote count 4, Day 3

Haylen -

Netopalis

No lynch - Haylen

Not voting - Bwian,

Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon

, Nachomamma8

Vote Count 5, Day 3

Haylen (1) <-~

Netopalis

No lynch (1) <-~ Haylen

Not voting (4) <-~ Bwian,

Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon

, Nachomamma8

Conclusion

Bronco and Jase had a tendance to vote together. Bronco only unvotes Jase close to deadline, possibly to prevent him maybe being lynched. They then vote for the same person. VRK and Jase also vote for the same player a lot. Never have they had their votes on each other. Both voted for different people at the end of Day 2, on both of the bandwagons though. They also have never bought anything up against each other. Bronco made a halfhearted case at the beginning of day one that was easily refused, but this is the only time either of them have been against each other.

Therefore, I must draw the conclusion that Jase and VRK are the most likely scumbuddies here.

[Haylen]

Give me a few days and I'll also write a huge case on why I shouldn't be lynched
HAZZAH!

[Haylen]

By case, I mean rant. And by rant, I mean...ha ha ha. Good luck.

[Netopalis]

Still here, just busy...I'll be able to post tomorrow evening.

[Bwian]

I've got two drafts. One of which included voting. The evening of two nights ago I felt certain enough to write that post, but hesitated upon posting it. Will hold on to it until I've had time to reexamine the game in order to verify or discard the theory.

When it comes to voting it did cross my mind that there were two players who didn't vote the first day. Will be examining those excuses in the light of day three.

Nachomamma8, I'm not sure which question you're asking about. The only unanswered question I found when browsing through the past few days at a glance is the one where you asked if I got what conclusion you were considering regarding your bandwagon of day one. The shorter version of that question is asking my alignment. There was no scum on your bandwagon day one, but you'll have nothing but my word for it.

We don't celebrate thanksgiving in Sweden but we are celebrating the first advent, lighting candles and spending time with those we care for. Might be able to check the thread at some point but wouldn't count on it. Monday evening I'll be occupied with a council meating after which I'll be staying at the girlfriends place.

[Incognito]

bump.

[Netopalis]

Looking back over the stuff posted since I was gone, it's clear that a reread is in order. Expect a fairly significant post by midnight.

[Nachomamma8]

Nachomamma8, I'm not sure which question you're asking about. The only unanswered question I found when browsing through the past few days at a glance is the one where you asked if I got what conclusion you were considering regarding your bandwagon of day one. The shorter version of that question is asking my alignment. There was no scum on your bandwagon day one, but you'll have nothing but my word for it.

I'm mainly referring to my post in response to your inertia case. You never agreed with my position, nor did you shoot it down like I requested.

[Jase]

Well I'm back. I'm putting off addressing all of the things I want to because it's midnight, but I've a few things to before I go to bed at least.

Nacho: You say you have a town read on Haylen. What you don't say is why.

Haylen: "My previous actions include a mistake I've already admitted to." Admitting to a mistake doesn't pardon you for it, but the way you talk suggests that it does. Especially considering that your other option would be to defend that mistake.

[Bwian]

Nachomamma8, I'm not sure which question you're asking about. The only unanswered question I found when browsing through the past few days at a glance is the one where you asked if I got what conclusion you were considering regarding your bandwagon of day one. The shorter version of that question is asking my alignment. There was no scum on your bandwagon day one, but you'll have nothing but my word for it.

I'm mainly referring to my post in response to your inertia case. You never agreed with my position, nor did you shoot it down like I requested.

Regardless if we no lynch today or not we're now so few that all town must agree and vote for a mafia player in order for us to lynch a mafia player. If we don't lynch today we reduce the number of town players that must agree to 3, but at the same time we reduce the number of town players that can vote for the wrong player without the mafia hammering a mislynch. When reducing our numbers we also lose the inerta that saves us from losing the game at a single bad vote.

Based on your logic, we have a better chance of lynching scum on day one than in a 2 town 1 scum scenario. Prove me wrong if you disagree.

The message I'm trying to put through is that we shouldn't treat not lynching as a holy grail. You may note I didn't take stand against it. I just wanted us to pace ourselfs and consider the cons as well. Not lynching today would put us in a

different

situation, for better

and

worse.

There is a certain safety when a townie is allowed to make a bad vote without causing his team losing the game. If a town player is fooled to vote for another town player in a 2 town 1 scum scenario it's over.

You asked me to prove you wrong. I will not. In post 573 I repeated my stance that we should not neglect that there are downsides with not lynching, and gave an example of why using the same scenario as suggested by you.

Yet again I'm not taking a stand against not lynching. I just want to make sure everyone make their decision with all pros

and cons

in consideration.

[Nachomamma8]

You asked me to prove you wrong. I will not. In post 573 I repeated my stance that we should not neglect that there are downsides with not lynching, and gave an example of why using the same scenario as suggested by you.

Yet again I'm not taking a stand against not lynching.

I just want to make sure everyone make their decision with all pros and cons in consideration.

You're creating cons in a situation where they either 1) Are too insignificant to matter or 2) Where they don't exist. If you want people to make a decision with all of the cons in mind, then you might want to begin stating those cons.

Stop fencesitting. Are you for a no-lynch today, or are you against it?

[Nachomamma8]

Missed this before.

Nacho: You say you have a town read on Haylen. What you don't say is why.

You SHOULD have a read on everyone in this game. You also neglect to say why.

[Haylen]

Sorry guys, I've been busy celebrating thanksgiving. I'll post when I return from my exam and lecture.