Mini 896 - Jekyll Mafia - Game Over

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: Ectomancer

When shooting people just isn't enough.

[Nachomamma8]

Unvote, Vote: Gerhard Krause

In addition to Ectomancer's reasons, I am voting you because you seem afraid to remain with a bandwagon very long. On top of that, you misrepresented Ectomancer immediately upon his vote for you, specifically in post 19, and you also attempted to halt discussion.

Being afraid of being with a bandwagon for a long time is being afraid of being questioned for your actions. As the bandwagon grows, it grows more likely to turn into a lynch, and then, if the victim is town, the people voting for the lynched fall under suspicion. Now, if a bandwagon is swelling with speed you don't approve of, the pro-town action to take is to unvote, explain why you're unvoting, and question those who voted after you about their actions. What you did is unvote, then random vote again.

You misrepresented Ectomancer by your post 19, which is not something Ecto said or even implied.

It is also scummy that you attempted to halt discussion of a bandwagon by ending it completely instead of questioning Mr. Suave for his vote. If L-3 is "too hot for you", then why didn't you feel the need to ask why it wasn't too hot for Mr. Suave?

vote: nachomamma8 because in regular hyrule, I don't eat octorocks!

Really? 'Cuz I eat Octorocks for breakfast :O

[Nachomamma8]

Must I explain my RVS reasoning?

1) I said it made me look like a weakling, because on policy I think people should stand behind their votes, but I did not based on the strength of the wagon.

2) Yes, early bandwagons get discussion going, but that isn't an excuse to put them all the way to L-3, which I was uncomfortable with. I'm not afraid of having my intentions questioned, because my intent was not to let the badwagon get out of hand.

3) Obviously I did not halt discussion at all.

4) I didn't ask him because we were still in the RVS, and I didn't think it was terribly serious, just serious enough for me to want to move my random vote somewhere else.

1) You're pursuing against your policy by unvoting, then. If you were truly concerned by the strength of the bandwagon, then why didn't you address that more in the unvoting post, and try to dissuade people from pursuing that same bandwagon?

2) If your second point is true, then what was the purpose of the question in the beginning of your post? Was it to minimize my case as much as you could, or did you have an actual reason behind it?

3) And this is only true because Ectomancer and I pursued the case, now isn't it?

4) The RVS ends when someone decides to step up and address it. If everyone had the mindset you displayed in point #4, the RVS wouldn't end until the deadline ended and the scum had a free day to make whatever kills they pleased.

[Nachomamma8]

1) Because I am not bothered by other people pursuing it. Now that I am off, it is no longer at L-3. That was my criteria for unvoting.

2) That's a loaded question. Both of the options you presented involve hidden meanings, however my question did not have such a thing. It was an expression of surprise and frustration at being thoroughly questioned on page 1, although I do applaud you for getting discussion moving. The frustration was born out though because I did not think your train of reasoning would lead anywhere. That his been disproved.

3) That is true the way things turned out, but it is totally implausible that conversation would have simply halted had you not pursued me. There is no strong debate to be threatened this early in the game.

4) On page 1 that is the mindset to be expected. I would be a poor player if I decided to keep that up, and do you really think it would be in any way possible for me to avoid being lynched if I chose to play that way? I do not feel I can be held responsible for not immediately trying to start active discussion on page 1. Personally I enjoy the RVS.

1) Why are you so worried about a bandwagon reaching L-3?

2) Fair enough.

3) However, it would've effectively stopped the bandwagon, something which produces quite a bit of discussion when it gets big enough, and there would be tons more random voting until a semi-serious accusation was made, or another bandwagon formed. Getting the discussion started so early effectively stopped any early attempts to skate through the random discussion and hide for the rest of the day. If you'd like examples of where this has happened, I can produce them.

4) Again, fair enough.


@raider: Why are you trying to extend the RVS when it's obviously already ended? What is your opinion on what's happened so far?

@Ecto: What's your opinion on Gerhard?

@MrSuave: Do you feel putting me at L-3 was a bad move? Why or why not?

@Everyone else: What do you think about what's happened so far? Who do you find yourself agreeing more with, why?

[Nachomamma8]

a little off topic, but since when could you eat octorocks? O_o

Oh, you've never played Cooking Mama: The Legend of Zelda remix?

[Nachomamma8]

1) I don't feel that allowing a bandwagon to reach that point this early in the game can be helpful to the town. Debate becomes one sided if the whole town is on the same side of a baseless issue, and it takes longer for real discussion to arise.

Four people hardly represent the whole town, and I'm sure 5 votes on one person with little to no reasoning is likely to start up some valid accusations and suspicions.

I think this debate has given some clear ideas of both of our play styles and positions this early, but it has allowed other players to go unnoticed, though that is to be expected this early.

If you're afraid about someone going unnoticed, then don't let them. When the discussion starts early, make sure the questions to the less inactive of the group do too.

[Nachomamma8]

I think it is a little premature to decide about someone's general dedication to bandwagons, don't you think? Is the set of one bandwagon (especially one during "RVS") a good representation of all bandwagons? I think not. I think this "additional" justification for the vote is ridiculous.

I said he seems afraid to stay with a bandwagon for very long because of his wording; he unvoted because L-3 was "a little to hot for him", and he mentioned that he viewed his action as a sign of weakness. And if I can't base what kind of player he is based on his actions right now, then how many bandwagons should I wait to pass before making that judgment?

Nachomamma8 - pursuing the course you are, it appears to me that you are most concerned with the behavior and not necessarily whom the vote was cast on (you). Is this true?

Yes. Do you disagree with my view?

Why not? There is no official ending for the RVS so I thought it would be fun to change my vote a few times. Besides, if the RVS has officially ended wouldnt all the votes casted during the RVS be removed?

Trying to extend the RVS isn't helpful to the town at all. And no, they wouldn't. The mod doesn't remove all votes when he thinks the RVS has ended, generally.

I thought what was going on was stupid but I wasnt about to say something as it was sparking conversation which is always good. I saw the third vote as a null tell as well as the unvote.

Why did you think it was stupid?

I think you may have misunderstood me. In general, conversation is good. However the conversation that was being had I thought was stupid so I did the wise thing and stayed out of it. Over time it may have evolved into something note worthy however as the basis of it was nothing I did not see that happening.

The problem of all of this is that you didn't just stay out of it. You posted a completely useless post that seemed like nothing more than an attempt to extend the RVS, nothing more. If you thought the conversation was stupid but beneficial because it kept the town talking, then why did you try to divert from it by randomly switching your vote, or why didn't you point out how the conversation was stupid and cast a less-random vote?

When you say "let everyone else participate" who was that exactly cause I dont think that was happening. I just happen to be the one that voiced something about it.

You just happen to be the only person that voiced something about it because you were asked directly about it. Before you were asked, you ignored the conversation completely and posted a completely random vote. You realize this, right?

Vote: raider8169

This vote's putting him at L-4, just in case you aren't counting votes

5cvm, Kikuchiyo, HackerHuck, and Phantom... where are you guys?

[Nachomamma8]

What I don't get about what you just posted was that you seemed to be going on about Gerhard Krause. And if you're saying that you can't read a player, then why are you directing attention to someone else? You're blaming raider for trying to divert attention away from the conversation, which is exactly what you are trying to do now. Do you now feel that Gerhard Krause made a justifiable move by unvoting? If not, why are you trying to put attention on raider?

You're getting all excited about nothing. Of course I'm going to switch my suspects early in the game because we are BARELY on page three. The chance of me catching a scum on page 1 is LOW. So, when something interesting comes up, I'm going to question it. And why am I trying to "divert attention"? By not tunneling and paying attention to someone else?

Yes, I feel he made a justifiable move. But I also felt it was worth questioning. And I'm NOT trying to "put attention on raider", as you keep insisting. I'm questioning actions that seem scummy to me. Do you honestly expect me to let scummy behavior pass because I already have a suspect that I'm questioning?

LIAR! You said it was because of his actions, not wording. Those two are very different.

Are you reading the whole game? In the beginning, the action is what I was originally speaking of. Then, when someone asked me how I could justify future behavior about bandwagons, I answered it was because of the wording.

Kikuchiyo: Random questions annoy me, so... no.

[Nachomamma8]

I don't really see what all the fuss is regarding random votes, nor do I really see it as a phase that "ends".

What do you mean by the second part of that?

[Nachomamma8]

5cvm...

ITS NACHOMAMMA8!!!!!

I TOLD YOU THAT AT LEAST 12 TIMES IN PREGAME NIGHTTALK CHAT, SO SPELL MY NAME RIGHT FOR ONCE!!!!

[Nachomamma8]

Whoops, my bad. Meant to post that somewhere else.

[Nachomamma8]

quote]
Nacho asking irrelevant questions and Raider perpetuating. Good vote targets.
[/quote]
Please explain the relevance of kikuchiyo's questions, and I'll explain the relevance of mine.

I am voting Nacho for his decision to not answer my questions. You have claimed "role information" which leads you to believe Nacho is 80-90% scum. Raider has voted Nacho based on the "false dilemma" that one of you two must be scum.

You asked a bunch of useless questions, including my favorite color. You can figure out who I've played with by everyone else's responses, and you will get through the night without knowing what role I'm comfortable in playing in.

That being said, I'm surprised that people even thought I was serious. And I also think that kiikuchiyo's comment + xvart's reaction to it was a bit immature; after all, this is still a game, and you don't have to call people assholes in order to play it properly. 5cvm is spamming. So I spammed back.

That is what I am thinking. If 5cum got something saying Nacho is scum as town he would say something as scum he would be lying. So if Nacho is scum then 5cum would be confirmed town, right? If Nacho is town then only scum would risk something like that, right? As long as I am not missing something it seems pretty straight forward.

...

...

...this is the most confusing post I think I've read in my life...

[Nachomamma8]

Well, I don't mind you cooling down the pressure on you, but I expect you to do it by progressing the game, not by taking a safer sidepath.

My question to HackerHuck was going to be followed up other questions based on his response. Because if he doesn't think that the RVS actually ends, then he certainly wouldn't mind people who tried to extend the RVS: after all, why is it scummy to extend something that never stops?

Any thoughts in that direction?

Far too often people get lynched because they have an annoying playstyle, even though these playstyles are great for gathering reactions off people. However, these are also NOT the kind of people you want around when LyLo approached- they make obvious targets and a townie that might be a little annoyed by his playstyle could let bias cloud their judgment. So, we need to take this into mind as we progress through the days.

I happen to like Kiku.

And you don't like anyone else? Why can't we

ALL

be friends?

[Nachomamma8]

man, the situation hasn't changed for Mr.notmymama... but I may I ask for a vote count? if mama is at L-1 then I'd like to know. I don't want the day to be only 4 pages, you know?

If you're unsure if I'm at L-1 or not and worried I'll be hammered, then why didn't you unvote to be safe, or just count out the votes yourself?

So now I've just spent the last five minutes typing up something that has no real relevance to this game and will just take up space. That's why I don't want people to talk about the random voting phase.

Then let's forget about this and go to a game-relevant question: What's your opinion of 5cvm?

[Nachomamma8]

Still waiting for Mr. Suave to explain himself before I change votes...

[Nachomamma8]

· Nacho, why did you respond the way you did in post 64? I can understand a knee-jerk sarcastic response to such an accusation, but what I don't understand is why this was the totality of your vocalized explanation as to 5cvm's claim. It's... far from helpful, to put it lightly.

It was 12:30 AM for me, and I didn't really feel like responding semi-seriously to that comment.

I do not see how it is flawed unless 5cvm is just being an ass to everyone in this game. If he does have that information and if he was a townie it would be the right thing to do and push for a lynched based on what he knows. If he is lying then scum would be the only type to do that so either way we found scum and I do not see how that is a bad thing.

It is possible I do not see how it is flawed outside of knowing 5cvm playstyle. Can someone explain that one to me?

When someone claims the knowledge that someone else is scum, common sense needs to come into play. What's the chances that the mod gave a town member information on who is scum and no restrictions whatsoever as to stating that person is scum, and what's the chance that scum would seriously pull a stunt like that? And honestly, if scum is stupid enough to do the latter in the first place, then I'm confident in the town's ability to catch them.

[Nachomamma8]

Oh, right.

120 was a pretty useless post, xvart. Got some sage advice to share with us?

[Nachomamma8]

A) Raider embraced a "false dilemma". That is not a huge fail. It is fact.

I have yet to understand why and no one has bothered to try to explain it. It may be a mute point but I would still like to know.

You missed the "He's not being serious/he's lying factor" in your post.

Unvote, Vote: Mr Suave

Just because we're discussing 5cvm at the moment doesn't mean you get to lurk, Suave.

[Nachomamma8]

Ah, that would do it, though to lie like that would normally mean he is scum. In this case I am seeing just him being an ass. So my wanting him to be lynched seems to be more of his play style then him being scum, at least at the moment.

Which is not a lynch I want to occur on Day 1. It's exactly the kind of lynch scum want to occur; a lynch they can push for without a real case against a person; which is the simple reason why I feel we shouldn't be lynching him right now. If he begins to cause harm to the town or gives us considerable reason to believe he's scum, then we lynch him; however, I don't think that he's done either of these things.

[Nachomamma8]

Not a good reason to be voting for either MrSuave or for 5cvm.

That's not the main reason I'm voting MrSuave, though. I'm mainly voting him for the scumtell he dropped in the beginning (which I questioned in post 100), as well as for his 109, which wasn't really a good enough excuse for me.

[Nachomamma8]

but for that "scumtell", I don't think you can really say that. you've never played with me before.

I know a scumtell when I see one, despite whose name is to the left of it.

also, why are you trying to set up a lynch for tomorrow?

Where was I trying to set up a lynch for tomorrow...?

[Nachomamma8]

Awww... Sorry to hear that, Ecto. I was looking forward to playing another game with you... . Hope you feel better though!

That being said, let's get some more votes on Mr. Suave.

[Nachomamma8]

Can we get a prod on like... Everyone?

[Nachomamma8]

If 5cvm flips mafia I'm glad to deal with the heat tomorrow.

Ehh... what? Nonono, see, if 5cvm flips mafia, that's a good thing

@5cvm: Well, you're at L-1 now. Care to claim?

[Nachomamma8]

Is the scumtell you are talking about the not knowing the votecount or misrepresenting the votecount?

See: Ecto's case.

Exactly my point. Not sure how you are intepreting what I said to mean anything else.

Then I think you mean "If 5cvm flips town" because otherwise you would be expecting to get heat from successful mafia member.

[Nachomamma8]

EBWOP: Then I think you mean "If 5cvm flips town" because otherwise you would be expecting to get criticized for getting a mafia member lynched.

[Nachomamma8]

so, I was mass prodded. and from my experience, policy lynches are never good. I've been told that many times, from many different people, and in several games. so I am against such shinanigans.

Who are your suspects? Why?

What do you think of 5cvm?

[Nachomamma8]

Unvote, Vote: Gerhard Krause

Every time you post, I get a worse feeling about you. You are bouncing from wagon to wagon, leaving your old one as soon as it starts to let off steam. You're not posting consistently, and I haven't been satisfied with any of the scumhunting you've done alone.

[Nachomamma8]

I'm looking at Kiku's posts, and I can't imagine that reasoning coming

from town

, but it makes perfect sense

as scum

.

Kiku, how do you feel about how Gerhard worded that?

[Nachomamma8]

@Nachomamma8 - Your vote on me is

completely baseless

. You have less reason to vote me than I did on either of the people I voted for. You said I've been leaving bandwagons, I left one when I saw something better.

There is

no

reason for you to be voting me,

especially not based on the reasons you presented

.

Baseless? Nah. I just find it a little too convinient that you voted 5cvm when he was the bandwagon being discussed, then you switched to Suave when he was the bandwagon being discussed, and now you switch to Kikuchiyo now that's she's being discussed. And as for the bolded... That's a little extreme, don't you think so?

[Nachomamma8]

You don't have your facts right. I never voted 5cvm once during this thread. I said I could be convinced to switch over, but I was still happy with my Mr.Suave vote.

Unvote

Then I'm sorry. I was mistaken.

[Nachomamma8]

Thank you. Your lack of inclination to check facts has been noted.

Be sure to note the time as well.

[Nachomamma8]

When you voted me? It was 9:27.

When I explained my vote? It was 1:00 AM. Pointless bickering doesn't really get us far... >.>

[Nachomamma8]

Gerhard, you're confusing the hell outta me.

This isn't really pointless actually. You're digging yourself into a hole here. First you vote me based on false assertions. Then you retract that vote based on false excuses. Then you dismiss the argument as pointless, when, though not hugely important, it is at least relevant.

False assertions... okay, I messed up and thought you voted 5cvm. We've covered this. False excuses is where you lose me. What false excuses?? And I really don't see how this discussion is doing anything but distracting the town because of a misunderstanding. Thus, pointless.

Now what you have just shown is a scum slip if I ever saw one. You posted a vote, but only later did you come up with reasons to explain it. You're basing your excuse off of when you explained your vote, not when you placed it.

>.>
No. I posted a vote, I explained it.
The "excuse" was in response to "your inclination not to check facts is noted". As in, I didn't double check my facts when i further explained my vote. I didn't. It was 1 am.

You could pass off the time issue as forgetting who you were voting for, or why you were voting them, but when you placed the vote, you knew what your reasons were. If the time was the issue, you wouldn't have retracted your vote, you would have explained the real reasons behind it, as you were clearly lucid when you made it.

You completely lost me.

[Nachomamma8]

@Nacho - I'm sorry I lost you. The whole case boils down to the fact that you did not have reasons for your vote until after you placed it. The only way that is possible, since you didn't have any other reasons, is that you fabricated those reasons after you placed the vote itself.

Town have no reason to do this, since they are actually trying to find scum, ergo you are scum.

I DID have reasons for my vote. I STATED said reasons for my vote. In the next post, I CLARIFIED said reasons. You criticized me for not checking the reasons in my vote. I pointed out that it was 1:00 AM when I CLARIFIED (not made, CLARIFIED) my vote. Then, you go on some tangent where I dropped an obvious scumtell.

@Kiku: Had GK voted 5cvm, I would be a lot more suspicious of him. It would mean he had hopped on every bandwagon presented to him thus far. If 5cvm ends up flipping scum, however, GK will be my top suspect.

[Nachomamma8]

Happy new years everyone!

I would be willing to switch votes from 5cvm to MrSuave based on this post alone.

So you noticed Suave avoiding/picking up a prod by wishing every one a Happy New Years too?

[Nachomamma8]

I just re-read the votecount, and saw that Suave had 1 vote on him.

Vote: MrSuave

@Nacho - There is no way you are going to convince me that's what happened, but I'm willing to drop it

for now

since there are two people I'd rather lynch than you.

That was a conversation that was a bit frustrating for me. So, if you make a case on me again and it's based entirely on that "scumtell", I'm not responding. I told you what happened, you don't believe me. That's something that I can't change, so... yeah.

[Nachomamma8]

Do you have anything to say to it?

[Nachomamma8]

Mod: How's the search for a Unity replacement going?

[Nachomamma8]

Mod: How's the search for a Unity replacement going?

This is an odd post.

First, he just requested to be replaced yesterday.
Second, you either have a replacement or you don't. I seriously doubt the mod would say that he has one, but forgot to tell us.
And finally, why are you so concerned about a replacement now?

Because a MrSuave wagon was forming and I wanted to get a replacement to comment before a premature hammer...

Why was that post such a big deal?

[Nachomamma8]

Deadline's in 3 days, guys. Don't forget that fact. Waiting for replacements to check in.

[Nachomamma8]

Please let us have a deadline extension...

One that is preferably a week or more?

[Nachomamma8]

Well, I know who was lagging on this page

Mr Suave is a lynch I don't really like right now. It's more of a gut read than anything, but I can tell you that if Suave is town, it's the easiest mislynch they've ever gotten. We still have 6 days until the deadline, and I still REALLY want to hear from 5cvm's replacement before lynching Suave.

[Nachomamma8]

Complaining =/= contributing.

But you're complaining as we speak.

[Nachomamma8]

No. I'm not. I was done discussing. I was done contributing. I hammered. Slaxx and Raider are complaining. Where have you been?

Aren't you complaining about their lack of contribution?

[Nachomamma8]

@Raider:
When you posted your ISO 15, had you read all of the game?

[Nachomamma8]

I noticed that Nacho basically disappeared at the end of the day, especially for someone pretty active in the early going. Something to keep in mind.

The end of the day was just general, low activity, I think. There really wasn't a whole lot I really wanted/needed to say.

I'm not sure about the Raider case, but I'm going to look over peanut's/GC's cases and ISO Raider, and come back with an actual opinion on this.

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: Raider

I believed his vig claim pretty much completely at first. That is, until I saw post 424. And 427. And 433...

[Nachomamma8]

Yes, I realize that was the hammer vote. No, I don't regret it.

Peanut, in 443 you mention the odds were that raider was town. And yet, you were entirely convinced before that post that raider had a high probability of being scum. If you had so much doubt about pushing raider to a lynch, then why did you seem so convinced he was scum? Also, did you think it was a badly timed hammer?

[Nachomamma8]

GK, why did you investigate who you did?

And Slaxx, xvart's been replaced already; Pulindar is his replacement.

Not really much for me to comment on until peanut gets back...

[Nachomamma8]

While I'm waiting on peanutman...

GK, if you got a guilty on Maccavitylock, what would you do the following day?

I don't see why people are convinced that there's a SK lurking about rather than someone has a "paranoid townie" trait or that maybe there was a backup vig?

Personally, it's because SKs are simply more common. Never played with a Paranoid Gun Owner, and never played with a backup vig. I definitely have played with quite a few SKs, though.

@Slaxx: Your predecessor also was replaced for the same reason. Do you think Slaxx was lurking or giving up?

[Nachomamma8]

Regarding the 2 Night kills, the fact that there was only one on the first night really makes me doubt that there's a SK.

Why? It is possible that the SK wasn't compulsive, and decided not to kill the first night; in fact, there's a damn good chance of it.

You are definitely playing with words on this question to make me look bad. I never said that Raider had a "high probability" of being scum. Sure, he was my main suspect, but my comment at 443 was that, regardless of who's lynched, the odds are that the town is wrong.

Alright, you had raider as suspect #1. Thus, you thought there was a good chance of him being scum, no? And as for your "odds are the town is wrong" deal, that's always a granted. But you vote to lynch, and I'm pretty sure this town isn't stupid enough to bring someone up to L-1 when they don't want to lynch him. Who would've been a better lynch at that point, in your opinion?

For you to say that I spoke of the probability of raider being scum earlier on is misleading.

Twilight Day 1 certainly gave ME that impression.

I still don't like how you were inactive for a little while before popping in with a hammer vote, in effect, not having to contribute much more to the day because you ended it.

I was fairly active in the beginning of the day. I didn't think that the day was going anywhere particularly interesting. Raider vigged Hucker, someone who was pretty protown at the time. So I hammered. Why waste time on what would've been meaningless discussion when the town's mind, as well as my own, was made up?

[Nachomamma8]

It's like the perfect SK role claim.

Forgive me if I don't believe you, especially after speculation that there was a PGO in this game started up. First of all, what's your name? What's your flavor? Why didn't you tell us in the beginning of the day if you only wanted to "save PRs"? What made you claim now? As of post 476, was I your only suspect? If so, you do realize that would mean raider was your only suspect before, and you suspected me for dropping a hammer on your first and only suspect, correct?

[Nachomamma8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jekyll_(TV_series)

Vote: Peanutman

Mrs. Utterson = Another version of Hyde, which is definitely not pro-Klein & Utterson. Sounds to me like peanut just changed the last part of his flavor, and left the rest the same...

[Nachomamma8]

Just a thought that might help convince some of you as well. What are the odds that, if I were SK, I would pick scum, a scum rolecop nonetheless. Wouldn't it see more likely that wolframnhart tried to investigate my role and died doing so?

Here's a load of WIFOM. If you were SK, you have no idea who's scum and who's town. I think you just got lucky with him being a rolecop.

As for Nacho, did you even read my post completely because most of your questions are answered there?

Obviously not. My eyes jumped to "Paranoid Gun Owner", and I thought "oh, hell no".

It seems like you might be a flustered scum who doesn't like having an unkillable* confirmed townie around.

Confirmed? Not even close. And if I had a killing role, I wouldn't mind taking you down with me.

As for why I didn't claim at the start of the day, it's because I didn't know how to play the role, and wanted to hear a bit more about it to see if my intuition of claiming for the town's benefit was worthy of it.

As soon as I get a role I don't know how to play, I google/Wiki it. What made you wait until the night?

The fact that I caught a scum last night is definitely a bonus, but I don't want to risk losing a town PR in the following nights.

So you didn't care about losing a town PR this night?

[Nachomamma8]

@Nacho, really? I'm Mrs. UTTERSON, owner of Klein & UTTERSON. I own the institute that has been breached. As per the original post, the survival of this institute, of MY institute, is at stake. Even though I am also Jackman's mother, and therefore a hybrid, my alignment is still very much with the institute. You really look like you're scrambling to derail this and save yourself right now.

Well, lesse... At the end of the sixth episode, apparently, you turned into a Hyde yourself. And you yourself stated you kill people because you "get angry"; thus, turn into a Hyde. Obviously, you can't control yourself when you kill, so how farfetched is it that you simply turn into a Hyde and go SK?

[Nachomamma8]

Well, I think that it's pretty obvious that peanut is the SK. The question is, should we kill him now?

We have 7 people alive. If we lynch him and he is a PGO (unlikely), then we'll have 5 people alive after the NK, with a maximum of 2 mafia members left, so... possible LyLo. If we lynch him and he is an SK, 5 people alive, 2 mafia members max, and still pssible LyLo.

If we don't lynch him, and lynch a townie, and he kills a townie out of spite, we will have 4 people alive; 2 mafia members, a townie, and an SK. The mafia will know he isn't a PGO, and so they will collectively no lynch, kill him during the night, and endgame the other townie in the morning.
If we don't lynch him, instead lynching a mafia member, and he still kills a townie out of spite, we'll have 4 people alive again, A mafia member, two townies, and him. A townie offers to kill himself, and put the scum into a prisoner's dilemna.
If we don't lynch him and he doesn't kill and we lynch a townie, we'll have 5 people alive: 2 townies, 2 mafia members, and him. All three will try to find mafia members (since lynching town would be a loss for every person non mafia), if they succeed, we'll have 3 alive: maybe one of each, maybe just townies, maybe him and two townies... either way, town still has a decent chance of winning.
If we don't lynch him and he doesn't kill and we lynch maf, we'll have 5 people alive: 3 townies, mafia, and him. We try to lynch the mafia that round, if we succeed, we have 2 townies and him, if we fail, we have one of each, which is the prisoner's dilemna again.

tl;dr (that was mostly for me): the only way he'll win is if he doesn't kill. So, let's kill mafia instead of the SK. If there's somethin wrong with that, point it out, please.

[Nachomamma8]

Nacho, based on your outcome from your numbers game, why didn't you unvote Peanut?

I wanted to make sure I did everything right first.

Also, I think there's a major flaw with your numbers game. In the scenario that Peanut is SK and doesn't kill tonight, there's no guarantee that he wouldn't kill the subsequent night. I tried to do the numbers game myself, as I am wont to do, and at the point of examining night 4 occurrences, it spiraled out to way too complicated to come to any major conclusion.

For the most part, I take note of that. In scenarios #1 and #2, it simply doesn't matter if he kills the second night or not.

In scenario #3, if he kills the second night and kills a townie, mafia wins. If he kills a mafia, and mafia kills a townie, he wins. If they both kill each other, we win.

In scenario #4, if he does kill, then it'll be 3 townies and him. If he doesn't, it'll be 2 townies and him. Either way, the game is pretty much wrapped up at that point.

you didn't mention the possibility that I am a townie.

If you ARE a townie, then we can't lose any of the prisoner's dilemna situations, and PGOs can't be endgamed by one mafia, so you would get us a draw in the worst case scenario. And in all of my scenarios, we end up lynching you last. So if you are a townie, you will still win; in fact, you'll make it far easier for us.

Honestly, if you think this through, why would I, as SK, make any kind of claim when I was in a relatively safe position without any real threat on me. I could have coasted along as SK, not mention anything until I was pressured.

Erm, WIFOM again.

Do you have any suspicions/ a scumlist?

Hmm... right now, I feel the lynch should be you or Macavitylock or GK. Pulindar is a town read for the moment because of his being the first person to bring up the fact that we should lynch SK before scum. Peanutman is SK, and I'm definitely a fan of Green Crayon's posting so far.

You are a suspect because I feel you go after lurkers too much, who I feel are simply easy targets. Well, lurkers and major bandwagons. I'd like you to see you make cases on people who are posting a little more, or add up reasons on Xvart that doesn't include lurking.

Macavitylock is a suspect by process of elimination. Nothing he's done has been particularly pro-town, so just a null read. I'll probably do a reread of him in ISO later.

GK just jumped in my suspect list because of his latest post. He responded almost immediately after someone mentioned he wasn't around, and his last post is just... lazy.

GK, I asked you the question for 2 reasons: to see if your sanity was guaranteed, and to see if you had thought of the possibilities of being insane, naive, etc...

Unvote, Vote: Gerhard Krause

I like this vote.

[Nachomamma8]

Nacho, why is it wrong for me to suspect someone who directly drops a hammer after being absent for a little while?

It was the hammer on your top suspect, and a suspect you felt strongly about. Also, you haven't really presented WHY the hammer was wrong, you've only said that it was wrong.

Lynching SK won't doom the town this night and leaving him alive takes what control we, the town, have over the situation.

Sure, it won't doom the town, but it'll put us in a considerably worse situation. We'll most likely be thrown into a 5 person LyLo, and need 2 consecutive correct lynches to win. Let's not forget that we also don't have too great of ideas on who exactly the two remaining mafiosos are, either.

I would rather definitely extinguish a whole kill group (SK) rather than cripple one and leave two anti-town groups alive.

Normally, I would agree with you. However, in extinguishing one group, we're crippling ourselves. SKs are anti-everyone; all they care about is surviving. So as long as keeping town members alive is in his best interest, then he will keep town members alive. And there IS the possibility that he is the PGO, which is still a force that could absolutely screw the mafia in the end when the game is most definitely theirs (endgaming him= draw), which means that it's in our best interest to keep him alive for today.

He could just be fake claiming the kill, and something random could have happened.

That's unlikely. Far too likely to be countered, and not enough gain for the risk.

Also, I forgot to mention, that I don't like that Nacho used the same exact logic for peanut being a serial killer over being a PGO that Wolf used for Raider being mafia over being a night vig.

Explain? I don't see the similarities...

Who wants to make the peanut-SK case?

Green Crayons needs to. He's 100% sure peanut is the SK, and he wants him dead today.

[Nachomamma8]

Unvote, Vote: Green Crayons

Call it a hunch. But if his analysis later tonight isn't a damn good one, I know who I want to lynch.

[Nachomamma8]

I also like how you both thought about SK.

When someone dies, and no one really suspected that person, my natural go-to reaction is SK.

In your point against me, you're failing to realize that I am against peanut's lynch; not only am I against it, but I'm also offerring good alternatives for people to lynch instead. Wolf used that point to get his suspect lynched. I'm using that reason more, combined with worst case scenario thinking to make sure that the town doesn't do something incredibly stupid.

[Nachomamma8]

Just earlier when I asked of his suspicions he said he had been a big fan of GC's posting, then he votes him because of his "gut".

Just earlier was before my vacation, and before that time, Green Crayon hadn't been trying to get peanut lynched, nor had he been breaking any promises, nor had he been "electronically transcribing his notes". Right now, I feel like he's making excuses to escape giving his position on something, and I really don't like it, considering how close to deadline we are.

Also I believe he said something about 2 mafiosos. I'm not good at balance, because I haven't played too many games, but assuming a certain number of maf left seems off to me, especially with the SK/PGO variable still incorporated into the gameplay mechanics.

Well, that's assuming a maximum of 3 mafia in the beginning. I'm assuming there aren't any more than that, because that means a mislynch, a PGO/SK kill, a vig, + a mafia NK would equal loss for town, which seems a tiny bit unbalanced to me.

[Nachomamma8]

If we don't lynch peanut and he is SK, there is a reasonable chance that we end up in a town-auto-lose situation.

Post 490. The only way that the town ends up in an auto-lose situation is if Peanut shoots himself in the foot.

Unvote, MaccavityLock

I like Green Crayon's case on him so far. I don't like his responses. And since I don't really want to lynch an un cc'd cop just yet, that leaves my suspects between GC, Slaxx, Pulindar, and MaccavityLock. Slaxx and Pulindar are in some weird fight that I'll pick apart tomorrow, my only problem with GC was his sudden disappearance, so that leaves us with MaccavityLock. I'm vote hopping around a little bit, but we do only have 3 days left...

[Nachomamma8]

My last word on SKs (for now): A vig is town aligned and has incentive to do what the town needs, which includes not killing when the additional kill is bad for the town. A SK does what will help the SK win, nothing more. A SK is a ton more dangerous than a vig.

And now is one of these times. The only chance peanut has if he's the SK is if he cooperates with the town tonight. So, we have nothing to fear in leaving him alive today.

[Nachomamma8]

Ever heard of NK immunity? It's a pretty common SK perk. In my opinion, there are just too many variables to consider leaving a SK alive. The whole debate is moot anyway, peanut isn't getting lynched today.

If he has NK immunity, he kills a scum today, we have 2 town members left, 1 mafia member left, and him. Town gangs up on him with mafia, mafia wins. If there is only 1 mafia member left, then there will be 3 town left who will auto kill him, and then go to normal lylo. He remains screwed.

[Nachomamma8]

What incentive does town have to do this, giving maf the win?

None. But the maf wouldn't have screwed us over so throughly...

Now, what don't you like about my answers to GC?

In post 536, you asked a shitload of questions, but you didn't defend yourself as much as I would've liked you to.

And there is the whole SK opinion you have... you seem absolutely convinced that peanut being SK would screw over the town, but you are comfortable with leaving peanut alive.

[Nachomamma8]

Why are they bad reasons? If you think so, why didn't you point them out at the time?

Well, there's this. Instead of explaining why your reasons weren't baseless, you just ask why they're bad.

Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:45 pm Post subject: 548

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

Nachomamma8 wrote:
MaccavityLock wrote:

Now, what don't you like about my answers to GC?


In post 536, you asked a shitload of questions, but you didn't defend yourself as much as I would've liked you to.
What exactly in GC's 534 did I not defend that I should have? I can't answer for Phantom, so let's skip over all that. Nor can I answer for Ecto/wnh's actions. And I responded to every one of his points against me. What do you even mean by "defend" here?

Nachomamma8 wrote:
And there is the whole SK opinion you have... you seem absolutely convinced that peanut being SK would screw over the town, but you are comfortable with leaving peanut alive.
Because I think that peanut's play is far more consistent with being PGO than with being SK.

Now, let's back up a minute here. No matter if I'm town or maf, I can't know whether peanut is SK or PGO. The only way is which my response to peanut could be anything but null/my true opinion is if I'm a SK, and thus know that peanut probably isn't one too. If I am SK, all of GC's connection points against me go out the window. So, either you believe GC's case against me, or you think that my play around peanut is scummy, but it can't be both.

You misunderstand me. The SK scenario is far more likely to screw over the town, than it is the mafia. You're worried about SK completely screwing over the town, and you point out how it could be an autoloss... But you ignore how peanut reacts after the initial accusation, and simply insist that Peanut's play just seems protown to you, and you're willing to let him live simply because of that.

[Nachomamma8]

What's the problem here?

There is a strong possibility that he is the SK, and you believe that him being an SK could screw over the town. Yet, you are still confident in putting your vote somewhere else.

[Nachomamma8]

Because I don't agree with you that there's a strong possibility that he's SK.

But there's still a chance. And you're basing what you feel could be the game on "he's been playing like a PGO all game".

[Nachomamma8]

@Nacho, it does feel like you're taking advantage of the situation with your votes, but it could be due to the close deadline.

Honestly? I have no idea who the mafia right now is. And my gut's telling me that with the way that Green Crayons and MaccavityLock are fighting, that one of them is scum. The only bad inkling I got from GC was his recent disappearence of activity, and I don't like MaccavityLock's whole opinion on the SK issue, but I'd rather talk about that tomorrow than today. And since ML is calling my case on him crap, I suppose I might as well post something real...

[Nachomamma8]

Nacho, if we lynch peanut and there are 2 maf remaining, we will likely be in LYLO.

This. If you have 2 townies, 2 mafias, and 1 SK, that is not LyLo. If the town no lynches, SK can hit a mafia member and the mafia member can hit the SK, and that leaves 2 town - 1 mafia LyLo. If the town lynches a mafia and the SK kills the other Mafia and the mafia NKs a the SK OR a townie, the game continues, etc.

376 was my first post of the game, and I had been working on it over the night as I replaced in. The fact that wnh "called me out" has nothing to do with why I posted it. If you see a connection there, that's your read, and you have every right to make that case. But I know that there's no connection, because I'm town.

This isn't actually a response, or a defense. The point is, in 376 and 377, you had a weak back and forth that neither of you bothered following up on. You're "I know there's no connection because I'm town" isn't even a valid defense; anyone can say they're town, but that doesn't give us any reason to believe it.

He's specifically asking people to end the day, when you had suggested that you wanted to put some analysis in. I read that as him being afraid of what your analysis might show.

There's this suspicion you have on Gerhard because he wanted to end the game early. You fail to acknowledge that his cop claim kinda explains that.

You're calling me out for the use of the word "obvious"?

Hypocrisy is a great way to find scum. I'm pretty sure it was you who made the case that Gerhard was scum because he knew MrSuave was town based on his wording...

The whole "No Result" thing is also quite stupid. You tried to get yourself cleared by saying that No Result = innocent, and even you have to admit that's one hell of a stretch.

[Nachomamma8]

And that's all I did.

...and that's the problem. You never followed up with any interaction with wnh at all. Also, you're defending against connections by saying "I can't explain his posts", although it was you who brought up the suggestion in the first place...

Ending the day early doesn't mean that his investigation (if he has one) will be any more effective.

He's a cop. He has a night action. He has a theory on who is scum. He wants the day to end early to see if his theory is right.

How does using the word "obvious" make me scum?

Pointing out hypocrisy is not strawmanning... And it's not the fact that you're using the word obvious, it's the fact that you're calling Green Crayons's argument stupid when you youself used the same argument against GK earlier.

No matter if it's a stretch or not, it costs nothing and possibly gains the entire town a cleared townie. This is beneficial to the entire town. How does trying to clear myself make me scum?

Well, if those were truly your noble purposes, you would've asked the mod. Scum want to look as townie as possible. So it makes more sense for scum to try to ask GK, "hey, have you ever thought that No Result = Innocent" than it does for town to.

More people need to vote Nacho now.

Heh, I don't mind if I get lynched today. After all, if I get lynched and flip town, guess what scum will get lynched tomorrow?

[Nachomamma8]

Go back and look at who interacted with wnh. It's approximately no one. The fact that you're singling me out is crap.

Lesse... Wolf attacked kikuchiyo, he followed up on those attacks. Wolf attacked HackerHuck, he followed up on those attacks. Wolf attacked you... nope, no follow up.

This is dumb.

Beautiful response. Why is it dumb, though?

Not at all the same argument. What about using the word "obvious" in the manner that I did makes me scummy?

You: "GK, your wording was scummy."
GC: "ML, your wording was scummy."
You: "That's a crap argumment, GC..."

If you'd like me to explain past the basics, I gladly will.

Why would I ask the mod, when I don't even know if Gerhard is a cop or not? It's not my job to figure that out, it's Gerhard's. Also, why shouldn't a townie want to look as townie as possible?

Umm... you could just ask the mod "Hey, if a cop investigates someone, does 'No Result' = Innocent?". And if it was Gerhard's job to figure out his investigation results, then why did you bring it up in the first place?

Townies shouldn't worry about looking town; they should focus on scumhunting.

Nacho, ML, GK = what are your opinions on Slaxx?

I don't like when he attacks for inactivity, at all. He also doesn't post a whole lot, and he hasn't been scumhunting based on scummy things; only based on inactivity. He's talked more about peanut than he has about his top reads lately, and I don't like that either. All in all, probably our second scum after Maccavity.

[Nachomamma8]

But I can't defend it, and if you expect me to, you're expecting the impossible.

You can explain why you didn't follow up, for a start.

I already told you why. There was no reason Gerhard had to rush to make his investigation. Waiting costs him nothing.

It costs him nothing but patience, which might be something he doesn't have a whole lot of. And impatience alone is not a scumtell.

The wording I used tells you what exactly?

By saying you wanted to make sure that he wasn't missing the obvious, you were using it as an anaphor to "No Result = Innocent", which is a bit of a stretch no matter which way you look at it.

Again, not my job. Why would I ask the mod that? Usually in these situations, a mod won't answer questions about other potential roles in the game, only your own role.

Not always. In asking the mod, you could actually clear yourself as opposed to just confusing GK.

Focus on scumhunting, sure. But townies shouldn't worry about looking town? That's important to preventing mislynches. It may not be at the top, but it's a priority.

No, not at all. You prevent mislynches by defending yourself the best you can, and trying to find who the true scum is. And if you are lynched, all of your scumhunting is made valid, and people know that none of it were lies. So, they can take a closer look at it and use it to help them find the real scum.

[Nachomamma8]

In my mind, there are are a few reasons why ML is scum.

First of all, his position on peanut. In my mind, there is a pretty large chance that peanut is the SK. However, we could have as many as two scum left, so our priority should definitely be focusing on the mafia because at the moment, they are a far greater threat than Peanut the SK is, and lynching him today will only be wasting time. Macavity is convinced that an SK could completely screw over the town, yet is convinced the peanut is a pro-town PGO. This is scummy because he hasn't pursued the issue at all with peanut; instead, he's been begging for someone to make the case on peanut being SK so he can hop on the wagon himself without giving a whole lot of reasoning for it. His quote on 536: "peanut, I don't think you are, but if you are SK, good job. It doesn't look like you'll be getting lynched today." read to me that he was just giving up on the peanut lynch. I guess that I'm also biased because I can see how lynching peanut today benefits the mafia, but I can't really see how it benefits the town.

Secondly, I don't like how he's been trying to clear himself since he's been under fire. First, there was the whole "No Result = Innocent" situation, then there was the false dilemma in 578: "Either you believe GC's case on me, or you think that my play around peanut was scummy.".

He's also been playing extremely defensively, and he never really pressures anyone, not even me. He just points out that my arguments are inherrantly wrong and scummy, and that everyone should vote me. Also, the jist of his case on me is that my case is crap. Responses to the rest of it is below:

One point he tried to make is that I shouldn't have found Gerhard's excitement to end the day early scummy. When it came down to it, Nacho's argument boils down to the fact that I shouldn't have been scumhunting.

Actually, it boils down to the fact that you were misrepresenting Gerhard. I pointed out since he does have a night action, then he was most likely just waiting for night to come so he could investigate who he thought was scum. There's also the point that Gerhard didn't actually END the day, he just expressed impatience at the day's length. And if he was really so afraid of Green Crayons's analysis (Intermission: Now that I think about it, "Oh GC, he was obviously afraid of your analysis" is more like buddying than actual scumhunting...), then do you really think that he forgot that we could all talk during twilight?

Another point is that I shouldn't have questioned Gerhard about "No Result = Innocent". This was at best a pro-town action, and at worst a null with self-interest action. He is trying to make a show of the fact that it was scummy, when it wasn't. This is a scum tactic.

Erm, when the motive is simply self-preservation, I can't agree with you that it's a nulltell.

He strawman-ed with the "wording" argument. Strawmanning is a scum tactic.

How did I misrepresent your position at all? Your attack of GK was based on his wording (i.e. anti-town instead of scum), which suggested that he knew Suave was town, and thus was scum.
GC's attack on you for using "obvious" was based on wording (missing the obvious instead of missing a possibility), which suggests that you're using bad logic to keep yourself alive. Surely you see that similarities...

[Nachomamma8]

But you're not scum

[Nachomamma8]

Erm, you really haven't... Who's scum, Slaxx?

[Nachomamma8]

The most immediate speculation in this possible scenario that comes to me is a lynch immunity ability. This would waste a town's lynch for a single day and give scum another free town kill.

He could also be Vengeful Mafia or a mafia-aligned supersaint...

[Nachomamma8]

False dilemma, Crayons >.>

[Nachomamma8]

I'm slowly coming around to the notion that one of you is scum.

Why? Hasn't the way you view MacavityLock been changed based on his reactions to my attacks on him?

you both have done some pretty scummy things independent of one another that I believe may be indicative of anti-town alignment.

Hmm... I'm pretty sure you had a town read on me before I began attacking MacavityLock.

Furthermore and separate from the above, I'm also warming to the notion that if GK flips scum one of you two most definitely is scum (also assuming there is no "trigger" ability in his lynch that would overrule his claim that his lynch would mask the attention of his scummate).

Alright, so what makes you believe that GK is trying to save his partner, as opposed to him just getting bored of the game and claiming? Does this mean you believe Slaxx is town?

If one flips town that does not have any bearing on if the other is town or scum (therefore: my suspicions of that other player being scum are still valid).

This is inconsistent with the rest of your posting. You said before that you're coming around to believing that one of us have to be scum, so if one of us flips town, wouldn't that make you more likely to believe that the other is scum?

[Nachomamma8]

@Nacho - Why haven't you voted me?

You're too hot.

[Nachomamma8]

"Independent from one another" means I find that you two have done scummy things that are not dependent upon the other being scummy.

Oooh, I see. I thought you meant we were scummy for reasons independent of one another (i.e., not based on our interactions).

Psst, my question about Slaxx still stands.

To correctly answer your questions: No. Any change in my perception of Macavity is due to his responses to my accusations.

Then you need to look closer at our interactions.

[Nachomamma8]

I've seen Vengeful Scum in a mini

normal

, and I've seen jesters in Mini Themes.

And why would you stay on the me-wagon, rather than get on the Gerhard wagon? We could take care of one self-professed scum first, THEN deal with the problems you have with me when we're in a decidedly better position...

[Nachomamma8]

decidedly should be definitely >.>

[Nachomamma8]

Erm, it was a theme and not a normal, but you get the idea

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=23

when you haven't voted Gerhard

Well, that's because I'm up to the block as one of the people to hammer him, silly.

[Nachomamma8]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12533 >.<

I assume I am too then. Why are you calling me out for not being on the wagon when you and I are basically in the exact same position regarding Gerhard?

Well, Gerhard doesn't have a voice because he's scum, and peanut doesn't have a voice because he's SK. Slaxx hasn't showed up in forever,

prod request for Slaxx before I forget

, GC doesn't care as long as it's you or me, I want Slaxx to hammer, and Pulindar wants me to hammer; I'm assuming you do too. Thus, I'm the person fated to hammer... right?

[Nachomamma8]

Did I miss this, or is this the first time you've said it?

Don't worry; it's definitely the first time I've said it. Whenever I don't have the slightest idea who's scum, I pick someone psuedo-randomly and just start attacking... Reaction hunting is an effective technique, and it usually helps if your attacks seem serious. I was looking mainly at your, GC's, GK's, and Slaxx's reactions because I'm already convinced that Pulindar's town and that peanut's the SK... Not a really big fan of the fact that Slaxx refused to comment on anything's that's happened so far, and I looked back at a few 5cvm - Ectomancer connections, and I still think that his lurker-attacks in the beginning of the game are scummy. I'm pretty sure that you're town because you attacked me for my shitty attacks as opposed to attacking Green Crayons, and plus I've liked your responses to both myself and GC. GC is my scum choice if GK/Slaxx isn't scum, but I don't see that happening...

Why choose to have Slaxx hammer when you're still voting me?

My vote's really nowhere in particular right now. There aren't enough active, stupid people to hammer you right now, so no worries there. Like I said, I'm waiting for people to pile votes on Gerhard so I can hammer.

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: Gerhard

Don't worry Budja; he won't break the rules because he's dead!

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: Slaxx

[Nachomamma8]

Slaxx:

Ectomancer completely ignored 5cvm during the whole fiasco until 5cvm began talking to him, which definitely sent some red flags up.

Slaxx continues the trend by not commenting on Me v ML v GC, and he is the only player not to comment on GK's scum claim. He's active lurking, posting just enough to stay in the game.

His attack on xvart/Pulindar was "he's scum because he's lurking", and he's become the biggest lurker here. I don't like that at all.

I figure that GK was reaction-hunting. Unfortunately, my premature hammer stopped that. I figured he was just being an ass, and I really didn't want to play his game too much longer...

[Nachomamma8]

Either Slaxx or I are scum, or there is only one mafioso left, or scum can't daytalk and thus they aren't quick enough to organize.

And if I was closer to being lynched and this is just one massive bus, then why would I bus Slaxx as opposed to it being the other way around? It would be much easier for Slaxx to bus me and get me killed.

Also, why would I commit to that when I'm absolutely convinced that peanut is the SK? That would leave the scumteam in a horrible position when we could just push for someone else's lynch.

As for massclaims, I'm up for popcorn claiming, me first.

[Nachomamma8]

Nacho, in our game with zorb you did not vote right away, how sure are you that slaxx is scum, and why are you so sure?

I'm sure because of how Slaxx magically missed commenting on EVERYTHING that's happened this entire game. Ecto/5cvm interactions definitely helped a lot. In addition, I have a good gut feeling, and I bank a lot on those in times like these. There's also the all-powerful process of elimination.

Peanut has a very small chance of being mafia.
You're not mafia.
MacavityLock is an unsure point, but I'm about 80% sure he's town.
Guess who that leaves?

On another note, Nacho who is Slaxx's partner?

I'm not sure he even has a partner, but if he does, it's MacavityLock.

[Nachomamma8]

Explanations as to why are always beneficial.

[Nachomamma8]

Scum wins.

But peanut, let me point out your mistake. Scum is going to kill you tonight, and you might be able to take out one of them. However, one townie v.s. one scum = endgames. Now, as for why Slaxx is scum... For one, do you honestly believe there are two investigative roles? Secondly, he investigated GK the first night

and cleared him

. And yet, he still said that GK's cop claim was "uncertain".

ML was scum I was unsure about because of GK's claim, but I was go for his lynch tomorrow...

[Nachomamma8]

Yeah, but you could've mentioned that Gerhard DID target Kiku Day 1...

[Nachomamma8]

The "roleblocker" was thought to be kiku, if you read the game at all.

And what did the SK have to do with it?

[Nachomamma8]

So what made you doubt it?

...and I already explained why there wouldn't be two kills. Did you disagree with this?

[Nachomamma8]

Good game, scum.

[Nachomamma8]

Great setup, Budja

I'm still sour that I got crushed by a fakeclaim...

[Nachomamma8]

I'm guessing GC=GK?

Thanks

Also, I'm pre-inning for Rapture Mafia.

Your on the list