Royal Family Mafia - Game Over!

[the silent speaker]

Vote: ether.

He's a poison, I bet he's a poisoner.

[the silent speaker]

[quote]

Because first round votes are completely random.

I'm new to this forum, so I have no "oh, I want to get him back for a previous game" excuses. I made a random vote for you earlier, then

saw that the voting bandwagon was heaping up on Ether, and decided to hope on board since

he was the popular vote.

So... not random, then.

Unvote: Ether, vote: Canucklehead.

[the silent speaker]

Fishing? I bolded two comments of Canucklehead that seem directly contradictory, and voted on those grounds.

And LuckayLuck, from what I can tell your defense amounts to "I assume he's town, for no reason other than it provides me with a starting point." Care to explain why I should give that any weight at all?

[the silent speaker]

Luckay, care to explain why you think I'm suspicious?

[the silent speaker]

I thought I explained that. He said it was a random vote and then gave a nonrandom reason why he picked that person -- i.e. that it was not a random vote. The contradiction, not the nonrandomness per se, was what drew my vote.

[the silent speaker]

You have a better conclusion from it? I'm not saying it's the end-all of suspicion, but for day 1 it's surely better than nothing.

[the silent speaker]

There is much in Luckay's recent posts I disagree with -- for one thing, a new player would meseems be more likely to make an inadvertent presentation of WIFOM as sound logic, not less -- but Twito's attempt to shut up the loud player definitely makes me wonder about him.

Looking back, it seems I misunderstood the post of Canucklehead's that I took for talking out of both sides of his mouth. He seems to have meant that his

initial

vote, not the bandwagon hopper, was random. It's still a little disingenuous, given that he recognized that ether was "the popular vote" completely randomly, but sufficiently not-as-bad-as-I-thought to warrant an

unvote: Canucklehead, vote: Twito

.

[the silent speaker]

A sarcasm detector.

There's

a useful invention.

Jack: WTF?

[the silent speaker]

1. LL keeps going on and on about knowing who's townie and who's not. Obviously, as we all know, the odds of lynching scum on the first day are low. So if LL is sooo positive that he(she)'s right, then why not give it a chance? If Jack turns out to be a townie, then

we can finally have a reason to knock off LL.

This really

really

looks like a slip from someone looking for a way to have LL killed. MAJOR ping on my scumdar. Also, "I was using your logic! WHY DO YOU FOS ME?" reads like an ingratiation attempt. Second, smaller ping.

FOS:Canucklehead

.

And Jack, I dispute the assertion that we will learn very much at all from a LLLynch. I, and most people here it seems, have him penciled as a loud but uninformed townie.
P.S. You wuss. I've seen Day Ones that went a month

without

the board crashing.

Mariyta: why vote IH?

[the silent speaker]

On the contrary, whether I'm scum or town I dearly want to understand the arguments against me. I love as scum getting arguments I can refute.

[the silent speaker]

Nooo, I'm disagreeing with Thok. I didn't quote because he's the post directly above mine.

[the silent speaker]

I think LL's playstyle concept is not a bad idea and could even work

judiciously applied.

Like any playstyle, though, it can and sooner or later will be gamed. I think he is overrelying on it and puts too much weight on the one linchpin of Canuckle's townieness. But I do not think he is scum for doing this.

But keep in mind, LL, probabilities multiply. If you are let's say 80% sure that Canuckle is town and 80% sure based on that that Mariyta is town, you are really only 64% sure of Mariyta, and your next 80% step is barely more than a coin toss. (Numbers provided by Ex Recta Rounded Off Numbers Enabling Outrageous Use of Statistics. ERRONEOUS is fat-free, non-profit and pro-puppies, and guarantees the value of every number they sell.)

N.B. Just because I think he is hinging too much on Canuckle being townie doesn't mean that I think Canuckle is scum. I've seen a lot out of Canuckle that

is

scummy, and would not be surprised to see him come up guilty, but there are some subtlish mixed messages that make me wonder. I'm not really wedded to my current Twito vote, but I will need to reread before I can decide where it is best placed.

[the silent speaker]

You consider the question of "who would you lynch, right now, if the decision were yours and yours alone?" a time waster?

[the silent speaker]

Ether -- because I haven't had time yet to go over the whole thread and decide who I really really want to lynch. I guess I could have answered, "If I were king, day would still go on for a bit," but that isn't really the sort of thing he's looking for.

[the silent speaker]

A quick note for LuckayLuck -- just in case your intended "spirited defense" was going to consist of revealing a cop investigation -- don't. A cop is worth far more than one innocent result, especially this early, and unless your role PM specifically says you're sane, you can't assume that you are; so Canucklehead wouldn't be confirmed even if a cop

did

announce an innocent result. (This message is prophylactic. I'm making a point of refusing to speculate on whether this is in fact what you planned to do. If is a big word.)

[the silent speaker]

Jack is right that the lack of counterclaim proves nothing, and even, I'll grant him, that in a game where "Court Jester" was an anti-town role any other role that claims to be "Court X" needs to be looked at with an extra eye; but it's still silly to insist on lynching Canuckle now. This does not mean he gets a free pass forever and ever; it means that if he's scum we can spare him the rope to hang himself. He

is

still a claimed cop, and those tend to make terrible day 1 lynches.

Looking over IH's posts-by, I get a townie vibe from him. This is still out of context and not with a full reread, but I'm tentatively lining myself up on that side.

This paragraph intentionally left blank.

[the silent speaker]

I think IH and the people attacking him on pages 19-20 were both keying on legitimate apparent inconsistencies. But those look to me to be only apparent inconsistencies, dispelled by close readings, across the board, and I don't think any of them are shown to be anti-town by it.

Pooky's question wasn't going to everyone, only the TWMOTW. HH's was going to everyone.

This I disagree with. Pooky's question was going to everyone just as much as Hacker's, just with some flavor attached.

With one candidate it'd be harder to know who to unite against.

... What do you think the town is trying to do Day 1?

[the silent speaker]

Because he's not the only scum in the game. By finding some

other

scum to lynch you give yourself the opportunity to learn you were wrong about the claim being a fraud before it's too late. And you lose nothing by it because you're still lynching scum.

[the silent speaker]

I'd give more reasoning of exactly

why

I thought the claim was fake than a bald "I don't believe you," I'll tell you that right now, Jack.

TEOM, unless you think his "town vibes system" is designed to specifically mislead people into thinking the scum are town, LL's not scummy for following it, and it's no reason to vote for him. Townies aren't required to have bug-free scumdars.

[the silent speaker]

In fact,

Unvote: Twito, vote: TEOM.

[the silent speaker]

Internet hates me; see V/LA.

I agree with the people calling BS on IH, though.

[the silent speaker]

I don't need a prod. I need a reread.

[the silent speaker]

Vote: Jack

because as long as my new posts are adding nothing, I can at least help make a counterweight for the big bandwagon so that no one gets lynched-by-defaut.

[the silent speaker]

And were they both town, both scum, or one and one?

I think as a blind strategy it leaves a great deal to be desired -- all blind stategies do, especially early -- but I see no harm in giving Pooky's opinions extra weight since we know they're pro-town opinions.

Why Nightson and CES?

[the silent speaker]

I don't think the points LL raised are valid as townie tells even discounting WIFOM, because I don't see why scum should be any warier of a townie reaching lynch-1 than a townie (who doesn't know that the lynchee is town, obv). That said, "feel" is a perfectly legitimate reason to choose one person over another -- it's just not one calculated to win over converts with the logic of it.

Probably one of the spy and traitor was someone who knew the mafia but they didn't know him, and the other was someone the mafia knew (or knew existed) and could recruit or somewhat, but who didn't himself know the identities of the mafia. I'm pretty sure I've seen both roles called "traitor", so I think a mod question is in order.

Mod: What was Twito's role?

[the silent speaker]

Unvote, vote: MOS

because of how scummy his last post was.

[the silent speaker]

Having looked over Nightson's posts I found a couple of scummy things:

1. His "Laughs at mafia" post could be a protesting-too-much scumtell. Could, but I would be chary of reading too much into that by itself.
2.

I don't get why we have to deviate from the standard definition of fishing which is fishing for power roles (which is what the mafia want to do)

This post is kind of back-to-front logic. The behavior is what it is; calling it fishing or saying that fishing is something else is just a label.
3. He hasn't posted in close to a month and a half.

I see a couple of places where Jack defended Twito. I realize I'm not totally innocent of that myself, but just throwing it out there.

That said I stand by my current vote for now. LL is clearly town, seems to me (at this moment; and when someone is agitating to lynch the clearly town, I get suspicious of them. Particularly someone who was very supportive of the clearly-town person, to the point of proxying his vote, early on. (One throwaway line about a proxy vote in the beginning of the game could be a joke, I'm aware. But MOS also accused Jack on LL's dime, and continued to accuse Jack the next day, so it isn't just the proxy vote that makes me think he was cozying up to him before.)

[the silent speaker]

That said I stand by my current vote for now. LL is clearly town, seems to me (at this moment); and when someone is agitating to lynch the clearly town, I get suspicious of them. Particularly someone who was very supportive of the clearly-town person, to the point of proxying his vote, early on. (One throwaway line about a proxy vote in the beginning of the game could be a joke, I'm aware. But MOS also accused Jack on LL's dime, and continued to accuse Jack the next day, so it isn't just the proxy vote that makes me think he was cozying up to him before.)

[the silent speaker]

In retrospect I sort of see what MOS is talking about. I continue to disagree with him about LL being scum, but

unvote: MOS. Vote: CES

to put another bandwagon in the sweepstakes, and because he hasn't posted in three weeks.

[the silent speaker]

Luckay, I honestly don't know who I would push against in that case. I don't have a strong read on anyone as scum this game, CES included. I think, though, that if CES were town, that would make Nightson slightly better looking, because Pooky's theory ties them both to Twito and that would be shown to be wrong at least in part.

I agree that those interactions look very like Twito and IH neither knew the other's role

a priori

. I'm leery of assuming that the traitor

or

mafia knew each other -- or, for that matter that they didn't -- because when I asked specifically, the mod specifically refused to answer; but it does cast a favorable light on IH.

Meanwhile, turnabout and fair play and so forth: Luckay, suppose Fritzler were lynched and turned up town; who would your next suspect be and why, and is this a different answer from what would be if Fritzler were lynched and scum?

[the silent speaker]

Any thoughts on the sudden appearance of a second death?

[the silent speaker]

Watch this space. Mod, I know you wanted more than "I'm here" and I'm sorry, but it would take a multi-hour reread to come up with anything worth saying. I will try to make that reread, and I think I'm going to assume without proof that MOS is scum to see if that as a starting point leads to any useful observations, but I haven't been sitting on any huge conspiracy theories this game yet. If someone could give a summary of the claims and claimed results, that'd help too, but I think Canuckle is about the end-all there.

[the silent speaker]

I'd be cool with a Jacklynch now. Well, not now; I think there's a bit more for the rest of us to discuss. Earlier, I regarded Jack's Canucklevote as a poor man's counterclaim. His three-towngoers response to Thok kicks that away.

QFT.
I cannot imagine why, believing Canuckle to be one of the most townish people in the game, you would then go ahead and vote for him.

I don't know why you guys think scum would try and lynch a claimed cop anyway. I'm not saying it's impossible but it doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me.

First of all, WIFOM to a sickening degree. Second, a claimant with no guilties and no new results since his claim is a much easier lynch than a cop confirmed by outing scum. Third, WIFOM. Fourth, what do they have to lose by throwing out the possibility? FIfth, trying to lynch him, if successful, negates doc protection, steers the lynch away from their ow and reduces the number of pro-town players by one. Finally, have I mentioned WIFOM?

You are looking seriously scummy now, Jack. I'd be voting you if you weren't so close to a lynch.

[the silent speaker]

Not out of him so much, Pooky, as out of me. I still haven't had time for that reread.

[the silent speaker]

Brooklyn, and no but I came close.

[the silent speaker]

I think HackerHuck is right, and there are three scum left. Looking over Fritzler's posts I get a scummy vibe, but since I haven't looked over everyone's votes yet I wll only give him a +2 scummy.

Hacker is a nontarget. Pooky is a nontarget. I am a nontarget, at least for me (and a bad target for the rest of you ). Cogito and Ether come off clean to me. Bogre has said little this whole game. That leaves Sarcastro, STD, Thok (and Fritzler). I want to hear the thoughts of those people especially.

[the silent speaker]

This has not been my best game, Sarc, I'll be the first to admit it. But I can at least point to being suspicious of MOS before it was cool.

Also, none of my posts have been terribly peripheral, I think (with the exception of Pooky asking me how law school is going, and he did ask first.) The Canuckle thing was very legit at the time, seeing as he really sounded like he was trying to lay groundwork for a next-day lynch of LL. I wasn't the only person to think that, and I'm pretty sure some confirmed pro-towns are included on that list.

[the silent speaker]

@Pooky: I think he has dropped some SK/vig tells. Once the mafia are gone, then it will be time to worry about him, but clean of being mafia, yes. Voting bloc first.

MOS was not voting Twito at the end, lending support to the conclusion that the mafia knew who he was. Ether did find him suspicious, lending support to the notion that she is pro-town.

Other people and where they stood on Twito and MOS:
3.) Bogre -- not voting Twito at lynch; not voting MOS at lynch; has not posted in a month and a half; never mentioned MOS nor MOS him, that I noticed. His only votes have been Ether and Canuckle.
5.) Cogito Ergo Sum -- voting Twito; not voting MOS; some tells indicating possible killing role.
6.) Ether -- voting Twito; not voting MOS; expresses suspicion of MOS. Had some strange interaction with STD; has been singing the whole game; suspects Thok and Cogito among the living.
7.) Fritzler -- not voting Twito; voting MOS; indicated support for Ether and CES.
9.) HackerHuck -- not voting Twito, but was being voted by MOS at the time; voting MOS at that lynch; has been suspicious of CES.
15.)

Nightson

PBuG

Sarcastro -- not voting Twito; not voting MOS; sarc is too new to have a good read on him yet.
16.) PookyTheMagicalBear -- confirmed innocent.
17.) Save the Dragons -- not voting Twito; voting MOS; defended Twito; suspicious of CES.
20.) the silent speaker -- not voting Twito; not voting MOS; suspected MOS, but did not post at all the day he was lynched. Playing much more poorly than is his wont, honest.
21.) Thok -- voting Twito; voting MOS; suspicious of MOS early on; defended CES; noted the following to Jack: "MOS FOSes you, and CES, STD, and PBug vote you with little comment." A very interesting observation, if true! I think CES is not mafia, but

PBuG

Sarcastro and STD are definite possibilities.

Town lynches:
Arafax suspected mainly Jack. He was lynched by Save the Dragons, (PookyTheMagicalBear,) Fritzler, (TheEyeofMordor) and a late avalanche of CES, Ether, (Jack, Canuckle, IH).
IH suspected STD, and HackerHuck a little. The first half of his bandwagon was (Jack,) CES and Fritzler.
Jack suspected Thok. The first half of his bandwagon was Save The Dragons, Cogito Ergo Sum, PBuG, Fritzler.

I'm thinking Bogre/STD/Sarcastro is a good-looking scum combination, CES a serial killer. Two of them didn't vote for either Twito or MOS; they turn up in the early parts of townie lynches; and they have largely been defensive of scum and suspicious of people I think are non-mafia. Fritz and Hacker are second tier. They have some scummy evidence, like not voting Twito, but they have some non-scummy evidence too. Thok comes off as likely pro-town at this point.

[the silent speaker]

Fritz, I addressed that. MOS wasn't voting Twito, which seems to suggest that he might have known; besides, they didn't know the Court Jester, or they wouldn't have killed him, so it doesn't make sense that the wouldn't know the traitor either. MOS was also arguing the scum wouldn't know the traitor, and he turned up scum, for what that's worth. Presently you're about fourth on my suspicious list, but that post makes me wonder if maybe you should be higher.

Sarcastro, what would you have me go on? Most of the people still in the game have not really expressed opinions on other people still in the game. I summarized most of what little there was. All the opinions are on or from dead people. So yes, I look to the bandwagons, and I look at who finds suspicious the same people I find unsuspicious, and if they are lurkers or replacements then so be it. You three had the largest convergence of small points. You can't deny the points did converge, though; I posted what they were and who did and did not meet them.

[the silent speaker]

Vote: STD

He gets the nod because TSQ and Sarc have first-day-replacement immunity.

[the silent speaker]

Twito = traitor, scum don't know, no matter how you slice it.

That's the scum's catchphrase. MOS was fond of it, and it clashes with the known night death of the Mafia spy, which implies that the scum didn't know him - therefore should indeed have known Twito.

Meanwhile I'm one of maybe two or three people to post their top three candidates for scum today. That is Not Acceptable. I'm proven not to be scum, because if the only person sniffing out scum is scum himself the rest of you deserve to lose.

Sarc:

A lurker, a guy who replaced a lurker who replaced a lurker and who also happens to be voting you, and STD. Well, I have to admit that at least that last one is going out on a bit of a limb ...

You're critical of me for picking on Bogre because he's too easy a target? Funny...

I would also rank Bogre as scummy (though there's not a lot to go on)

[the silent speaker]

I'm still here and following; just that I've said my piece.

[the silent speaker]

Vote: BMQ

Clearly scum.

[the silent speaker]

er...

vote: TSQ

. I knew there was a Q in it, anyway.

[the silent speaker]

We're not giving TS/Ether more scrutiny because our first worry is Sarc/Save/Status. Pretty likely two of them are scum.

[the silent speaker]

One bright young TSS has failed to answer my question of:

Save The Dragons wrote:

How are you so damn sure it was the mafia who killed the Mafia Spy?


when I presented evidence that suggested that other kill sources could have killed the Mafia Spy. I do believe a traitor is a traitor, meaning I don't care if you started a million bandwagons on Twito, at this point I'm in the belief that mafia didn't know.

I should think Fritzler's death made it blisteringly obvious.

[the silent speaker]

Because you were hoping to use the fact of our current aliveness to try and get one of us lynched, obv.

I can go with an STD wagon.

Unvote: TSQ, vote: STD

.

[the silent speaker]

When did I say Ether was scum?

And I haven't been amking vague allusions at all. I've been consistent that two-out-of three of Sarc/Save/Status are scum.

[the silent speaker]

Thok, what are your thoughts on Sarc and STD?

[the silent speaker]

Thok... Oh Thoooook....

[the silent speaker]

I hate to say it, but I agree with Sarcastro. We need to use our lynches to nail scum, not kill people "we have no read on". In TSQ's case I think he

is

very plausible scum, but if we lynch STD we'll have a much better idea on that anyway.

[the silent speaker]

Here's what I see. HH posted an idea he knew was going to be ridiculous. It was crazy, it was dumb, and it's possible that he knew it, but it's also possible that he thought it was helpful. And I'm not going to deny that. This is nothing more than attempting a random vote on page 60. I don't think HH is in the clear, but I think he's telling the truth. I honestly expect a little more from HH than: "We should not waste our lynches, so let's waste this one!"

...
Run that by me again?

[the silent speaker]

Top suspects of:

HackerHuck: tss, TSQ? not stated
Sarcastro: HH, tss, either Thok or not stated
Save The Dragons: not stated, except not HH or Sarc
the silent speaker: STD, Sarc, TSQ
Thestatusquo: HH, Thok, either STD or not stated
Thok: TS, Sarc, not stated; Sarc may be a low second or third
Toaster Strudel: STD, Thok, HH; Thok and HH may switch orders

This is just a data post, and please feel free to correct my impressions. I'd like to see more people stating their top three loud and clear.

[the silent speaker]

Oh look. Tumbleweed.

FOS: every damn body

[the silent speaker]

Okay, before the day ends, can everyone PLEASE list their top three suspects in order so we aren't random lynching tomorrow?

[the silent speaker]

Toaster seems really desperate to claim. "Oh, oops, I let slip accidentally that I have no night choices. OK, you twisted my arm, I actually did have a one-shot vig ability used (and failed) on scum. Wait, why is nobody asking for all the details of my role?"
Nor does the claimed role hold together well, for reasons others have outlined before me. "Why did I claim to have no night actions? Oh, well, I, um, forgot. And Ether, uh, forgot too." I mean come

on

.
A vig ability attempted and failed leaves us with nothing more than your word for its existence at all. Yet Toaster appears to be invoking it as evidence that she can't be scum because she vigged scum before.

Bottom line, this claim convinces me that I have been wrong about ether/TS all along. I now think she is scum.

Supposing that's so, where do the lines of attack lead? TSQ is accusing Toaster hard, and Toaster is returning the favor. Toaster put Hacker at L-1.

HackerHuck: tss, Thok, STD
Sarcastro: HH, tss, either Thok or not stated
Save The Dragons: not stated, except not HH or Sarc
the silent speaker: TS (new), STD, Sarc,

TSQ

(see below)
Thestatusquo: HH, Thok, TS
Thok: TS, Sarc, not stated; Sarc may be a low second or third
Toaster Strudel: "My list isn't a very strong one. Leaning towards STD and Thok, but even with them as my top suspects I am not so sure." Posted

after

putting Hacker at one vote away!

So. I'm town. Toaster is, by hypothesis, scum. Since Hacker wasn't lynched, one of Hacker, Sarc, and TSQ is probably also scum, and TSQ doesn't look like a plausible partner for Toaster at this point. Toaster, the scum, names STD and Thok, and TSQ, the town, names Thok and HH. +1 for STD, -1 for Hacker. I, the town, suspect Sarc and not Hacker so much; -1 for Sarc, +1 for Hacker. Thok names two neutral-or-worse as his best bets, including Toaster, the scum; +1 for Thok, -1 for Sarc. Hacker accuses me, Thok, and STD, all of whom have plus values. -2 for Hacker.

Hacker's post subject 1594 really REALLY rubs me wrong. It looks to be calling attention toward the stepwise claim while appearing to be only criticizing; and simultaneous with the 'criticism' comes a vote of confidence in TS. And TS responds to Hacker

particularly

: [quote=1596]Actually, I wrote that in haste. Very sorry.

I am in more than one game with HH

, more than one game with a royalty theme, and I got confused.[/quote]
-2 to Hacker.

Sarc suspects Hacker strongly, which is a point in his favor, but he also suspects me and Thok, which is a point against, and agrees with Hacker on both of those and Toaster on Thok, which is a further point against.

That leaves STD, whose silence makes him unreadable for this purpose. He has a low plus score, but his two nonsuspects both have negative scores.

My new list:
1.

vote: Toaster Strudel

2. Hacker
3. Sarc

[the silent speaker]

Edit by post: Hacker is now voting Toaster, which is +2 and negates one of the -1 points too. He's still in the red, but much closer to Sarc now and may be cost by STD's silence.

[the silent speaker]

Assuming two scum left, we need to be unanimous to lynch a scum. At least one of Hacker or Sarc should be scum, on account of Hacker not being quicklynched. I suspected Sarc when I thought TS was innocent, and Hacker when I suspected TS was scum; since TS was innocent,

vote: Sarcastro.

If he turns up scum, I would look at STD or TSQ next.

[the silent speaker]

I would wonder why he's placing votes willy nilly at possibly lylo though.

Well, with an even number of players, we're a half-day ahead of lylo; if we lynch wrong we still lose, but one wrong vote can't be piled on. And with STD making noises in my direction, I thought it better to be proactive.

[the silent speaker]

Well, I find a scenario where Sarc is town and TSQ is scum pretty unlikely, so either you're scum or sarc is (or TSQ is but then sarc is anyway). Also that was partly due to my reaching back to an earlier theory without remembering that the reason I had definitively taken TSQ off the list was proven invalid. But sarc is ahead of TSQ on my list anyway.

Under the circumstances I think a quicklynch would have been plausible.

I'm not terribly enthused by the idea of a mass claim, but am willing to go first if such is decided on.

[the silent speaker]

I take it from the silence that you all consider my assertion that sarc is probable scum to be irrefutable. So why aren't you all voting him?

[the silent speaker]

Vanilla. Sarc's up.

[the silent speaker]

TSS + Sarc = scum.

If you believe that, put your money where your mouth is and vote Sarc with me.

[the silent speaker]

Unvote, vote: STD

Mason partner? I see "watchman," not "mason." Also you're my other scum suspect. If sarc is innocent then we have a lying townie, as TSQ has claimed a necessary role. I would have assumed Hacker, but he's voting STD; would scum bus a buddy at this point in the game? I don't know.

[size=large]THIS POST PUTS STD AT LYNCH MINUS ONE.[/SIZE]

[the silent speaker]

Hackerhuck, why don't you read my claim again and see if you're correct. Backup = not correct.

We never actually tried to raise the portcullis cuz we didn't know what it did (and I kinda suck at remembering to send in things),

backup=doesn't have to send in things.

[the silent speaker]

We have no claimed docs or blockers. A nightkill would have won the game for any allied scum. Might we not have allied scum remaining? Even so why would a solo scum not kill?

[the silent speaker]

If the lack of killing is the result of a power role, it has to come from TSQ, as no other power role has a claimed mechanic that could stop a night kill

I thought of that, but then surely the obvious thing would be to kill TSQ... even if they didn't work things out that far, they would have shied away from killing Sarc (one way or another) and probably kept the townies alive to keep us from figuring out which of them is scum, which leaves only TSQ anyway. So if TSQ is town, why isn't he dead, and if TSQ is scum, why aren't two other people dead -- since scum-TSQ knows that there are no roles to stop him?

[the silent speaker]

At the moment I favor a HarckerHuck lynch slightly. But, as I said before, basically I got nothin'.

[the silent speaker]

Why probably me?

[the silent speaker]

And yewt, you did speak for him.

Thok?

[the silent speaker]

Altogether there are four possibilities.
1. We can trust the flavor -- there are two scum left -- and we can trust the power roles -- both claimed power roles are honest.
2. We can trust the flavor, but not the power roles.
3. We can't trust the flavor -- there is only one scum left -- but we can trust the power roles.
4. We can trust neither the flavor nor the power roles: there's one scum left, and he didn't claim townie.

If (1), then from my point of view the scum can only be Thok and Hacker. If Sarc and TSQ agree on either of them, and the townies all split their votes among each other, we're guaranteed to hit scum. But there are some very important

if

s in that option.
If (2), I see a 50% chance no matter who we lynch, and so does the townie of Thok-Hacker; the town role sees a guarantee in the other claimed role and a 33% chance in the townie claims. Forcing the roles to agree on a townie will almost certainly not be beneficial. Forcing them to each pick a townie (and vote him) and having those two townies vote the third will create a 2-2 deadlock on two townies. I think that might be the best strategy

if

Case 2 is correct.
If (3), we have a lynch to spare and can run down our townie list one by one.
If (4), killing townies won't help us, and all of us townies see a 50% chance of lynching right among the claimed roles. But we have a lynch to spare, and since sarc is nightkill-immune (if he dies, we all vote in a ring to see whose vote doesn't count, and lynch that guy) we can start with TSQ and go from there.

The problem is these policies are mutually exclusive with each other...

[the silent speaker]

The second half of last week and this are Jewish holidays, that's where I am. And no one gave any comments to my strategies in the scenario they favor.

Hacker, from what I can tell your "reasoning" also involves assuming I am scum and there being only one scum "townie". You should state allyour assumptions, not only the ones you want people to notice.

Hacker says: we can trust the flavor, but not the power.
Sarc says: ? But has voted Thok randomly and so cannot be scum with him.
Thok says: we can trust the flavor and the power.
TSQ says: we can trust the flavor and the power.
I say: we can trust the power, but I'm afraid of betting the house on the flavor.

I would appreciate it if Sarc were to clarify his position.

However, Sarc-Thok is impossible, and Thok hasn't been quicklynched. Therefore Thok or Sarc is scum. Since both Thok and I think the power can be trusted, Sarc is not that scum. Therefore

vote: Thok

. From my standpoint it's him or Hacker or both.