Mini 554 - Mafia in Vollville - Over!!

[Erg0]

Vote: Oman

, obv.

[Erg0]

Huzzah!

Vote Guardian

Thats for cult mafia

Erg0, us aussies need to stick together.

I'm pursuing the "hang separately" option.

[Erg0]

unvote: Adel vote: Erg0

Was it something I said?

[Erg0]

You misunderstand me - I only want

you

to hang.

Also, I fail to see why I'm the "secret" Aussie - you can read my location, right?

And the next person to guess "Sydney" gets dayvigged.

[Erg0]

Because I detest him and everything he stands for. Every time I see that moogle I punch a kitten. In the nads.

In other words, I always vote Oman first in any game we're both in.

I'm not sure that threatening a dayvig based on a player's general knowledge could really be considered a scumtell.

[Erg0]

I'm not sure that threatening a dayvig based on a player's general knowledge could really be considered a scumtell.

I'm all for arbitrary daykills, but announcing them beforehand is just silly. It takes all the fun out of the "OMG! A daykill! Who did it?! Do you think they're scum?!" reactions.

Not that I think you actually have a daykill.

Don't you usually have to announce a daykill in the thread?

[Erg0]

Dayvig: Erg0

were you scum? did I nail you?

I always suspected you were an ABR alt.

[Erg0]

Nah, some are PM daykills. They're slightly more powerful for town and scum alike, so the new trend is to announcing in thread.

I'm interested to know if Erg0 does in fact have a daykill, because this could be an interesting (and breakable) setup if he does.

Erg0: do you?

Quit fishing, I'm not going to confirm or deny anything but I'd strongly suggest that nobody start hinting at roles based on the assumption that I have a dayvig. This applies to everyone.

[Erg0]

The argument? Or Jitsu?

[Erg0]

We haven't had a mod post since, so it's still possible that Oman's telling the truth.

[Erg0]

True enough, it seems unlikely at this point that he actually did make a kill.

[Erg0]

I think that the allegation is that you're taking the game

too

seriously. I don't really see that as a votable offence in its own right, though - I'll admit that I was being a little more flippant than usual, and there's not much wrong with trying to bring things back into line and get the game going.

[Erg0]

It was implied - there's a risk of any game on this site turning into "DayVig Joke Mafia". It's losing some of its value as a reaction-gathering tool, I'd say.

If he is scum, he put a lot of work into that, more than I'd expect this early in the game

This is of course, completely WIFOM.

Well yes and no... I mean, it is open to WIFOM to an extent, but you have to take a leap at some point and try to deduce someone's alignment from their posting habits.

That said, I don't think Oman's "kill" was particularly credible or likely to send Jitsu into a mad panic, so I don't think I'd put quite as much weight on his reaction as Oman has.

[Erg0]

So they are. Points to me for reading.

[Erg0]

I'm going to go ahead and assume that Oman knows me well enough by now to know that trying to start a serious bandwagon on me without any real evidence wouldn't work. Based on that, I believe that he really was just trying to get some discussion going, rather than trying to start a serious wagon.

I'm going to have a look at opie and see what I think.

[Erg0]

You just want me to lynch him.

[Erg0]

One thing to bear in mind, for those who aren't aware, is that Oman and I have played together alot. And I mean

a lot

. I don't think that there's been a time since the middle of last year that we haven't been in at least one game together.

As such, you should read his posts towards me (and mine towards him) with that in mind - for instance, when he asked me whether I really had a dayvig I expect that he knew that I wouldn't confirm or deny it. I believe that it was just a setup for him to try and add some credibility to his own faked dayvig.

I find him pretty neutral right now, leaning towards town. This is, naturally, subject to change at any time.

[Erg0]

Adel, I quite like your observations in post 136 but I'm not sure that I agree with your conclusions. I modded him in a newbie game and he was a fairly serious guy there, although he seems to be trying to get involved a little more in the early stages of this game. I'll keep my eye on him, but I'm not looking to vote him yet.

[Erg0]

I think so, yes. I think I may see your point, but I don't think I want to explore it any further at this time.

[Erg0]

I should have unvoted by now.

Unvote

I'm somewhat behind, doing a full reread so I can actually post something useful.

[Erg0]

Ok, reread done. I'll do a player-by-player and then carry on from this point.

Matt_S - I don't like how he voted Guardian in 80 (after opie and Jitsu) and then immediately weakened it by saying in 86 that he would move it later. I think he may have missed the point of the case on opie initially, but the populist FoS in 190 is the most blatant case of either following or distancing that I've seen in a while. Strikes me as someone that doesn't really have any solid suspicions, but doesn't want to reveal that fact.

Adel - Has been true to her word of staying on opie (so far), which is nice. This case isn't bad in places, though a lot of it seems to boil down to opie being too keen. I do agree with the point about opie trying to extend suspicion to all of the players on my wagon, but the case falls down somewhat if Adel's hypothetical is inaccurate. The early case has led to the rest of her day basically consisting of commenting on who is and isn't likely to be opie's buddy, which s going to be a problem if he comes up town.

pickemgenius - I dunno, ask me again if he's alive tomorrow. Lots of dependencies, but he's playing how he always does. Pickem, you say in 207 that you want to lynch opie, but don't vote. Why not?

Oman - Seems ok to me, but I can never pick scum Oman til day 2. Neutral read right now.

opie - Looking at it as objectively as I can, I'd say he erred on the side of suspicion when reading Guardian's early posts. His initial defence of Adel's vote was pretty poor, as he went after her rather than her reasoning in 116 and didn't really defend himself properly until he had four votes on him. The possible attempted setup of a chain lynch is the most damning point against him, I'd say.

ChaosOmega - A post or two would be nice.

Xylthixlm - Follows Adel onto opie almost immediately, even though he thinks her reasoning is "not much to go on", and stuck around on the wagon for quite a while before unvoting immediately once opie posted his full defence in 184. Frankly, I didn't think that 184 was a good enough post to really change anyone's mind, especially when his new vote was for TG on a lame overreaction tell. Hassling of Adel over her models while staying on the wagon with her and wilful ignorance of TG's vote on him are also points against. I'd actually rate him opie's most likely buddy at this point.

Incognito - I actually really like his case on Guardian, as he's using a lot of the same tells that I tend to look for, such as a player asking questions without follow-up. I also agree with his point about Jitsu's apparent backdown in 129 (which I noted on my way through). Good scumhunting makes him pro-town for my money.

TrustGossip - I laughed when he voted Xyl and nobody followed him. His comment about Adel in 117, followed by his vote for Xyl in 119, make me think that TG believed Adel was setting a trap for someone to follow her in with a "too townie" argument, so he was trying to get town points by jumping on Xyl first. Nobody else followed, and he just kind of dropped it quietly and then unvoted 80-odd posts later. Later sniping could be distancing, too. IGMEOY.

Guardian - Has shown a few of my classic scumtells: asks lots of questions (some of them only marginally relevant) without really doing anything with the answers, picked on one point in Adel's case without really commenting on the rest of it in any detail, really did strawman Incognito's case on him in his more recent posts. I think I need a better meta on Guardian, he always looks like scum to me.

Jitsu - Reaction to Oman's daykill is neither here nor there, I don't think anyone really falls for that one any more. Post 129 set off major alarm bells for me, as he tries to paint himself as having been aware for some time that the wagon on me was non-serious, and was simply waiting for someone to admit it. The tone of his previous posts, such as 98 (where he responds seriously to Oman's joke case), don't tally with this assertion. His subsequent defence against Incognito's case smacks of revisionism, as he was obviously attempting to give the impression in 129 that he'd known for a while, whereas in 180 he says that he only realised this when Oman said it was a joke (in 120). Overall, 129 looks like a massive backdown brought on by the realisation that the position he has taken is seen as suspicious by the town as a whole. I wouldn't be surprised at all if opie is town caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, and Jitsu is the scum that was lucky enough to be given the opportunity to run away.

Vote: Jitsu

[Erg0]

I just want to say...

TrustGossip - I laughed when he voted Xyl and nobody followed him. His comment about Adel in 117, followed by his vote for Xyl in 119, make me think that TG believed Adel was setting a trap for someone to follow her in with a "too townie" argument, so he was trying to get town points by jumping on Xyl first. Nobody else followed, and he just kind of dropped it quietly and then unvoted 80-odd posts later. Later sniping could be distancing, too. IGMEOY.

Aha!

I was wondering what TrustGossip was smoking to lead to post 119. That explains a lot.

Getting town points and pointing things out and getting frustrated with lack of acknowledgement are two different things. I got snipy at Xyl because it took him about five posts to actually figure out what he did wrong. In addition I don't really know what he's doing trying to be so overeager to analyse other people's numbers that he gets them wrong in his analysis. I stopped posting at Oman's request and because I would rather not make the same mistake. I also think the current opie-Guardian-Erg0-etc. conflict is not based upon anything notable.

That wasn't really what I meant - the vote (and lack of support) and the sniping are separate points. In other words, I agree that they're two different things.

I'm curious - is my interpretation of your initial vote on Xyl correct?

I partially agree about the opie/Guardian thing, in the sense that the initial actions from Guardian (pushing people to comment on me) and opie (finding him suspicious for doing so) were not particularly scummy in their own right. A lot of the reactions and discussion that have resulted from this are good information, though.

If you want to lynch me for perhaps hoping on coasting to Day Two then proceed. Xyl is incredibly annoying anyways.

So you're giving up on finding scum day 1?

[Erg0]

Stop being so ignorant and thick-headed.

I'd advise against being intentionally insulting if you want to make friends or influence people in the future.

100% bullshit is more like it.

Oh. I guess you're not the insulting type.

P.S. I'm not here to be your "friend". I'm here to play Mafia.

I've seen a scum say this like 3 times and never a townie.

WOULD YOU MIND LINKING TO ALL THREE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE YOU AT YOUR WORD?

Now you sound like Incognito.

[Erg0]

I was referring to your post 99 (not the caps).

[Erg0]

No more mind meld?

[Erg0]

I take it that my case on Jitsu hasn't set anyone's world on fire? Comments would be nice.

[Erg0]

Subsitute "content" for "tone", then.

[Erg0]

I pity you both for having read Big Love.

[Erg0]

I still pity you.

Coming soon: content!

[Erg0]

Right now I'm not sure whether Jitsu was trying to cover himself with his original reversal, or if he's trying to cover himself for the reversal now. The explanation makes some sense, but I have to ask:

Jitsu, I got the feeling when reading your post 129 that you were trying to give the impression that you'd figured things out earlier than you actually had. Do you think that this is a fair statement?

[Erg0]

Was that a leading question? I'm trying to get an idea of Jitsu's motivations here, as I think they're relevant to the interpretation of his behaviour.

[Erg0]

I'm starting to think that my case on Jitsu fails under the "don't assume your fellow players are dense" rule.

Unvote

There's a fair bit of material on the last couple of pages, which I will digest before I decide where to go next.

[Erg0]

Sorry for my recent absence, I've been sick for a few days and my head is full of cotton wool. I'll try to get things together and make a decent post this afternoon.

[Erg0]

That's -1, yes?

Of the two big wagons I'd lynch opie over Guardian, events elsewhere have led me to conclude that I have a better handle on Guardian's play than I thought I did. My case on opie is a little out of date, so I'll update that while we wait for a claim.

[Erg0]

If we're choosing between them, which would you rather lynch?

[Erg0]

Tum te tum.

Xyl: Can you please explain your vote on opie a little more? The last time you mentioned him you didn't seem to find him particularly suspicious, so your recent vote looks pretty wagonny.

[Erg0]

That's hardly surprising, given that you're on it.

[Erg0]

I wouldn't have believed a power role... I like 80% don't believe this.

I have to ask: why would you have believed a power role claim? This implies that you're voting for someone that you think has a good chance of being a power role.

[Erg0]

Oh crap, never mind - I can't read.

[Erg0]

I've doen some re-evaluations now that I've got a little more time, and I've come to the conclusion that I don't support either of the current lynch options. Based on his play so far, I'd be surprised if opie isn't just what he says he is. This wagon reeks of the classic day 1 mislynch - opie's biggest mistake was putting his neck on the line by going after Guardian, and now he's become the easiest deadline lynch. Guardian isn't really giving me a scum vibe overall, though that attempt to create a false dilemma on the last page didn't help.

My most likely scum right now are Xyl, Oman and ChaosOmega.

The behaviour I noted from Xyl in 242 has been reinforced by his weak opie vote - there was no obligation to join either wagon, and if he's ambivalent then he would have been better off staying away rather than making an unreasoned vote to save the person he thought was more likely town.

Oman was on the opie wagon early, but hasn't pushed it at all. The sudden endorsement on the last page looks like the play of someone who knows he's stuck on the wagon and wants to make it look good.

ChaosOmega is playing exactly the same way that he did in Clerks, where he was scum. Normally I don't take lurking as much of a sign either way, but he was somewhat more active in a newbie game I modded where he was town, so I see this as a semi-tell for him.

Vote: Xylthixlm

[Erg0]

So we should just lynch opie because there's no time to build another wagon (Guardian) and we don't want another claim (Adel)?

There's nearly a week until deadline and activity is high, we have plenty of time to swing another lynch if there's agreement. A second claim won't harm us if it's a forced claim from scum. If nobody's comfortable hammering then nobody should.

That said, if you

are

comfortable hammering opie then go right ahead. I just won't be the one to do it.

[Erg0]

I'm using the word "if" to allow others the room to make their own judgements.

In summary: I won't hammer, but others should feel free to. They should not, however, feel that they are obligated to do so.

[Erg0]

I'd like both of you to expand on exactly what you don't like about the "Ifs".

[Erg0]

There's nearly a week until deadline and activity is high, we have plenty of time to swing another lynch if there's agreement.

If there is an agreement. Well, there is almost an agreement on Opie, so we've already fullfiled this condition. Also, I see no reason that another agreement with be any more likely to hit scum.

You're missing my point - I'm not saying that there isn't agreement on opie (though I could argue that a couple of the votes on him have been pretty wagonny). What I'm saying is that "we don't have time to form another wagon" is not a valid argument for hammering opie, or for pressuring others to do so. Both Adel and Guardian have tried to present opie's lynch as a foregone conclusion, which it isn't.

In my eyes, another wagon would be more likely to hit scum simply because I don't like this one. Of course, this is subjective and up to every townie to determine for themselves.

A second claim won't harm us if it's a forced claim from scum.

WEEEEELLLLLLL SHIT! If you know who the scum are to force a claim from them WHY DON'T WE JUST LYNCH THEM! The problem is that claiming is a double-edged sword, if we hit scum, well that could work, (unless they claim cop and there is none so they get away with it etc.) but we have just as much chance hitting town (more chance, acutally). To make a claim a good thing for the town, we need to know who the scum are. So if we knew who the scum were to force them to claim, then we wouldn't need to, we could jsut lynch them.

Essentially, Lycnhes won't harm us if its a forced lynch on scum.

Again, my point is that saying "we shouldn't have another claim on day 1" is not an excuse for a bad lynch. If I think that someone else is scum then I see no harm in getting a claim from them, regardless of how many players have claimed previously.

Generally, I am concerned that the current arguments in favour of hammering opie seem to boil down to "that wasn't a bad day 1, let's kill the guy with the most votes and get on with things".

If nobody's comfortable hammering then nobody should.

I'm sure people are just worried about you hitting them.

IF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A HAMMER, I'LL UNVOTE AND YOU CAN -1 HIM THEN I'LL HAMMER!

Given the level of encouragement, I'd be very surprised if anyone's feeling worried about hammering. They've basically been given a free pass to do so by those on the wagon, which is seriously not helpful. Xyl and ChaosOmega have already been allowed to get away with majorly wagonny votes on opie, encouraging another player to make an easy vote is just making things worse.

Bottom line, I don't like this wagon and I definitely don't like the attempts to gift wrap it for the last voter.

[Erg0]

Erg0 is acting like scum who knows that the opie lynch will go through and will be a lynch of a townie.

Which is it Erg0: are you scum, or is opie?

Adel is acting like scum who knows that opie will come up town and is trying to set up another mislynch for tomorrow.

Dependent on one question:

Erg0: Is Matt_S scum or not?

I'm iffy right now, but I'll reread him and let you know.

[Erg0]

I didn't say "no read", I said "iffy", mainly based on the previous summary that you referred to. Also, can you clarify what you mean by "dancing around" the wagons?

I could see Matt_S as scum if opie and Guardian do both turn out to be townies - he kind of hung back from both of them but has seemed more amenable to an opie lynch late in the day. I have a hard time seeing him as opie's buddy, though, and he's not really conforming to my day 1 scumtells. He's drifting in the middle ground for me right now, many of the points against him are circumstantial and/or reliant on the alignments of others.

[Erg0]

"Iffy" means I have doubts about him being town, but I can see how you'd read it the way you did.

You're not giving great reasons for your distrust of the wagons, just pointing at them and being like "well, I don't like".

I've never been big on the idea of lynching you or opie, so it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone at this point that I feel the way I do. There are two main problems that I have with the current options:

1. I think there are better lynch targets available (which I think is a

great

reason to oppose the wagons)

2. I don't like the current air of foregone conclusion

[Erg0]

Guardian: I failed to notice your unvote before - what's the reason for that?

[Erg0]

I wanted to bring up my point and have Erg0 respond to it.

As for putting it back on: opie is my top choice right now, and I am as responsible as anyone for his lynch, but there are some lines of discussion people are bringing up I'd like to pan out before a lynch.

I agree with this approach.

[Erg0]

I doubt very much that this plan will survive first contact with the enemy. If opie and Matt_S both come up scum then you can go ahead and lynch me.

[Erg0]

I don't remember doing that.

[Erg0]

So your theory is that I'm linked with him because I'm not sold on him being scum?

[Erg0]

Argumentum ad craplogicum?

[Erg0]

1. Quit fishing.

2. I'm just trying to make a point, namely that I think it's highly unlikely that both opie and Matt_S are scum.

[Erg0]

Oman: Who are you talking to?

[Erg0]

1) I'm not fishing. I'm asking what possible motivation you could have to state that. Your post was pretty anti-town imo.

2) Why not just say that you highly believe they are pro-town, instead of the very WIFOM "lynch me if they are scum"?

It's called hyperbole.

Questions such as "Do you know one of them to be town?" and "Why are you pseudo-revealing that you aren't a power role?" are most definitely fishing, because they invite a response that may reveal something about my role.

[Erg0]

That's not hyperbole, that's lying. I'm using an extreme example to demonstrate the strength of my opinion, not claiming something that I know is untrue.

[Erg0]

"Possibly imperfect" is a severe understatement of what's wrong with your example. You're attempting to make my statement look far worse than it is.

When I said that my original statement was "just hyperbole", I was contrasting that with your insinuation that I either had knowledge of opie and Matt_S' alignment(s) and/or was implying that I didn't have a power role. In other words, I'm not saying that I am 100% certain of this information (as you seemed to believe), I am merely using hyperbole to reinforce the fact that I am very confident in my opinion.

You should not take anything from my original statement other than that I strongly believe that Matt and opie are not both scum. I consider the possibility of Oman's lynch strategy coming to fruition so remote that I am willing to stake my (game) life on it. Let's face it, if you lynch scum over my objections on days 1 and 2 then I'm clearly not being useful enough to be worth keeping around anyway.

You, erg0, saying that Guardian is fishing.

Are you trying to say that there is no such thing as fishing on day 1? If so, I strongly disagree.

[Erg0]

Guardian : I note that you did not acknowledge my explanation of why your post was fishing. Is there anything further you wanted to add?

I note that Oman and Guardian both quickly rebuked Matt_S for his erroneous comment about wanting more claims, which I feel is inconsistent with their recent actions.

[Erg0]

I've claimed nothing. Anything you

think

I've claimed is entirely in your imagination. The likelihood of the scenario I was talking about is so remote in my mind that my role does not play a factor in my statement. Stop talking about my role. Thanks.

[Erg0]

Expand on "not in that context". This is why I see fishing in Guardian's original post:

1. "Do you know one of them to be town?" is blatant fishing for a mason claim, since we didn't have a night 0 and I couldn't have an investigation result.

2. "Why are you pseudo-revealing that you aren't a power role?" is inviting a response which may inadvertently reveal something about my role.

Treating my comment as a pseudo-claim in the first place is baseless. Asking me questions about my role based on that is fishing, and Guardian's persistent conjecture on the subject is nothing but harmful to the town. I don't see how this is anything but black and white.

[Erg0]

And yet, there it is.

How do you feel about 581, then?

[Erg0]

He had 4 votes on him at one point. Not sure whether that fits your definition of strong.

[Erg0]

I need to work on my wpm.

[Erg0]

Now we just have to find an objective person.

Was that supposed to prompt someone to do the analysis, or are you asserting that your hypothesis is true?

[Erg0]

Not really, I doubt it would provide a result that was worth the effort. Guardian sure posted plenty when he got close to lynch in Big Love, and he was town there.

[Erg0]

Unvote, Vote: ChaosOmega

This probably has a better shot at getting to a lynch in 27 hours than a Xyl wagon does.

[Erg0]

If opie is scum then I'd expect his buddies to be on the bus right now. Realistically, there's little doubt that he's going to be lynched at this point because there are too many people that would look bad if they jumped off the wagon just before deadline.

Also, I agree with Patrick's assessment of CO.

[Erg0]

I take it you don't believe Matt's claim that he didn't see my vote at the bottom of the last page?

[Erg0]

I thought you were yelling at me on day 2? Keep it consistent, dude.

I'm not saying that I believe him - my first reaction was the same as yours (i.e. I thought that his vote was suspiciously timed), but he then explained it without any pressure being applied over it, which allayed my suspicions of following somewhat.

The fact that he felt the

need

to explain it is interesting, though.

[Erg0]

My point is that I don't think he was following me, but I do think that he was careful to make sure that nobody

thought

he was following me. So I agree with your last post, but not your earlier one.

[Erg0]

Woo! Nearly deadline!

[Erg0]

Jitsu, I'll be lynched regardless of your vote. I should have came on earlier to claim. I'm the cop. Was trying to stay in the background so I wouldn't get nightkilled.

Shit.

Unvote

[Erg0]

We can test CO's claim tomorrow.

[Erg0]

Vote: ChaosOmega

Watcher + tracker + cop? I think not.

[Erg0]

I sincerely doubt that he's actually going to be lynched before he posts.

[Erg0]

I doubt very much that you're paranoid, since that's still an information role (just reversed).

Overall, I'm unsurprised and unmoved - this is exactly the claimed result that I would expect from fakeclaiming scum in this situation. If you're an insane cop then you're

really

unlucky, because there's no way that I'm moving my vote based on that claim.

[Erg0]

I think Jitsu's the only person we haven't heard from now.

[Erg0]

I do so love it when being right is treated as a scumtell. It was especially nice of the scum to make a point of setting me up with their nightkill.

[Erg0]

Me neither (obviously), but I thought it was interesting that both of the players that I opposed lynching yesterday are now dead. Obviously opie was a communal decision, but I doubt that it was a coincidence that Guardian was killed last night (unless he was giving off power role tells that I missed).

[Erg0]

Me neither (obviously), but I thought it was interesting that both of the players that I opposed lynching yesterday are now dead. Obviously opie was a communal decision, but I doubt that it was a coincidence that Guardian was killed last night (unless he was giving off power role tells that I missed).

I don't understand why you feel this way, Erg0. It's not like you were the only one who was opposed to lynching Guardian yesterday. Why do you feel like this night-kill of Guardian was somehow used to set you and only you up?

I'm being egocentric again, ignore me if you'd prefer.

I don't particularly want to rush the CO lynch, but there's a limit to what we can achieve today whilst talking around the elephant in room. Those with something relevant to say should say it, but everything turned out pretty much how I expected yesterday so I don't have much more to add right now. My opinions at the end of yesterday are basically unchanged.

[Erg0]

I don't look at nightkills for scumtells. Its too easier to WIFOM.

Me neither (obviously), but I thought it was interesting that both of the players that I opposed lynching yesterday are now dead. Obviously opie was a communal decision, but I doubt that it was a coincidence that Guardian was killed last night (unless he was giving off power role tells that I missed).

NO! You say "me neither...BUT!!!" Do you or don't you?

The "but" was in reference to your original statement about looking for scumtells. I agree that looking for scumtells in nightkills is usually futile (certainly in the early game), but I wasn't really talking about scumtells, just making a general observation on possible motivations for the Guardian kill. I don't think that this really leads back to anyone in particular.

[Erg0]

That just completely defies logic. Mathematically, a random lynch is never going to be more likely to hit scum than town.

Are we operating on different definitions of the word "random"?

[Erg0]

Ah, I see what you're saying. I'm not sure that I agree, but it's possible that you're right when we're talking in terms of averages. I don't think that was a good play, though - as we saw at the end of the day, the town can actually come up with what appears to be a good wagon (i.e. ChaosOmega) under their own steam.

I'm not sure which worries me more: that you just gave yourself an out for lynching a townie, or that the town actually followed you on a wagon that you admit was completely random.

[Erg0]

Out of interest, have you ever run the numbers yourself?

[Erg0]

Which one do you think was the vig's target?

[Erg0]

The thing to bear in mind with the averages is that scum are almost always going to make a claim that has a high potential of saving them on day 1. Rather than players lynched, a better stat would be how often players that are forced to make the first claim on day 1 turn out to be scum.

That said, day 1 wasn't such a bad result in this game - the opie wagon was a good one to leverage off. There is still a lot of mafia to be played here, though.

======================================================

Votecount #31

ChaosOmega - 2 (Erg0, Adel)

Not voting - 7 (Matt_S, ChaosOmega, Xylthixlm, Patrick, Jitsu, Incognito, Oman)

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.
Deadline for D2: Friday April 5, 11:30AM GMT+10
================================================

[Erg0]

I would never have believed that we have a tracker, watcher and sane cop in the same 12 player game - that would be an exceptionally powerful combination for the town. Claiming a wacky sanity was his only real option, and to "prove" that he needed to have a guilty result on either Guardian or PEG.

[Erg0]

I don't think we should be lynching Adel before CO. What she did was arguably not in the town's interests, but I don't think that those who joined the wagon are in any position to condemn her.

[Erg0]

Hence the use of the word "arguably", rather than "definitely".

[Erg0]

His behaviour in relation to the opie wagon is about the biggest thing I've got on him, with his fluctuating opinion on me as a contributing factor.

I think we should be lynching CO today, but I can see the value of this wagon.

[Erg0]

It's obvious WIFOM, but I'm not really sure what it was supposed to achieve.

[Erg0]

It's pretty clear to me that if he was really a cop then he'd be making some kind of effort to avoid being lynched. If he's not caught scum I'll eat my proverbial hat.

[Erg0]

Pssst... Adel is a she.

Adel's play is pretty much irrelevant to my opinion of Oman. I thought his behaviour towards the wagon was scummy yesterday, before Adel admitted that she did this on purpose. I am concerned that Adel's admission has become something of a smokescreen here.

[Erg0]

I don't see any reason at all that Oman would "slip away". His alignment isn't really linked to CO's at all.

[Erg0]

What other reason would there be for you to worry about Oman slipping away? It's your assumption, not mine.

[Erg0]

So...you think CO and I are mutually exclusive scum now?

no.

if Co is scum then Oman may be scum
if CO is not scum then Oman may still be scum
if Oman is scum then Co may be scum
if Oman is not scum then CO may be scum

Ok, I have two parallel arguments to make here:

1. I disagree that there is a risk of Oman slipping away if CO is scum. If the town's first suspicion proves correct then it tends to reinforce the idea that the second suspicion is also correct, regardless of whether there is an actual link between the two. Hence, Oman is likely to be the next lynch choice if CO is scum.

2. I didn't go back and read your 850 when I wrote 860 - I was responding to Jitsu's post immediately above mine. Even so, what I said in post 860 is exactly the same as what you said in the quote above, just not spelled out as explicitly. Why did you think that I was assuming CO to be town, when I simply said that Oman's alignment wasn't tied to his?

[Erg0]

I stand by what I've said. The FoS is valid. You simplified my case down to what you all ready knew to be true: that CO is not scum. You wrote your post based off of that assumption.

Repeating yourself doesn't make your argument more valid.

Why

do you think that my post was written based on that assumption?

[Erg0]

Also, I thought on day 1 that Matt_S was slightly more likely to be scum if opie wasn't. His actions since have made me reconsider that position, though they came after I voiced this thought so I can't be sure it wasn't just a reaction on his part.

[Erg0]

I don't see any reason at all that Oman would "slip away". His alignment isn't really linked to CO's at all.

A lynch revealing CO to be scum would make it harder for Oman to "slip away" which does link Oman's alignment to CO's.

Now do you see it?

Are you stating that as a fact, or are you saying that's what I'm saying?

[Erg0]

My statement was open, it didn't specify either scenario. The assumption that I made was related to the point you were making, not to CO's alignment - i.e. I thought it was so unlikely that Oman would slip away if CO were scum that you must therefore be talking about the other scenario. Either way, I find the entire idea preposterous. There is no reason not to lynch the person most likely to be scum, especially with the possibility that we have an SK (though cop would be an unusual fakeclaim for an SK to make).

[Erg0]

There is no reason not to lynch the person most likely to be scum, especially with the possibility that we have an SK (though

Sane

cop would be an unusual fakeclaim for an SK to make).

I fixed it for you.

Non-sane cop is a very weak claim, I can't see an SK taking that as their first option.

[Erg0]

A cop claim makes sense for mafia because they know who's guilty and who's innocent. Thus, it is easy to fake investigation results to appear sane. An SK claiming cop has no way of knowing whether any given player is guilty or innocent, thus they would have to be banking on being able to get away with claiming a wrong result and selling it as a sanity issue.

======================================================

Votecount #36

Oman - 2 (Incognito, Adel)

ChaosOmega - 1 (Erg0)

Not voting - 6 (Matt_S, ChaosOmega, Xylthixlm, Patrick, Jitsu, Oman)

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.
Deadline for D2: Friday April 5, 11:30AM GMT+10
================================================

[Erg0]

Because if he is then we can potentially eliminate one nightkill by lynching him today rather than waiting until tomorrow.

[Erg0]

I'd guess it's because he didn't go with the approach of distancing and self-hammering, and is instead trying to keep himself alive in a seemingly hopeless situation.

[Erg0]

So you'd like to give Guardian a couple of free potshots before we lynch him?

[Erg0]

@um, yeah. I think it will result in more nailed scum than the alternative.

Exactly how dumb do you think Guardian is?

Also, let's not bring Mafia Discussion into this.

[Erg0]

Xyl: to what extent would you say that your dislike of Adel in this game is based on policy?

[Erg0]

I don't mean to imply that you dislike Adel personally, just that you dislike her play. Do you feel this is too strong a term?

[Erg0]

One thing I ask in the meanwhile: while I'm not sure there is much I can do to explain C_O's actions, as I am not C_O, are there major points of contention other than the fact I'm a cop (a cop with a guilty on Guardian^1, nonetheless)? If so, I'd appreciate that those be brought up -- even just saying "my thoughts in post X still stand".

The other major points are CO's hardcore lurking on day 1 (consistent with his scum meta), along with the incredibly poorly timed cop claim at the last possible moment on day 1.

[Erg0]

hmph, I never felt that I was a scummy player, I just take risks sometimes.

Whilst my highly sophisticated BS filter prevents me from seeing you as auto-scum, I can definitely see why Xyl thinks you're scummy here. When you say that you "take risks", do you mean that you perform actions that risk causing your lynch? If so, I'd say this is the very definition of playing scummily.

[Erg0]

/third. Also not going for a Matt_S lynch. Adel, you need to stop pointing out your own meta.

[Erg0]

hmph, I never felt that I was a scummy player, I just take risks sometimes.

...despite my standard scummy play...

Which is it?

[Erg0]

I think I know what you're thinking and if you're thinking what I think you're thinking then you're probably wrong. Even if you're right, you're going about things in the wrong order.

[Erg0]

You'll forgive me for not accepting "trust me" as a reason after the events of day 1.

[Erg0]

I think Oman's probably scum, but it's not based on the tells I've used on him previously (which largely revolved around the extent to which he buddied up to me). I probably shouldn't have told him what those were. Things haven't changed too much from what I said here, and opie coming up town somewhat reinforces that theory.

[Erg0]

So Erg0, are we just stuck in the dark on what Adel is trying to do? Could you say what you think Adel's thinking?

I'd rather Adel explain it herself - I could be completely wrong. I'll put my theory forward if she won't explain.

[Erg0]

Ok, fine. Here's what I think: Adel's theory is that Guardian is scum and will immediately attempt to distance himself from his buddies by voting for one of them.

If

this is the basis for her vote (and I'm not sure that it is) then I have two problems with her approach:

1. From personal experience, Guardian cannot be relied upon to distance from his buddies when caught.

2. Now that Guardian's given his views, the correct play is to lynch him to verify that he actually is scum and

then

start trying to draw conclusions from his actions. Lynching Matt_S first won't prove anything at all about Guardian, regardless of the result, and I think it's a pretty dubious lynch in the first place.

It's important to remember that a mislynch today may mean that we have to rely on crosskills tonight to keep this game alive for the town. We don't have a spare lynch to play around with here.

[Erg0]

I certainly agree with your last point. I had considered your first point, but we're getting a bit close to outguessing the mod there.

[Erg0]

*facepalm*

Why are we so intent on self-destructing?

[Erg0]

I do believe so.

[Erg0]

Fair enough, I suppose I haven't explicitly responded to your posts.

Frankly, yes I am closed-minded about today's lynch. There is almost certainly nothing you can say that will make me decide not to lynch you. The meaning behind CO's actions is basically down to personal interpretation, and you didn't raise any points there that I hadn't already considered. There is a possibility that he is a paranoid cop caught in a bad situation, but I've modded him both as a cop and as scum, and he looks more like scum to me here. He was still somewhat lurky but more ready to put his views forward and be proactive as town. As scum he was wagonny and withdrawn, as he was here.

Matt_S is on my second tier of suspicion, as is Adel. I'm still pretty sold on the you/Oman/Xyl combo, though. I see what you're saying about them, but I just can't see either of them as a good lynch today when we've got such a strong candidate ahead of them. The problem you have is that your role is entirely unverifiable and you will probably not be nightkilled whether you're a cop or scum. You present this as a positive, but it's only a positive if we actually believe you.

If you really are town, your cases will get a serious review tomorrow. As it stands, I'm not going to take direction from the man with his neck in the noose. As I said earlier, we don't have the luxury of a mislynch today, and I believe that you represent our best chance of avoiding that scenario.

The fact that you said you'd investigated your former self on "night 0" doesn't help either.

[Erg0]

Incognito: How do you propose that we test out Guardian's claim tomorrow?

[Erg0]

I'm not sure there's anything I can say to respond when you make it clear that there's nothing I can say.

Well what

could

you say? All you can do is try to interpret CO's actions, which I've already assessed as extremely scummy. I thought this through at the start of the day, and unless you can come up with a line of argument that nobody has considered to this point, I'm not going to be changing my mind. You've got your interpretation of CO's motives, and I've got mine.

Which them are you talking about? Either implies two, I am confused.

I meant Adel and Matt_S - sorry, this got messed up in editing.

Hm. I'm really town, why not give my cases a serious review today, at least, before you lynch me? What can doing so hurt?

It can create confusion and distraction, for one. I've read your cases, but I'm not going to vote for them today, simple as that.

Well, I agree with you, we may not have the luxury of a mislynch -- but that in and of itself is not a reason to lynch me. From my point of view, our notbeing able to give up a mislynch makes it all the more critical that we

not

lynch me today.

The use of the phrase "in and of itself" is completely misplaced. This is hardly the only reason I want to lynch you.

Well, I'm not saying that, that's whay C_O

did

. I guess when opie turned up scum he found me most suspicious and decided to investigate. I disagree with that cop strategy, but that's what he did.

You missed my point - CO would have investigated you night 1, not night 0.

If your decision is to remain close minded, I'm not sure what I can say to change that. But you haven't explicitly responded to my cases or my defense, and like I said I can't understand what perspective you might be coming from where doing so would be harmful.

Frankly, I think it's a waste of my time at this juncture. I don't need to refute your cases on other players in order to vote for you.

[Erg0]

I'm going to push for the Adel lynch first because I feel like she could easily slip away following a Guardian^2 lynch regardless of how it turned out.

Dude, paraphrasing others' stupid points is

my

schtick.

In other news, I still want to lynch Guardian. Things are getting busy at work so I won't be able to post during the day for a little while, but fortunately I'd only be repeating myself anyway.

[Erg0]

Near as I can tell, that PDF takes 8 pages to tell us that shorter is better.

[Erg0]

Patrick, Oman is pretty much different every time I play with him. Here he's far lurkier than I'm used to seeing from him. I think we've played together so much now that I've come around full circle and gone back to applying generalised scumtells rather than trying to meta him, and based on that I do find him scummy here.

I still want to lynch Guardian, btw.

[Erg0]

I seem to recall you using this exact argument against me towards the end of day 1.

[Erg0]

I tend to believe in it.

Except when you do it? What does that tell you?

[Erg0]

Assuming we have 3 mafia, and if Guardian is telling the truth, the split would 5/1/3 (townies/SK/mafia):

Lynch elsewhere

Best case: lynch scum, putting us at 5/1/2. If Guardian hits scum we'll probably be at 4/1/1 tomorrow, which isn't bad. If he hits town we're at 3/1/2, which is probable LyLo.

Worst case: lynch town, putting us at 4/1/3. If Guardian hits scum we'll probably be at 3/1/2 tomorrow, which is probable LyLo. If he hits town we're at 2/1/3, which is instant lose.

Lynch Guardian

We go to 5/0/3. Nightkill probably makes it 4/0/3, which is LyLo.

Of course, there's always the (strong) possibility that Guardian is actually lying mafia. I don't see a convincing reason in those numbers to keep him alive.

[Erg0]

Think of it this way:

Why would I claim SK if I didn't legitimately think a rational town would not lynch me?

Because you were going to get lynched anyway? Because you're mafia trying stay alive? All that your claim proves is that you want to survive, which isn't indicative of alignment.

[Erg0]

Wow, spring break seems to be an interesting time for mafia.

Unvote Guardian^2

. Well, we have one claimed scum already, so if we can lynch mafia today, and we get a crosskill tonight, that leaves our serial killer and maybe another mafia tomorrow. If Adel's right about Guardian being a good scumhunter, and he actually is a serial killer, then we could have a decent situation tomorrow.

You're only looking at the best case. If we go 1 and 1 on the lynch and kill then we're in LyLo anyway and we may have an SK running around that we can't afford to lynch. At that point Guardian may not need to follow our direction on kills any more.

[Erg0]

matt_s: check out this game for an example of guardian doing his scumhuntung thang as scum: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7270

lt;dr : as scum guardian replaces in a hammer scum with his first post, and then killed another scum with his nightmove. Town wins, despite being primarily made up of fools.

So you think that we should just let him decide what's in the town's best interests? Do you have that little faith in your own ability to find scum? I mean, I could point out games where I've found the scum, and I'm sure that many others here could as well.

[Erg0]

Do you disagree with my scenarios on the last page?

[Erg0]

One game doth not a meta make. This is a silly idea.

[Erg0]

Erg0, yesterday's suspicion + behavior re:

me

and C_O. Eager for 0 discussion --> lynch.

Awesome case. Does the bolded "me" refer to your first incarnation? If so, I don't recall being suspicious of you and I fail to see why being suspicious of the SK is a scumtell. Also, can you point out where I said I was eager for zero discussion today, or acted as if I was?

[Erg0]

Most of that case seems to go back to the premise that I'm scum because I was right about the alignments of CO, opie and Guardian Classic.

You were way too eager to lynch me, before you knew I was the SK. Even now, when multiple people, all of whom *are not on my team* (unless you think that all them are my SK-buddies.... ) are saying it makes sense for town + me to go after scum today, you attack that reasoning and insist that I be lynched.

There's just so much wrong with the argument that pushing the lynch of the scummiest player in the game is a point against me. Your SK claim is irrelevant, I still don't

know

you're the SK, just that you're scum of some form. Even if I believed you I'd still want you dead because you can't be trusted to act in the town's best interests.

Frankly, I can't believe it's taken us 16 pages to get to the point where we

still

can't get a consensus on the lynch of a player who has been WIFOM-spouting obvscum since the start of day 2.

[Erg0]

Think of it this way:

Why would I claim SK if I didn't legitimately think a rational town would not lynch me?

This is why we're not lynching me Erg0.

As I said before, your claim only proves that you want to survive. Survival is a goal common to mafia and an SK. SK might not be the best claim, but it sure beats claiming mafia.

[Erg0]

Also. LyLo is not the the worst outcome from not lynching Guardian, it is the most likely outcome. The

worst

outcome is a loss before day 3.

[Erg0]

This complicated analysis is stupid.

If it is 5-3-1, and we lynch Guardian, then it is 4-3 tomorrow. That means three consecutive days of LyLo. The chances of winning that are miniscule. On the other hand, if we don't lynch Guardian, we have a better chance - even though it isn't entirely under our control.

Glossing over the alternative scenario does not help us to make a better decision. We've got a choice between two kinds of bad here.

[Erg0]

LyLo with a living SK is worse than LyLo with a dead SK - as such, the scenarios with Guardian surviving the night are not equivalent to those where we lynch him or he's NKed. If we let him live today then we'll probably never get another chance to lynch him without taking out all of the mafia first. This is obviously bad news if he's NK immune.

By my count, 3 of Xyl's scenarios above are better than 4-3-0 LyLo, 3 are about the same, 4 are worse because Guardian lives, and 2 are an instant loss. All 3 "good" scenarios require us to lynch mafia, and 2 of those 3 also require Guardian to kill mafia tonight. I think we've got a decent chance of hitting scum with either the lynch or the kill, but we'd be fairly lucky to get them with both.

This brings me to the biggest problem I have with your justification: you say that 4-3-0 LyLo is an "almost certain loss", but you're confident that we can hit two mafia overnight and put ourselves in a great position tomorrow? If we've caught two mafia already then 4-3-0 is

far

from a certain loss.

Again, this is all assuming that Guardian actually is the SK. You also have to take into account the possibility that he's mafia, which would make not lynching him a

much

worse outcome. I've yet to see a compelling reason why this couldn't be a fakeclaim made purely for the purpose of keeping him alive a little longer.

[Erg0]

I already talked about fakeclaims - in my view, an SK would not claim cop as a first option. Vig would be a better bet, since it matches the abilities. Trying to fake investigation results with no knowledge of others' alignments is a pretty tricky proposition if you have to claim on day 1. I think that mafia are more likely than an SK to claim cop, since they have the advantage of knowing others' alignments.

That said, the scenario that Guardian posits above is entirely plausible. CO may not have been thinking beyond surviving to day 2. On the other hand, this thinking applies equally well to mafia or an SK.

Xyl brought up the amazingly valid point I missed, Erg0 -- If I am not the SK, then who made the Guardian^1 kill? I'm claiming to have done so, and no vig, or other SK, or lying mafia, or anyone, has come forward to be like "uh no, I shot Guardian^1".

That's ridiculous, why would the killer claim at this point? An undiscovered SK would want to stay hidden for as long as possible, mafia tend not to be too big on claiming kills, and a vig would know that he'd be an instant nightkill target if he put his hand up. If someone else made the kill than they're probably doing the smart thing and just pushing your wagon. I don't expect a claim come unless it becomes very clear that you're not going to be lynched.

[Erg0]

Wrong. Having an SK alive is much less of a disadvantage than having an extra mafia alive.

You're forgetting something: Guardian's best chance of a win from here is to use his kill to keep us in LyLo for the remainder of the game so that we can't lynch him, and with those numbers it's perfectly possible for him to do it whether we lynch mafia today or not.

The three good scenarios that you put forward almost certainly won't happen, because Guardian has zero incentive to kill anyone but a townie tonight if we lynch scum today.

If we bump off two scum by tomorrow then we can lynch him safely, but if we only kill one then he can cruise to endgame.

Looking at the more moderate examples: If we go to 3-2-1 tomorrow then we need to lynch and NK the two mafia on day 3 or we're in a 1-1-1 endgame and the power is out of the town's hands. Bear in mind that if we lynch mafia day 3 in that scenario then Guardian has no incentive to kill mafia on night 3 because that will then get us out of LyLo and allow us to lynch him for the win on day 4. 3-3-1 has the same problem. 4-2-1 is just as bad, because a 2-1-1 endgame still requires a no lynch for the town to have a chance of winning.

With 4-3-0 we have the chance to win the game with our own lynches. This is not true of any of the scenarios that involve SK Guardian staying alive, unless he messes up and kills mafia by accident.

[Erg0]

I'm ignoring it because it's idiotic. You're proposing that we throw the game on principle if you don't do as we say, which is just never going to happen.

[Erg0]

This is not an equitable contract because the risk is all on our side. Your starting position is "dead", because that's what you'll be if we don't agree to your proposal. Assuming we actually stuck to the terms: If you break the contract tonight then you go from dead today to dead tomorrow, which is a net loss to you of zero. We, on the other hand, go from being in a winnable position today to losing tomorrow, which is obviously a huge loss on our part.

Realistically, the town would never actually go through with a suicidal lynch, and you know it. It would be utterly foolhardy to kill ourselves just to punish you, especially when there would still be a chance of a town win in endgame.

[Erg0]

Ok then, I'll make it simple:

Play to win the game.

Me knowingly pursuing a lynch that would lose the game for the town breaches this rule. Likewise, you intentionally nightkilling the mafia so that we can safely lynch you and win the game breaches this rule. I don't believe for a second that you're not playing to win. You're counting on us not following through with the threat to lynch you tomorrow, and the worst possible outcome for you is simply that we lynch you tomorrow instead of today. "I promise that I'll do what you say, or you can kill both of us" is not a good bargain from our end, but it's a great one from yours.

[Erg0]

The basic problem is that a threat which involves the town committing suicide just to teach you a lesson is not, and can never be, credible.

[Erg0]

Once again, lynching you in 1-1-1 is town suicide. Going to no-lynch is the only option in that situation.

The point is that if you don't play the way we want you to we *can't* lynch you without costing ourselves the game. Basically, once we hit LyLo (which you can induce with your kill tonight, regardless of our lynch today) you can do whatever you want and we can't touch you. I'm fairly sure you already know this.

If we don't lynch you today then we have no further power over your actions unless you decide to help us out of the goodness of your heart. You're expecting us to believe that you'll willingly sacrifice yourself to help us win, when there's clearly an option available to you that would give you a chance of winning. How gullible do you think we are?

[Erg0]

I'm sure the mafia would be only too happy to potentially waste a kill for our benefit.

NO, if you get to 1-1-1, you've lost, and you lynch me. I have to not let you get there, because if we do get there, you return my defection and I lose.

But if you keep us from getting to 1-1-1 then we lynch you and you still lose. What's in it for you?

[Erg0]

I'm here, haven't had time to catch up yet. Thinking Oman is a good bet for today, but some reading is required pre-vote.

[Erg0]

Oman is looking pretty much the way he always did. Xyl seems to have gone into misdirection overdrive today: all this kill claiming stuff is irrelevant at this point and doesn't really inform us of anything. The other thing that I really didn't like about his opening post was this:

I'll do a targeted reread on Guardian to see if there's anything interesting about his play...

Translation: "hey everybody, go check out that awesome misdirection that Guardian was pulling yesterday!"

Nothing Guardian^2 said is useful, because I can guarantee you that he was fully expecting to be lynched yesterday and played accordingly. He said himself that he replaced in expecting to do some distancing and then take the lynch, and I think that demonstrates his frame of mind from that point forward. As such, I'll accept no arguments that are based on anything that he did after that point.

[Erg0]

Because I didn't see his play as townie then because I was looking at it with a narrow scope.

In what way have you now broadened your scope?

[Erg0]

Sorry, I'm behind again. Will catch up tomorrow.

[Erg0]

Never mind, accelerated read is done.

Vig beats nurse, I'd say. Patrick's claim is provable, whereas a nurse claim in a game that potentially has no doctor is definitely not strong enough to change my mind on Xyl. Swing for the fences on Oman if Xyl is scum, since he (Oman) is bound to be lynched tomorrow in that scenario. Even if Oman is town, NKing him tonight will put us one townie ahead of where we'd be if we mislynched him tomorrow. I'm tempted to say you should kill him either way, but that's probably a bad idea from a numbers perspective.

[Erg0]

The preview button is my friend.

What's the rush, Oman?

[Erg0]

Isn't the tracker dead already?

Aren't you just trying to come up with a reason that Patrick shouldn't kill you when Xyl comes up scum?

[Erg0]

So your theory is that we have/had two trackers?

[Erg0]

Silence = *headdesk*?

[Erg0]

So much for that theory. Not sure what happened with Oman's brain explosion there, but we're still in a good spot if Patrick was telling us the truth about being a vig. However, if Patrick is actually an SK then we're totally screwed. I tend to think that the latter is unlikely, though - if Oman had actually been scum then Patrick would have been lynched today for sure, so claiming yesterday was a huge risk.

If Patrick is a vig then we can lynch one of Matt_S and Jitsu, then Patrick vigs the other tonight if we mislynch. Obviously I'm in the equation as well from his perspective, but that still gives us at least a 2 in 3 chance of getting the last scum either today or tonight.

If anyone other than Patrick has a nightkill ability they'd like to claim then now is the time to do it.

[Erg0]

Fair point. I want to hear from the others before we decide where to go from here.

[Erg0]

I'm vanilla. Given that there are no other power roles, I think it's reasonable to assume that Patrick's claim is truthful. I'm going to do some analysis to choose between Matt_S and Jitsu.

[Erg0]

As I'm working through this, I'm wondering how everyone feels about possibly no-lynching today. If we assume we're at 3/1 then that would be the conventional play from here.

======================================================

Page 57 Votecount

Not voting - 4 (Matt_S, Erg0, Patrick, Jitsu)

With 4 alive, it's 3 to lynch.
Deadline for D4: Thursday May 11, 11:11AM GMT+10
================================================

[Erg0]

Hmm good point. Admittedly I still have a voice in the back of my head whispering "Patrick could be scum", which prompted me to consider a no-lynch in part as SK insurance. If it's 3/1 today then worst case after a no-lynch is 2/1 tomorrow (though we do lose the extra kill), but if its 2/1/1 then we're pretty much guaranteed to lose if we lynch someone today. I guess it comes down to whether we fully trust that you are what you say you are.

I had a long-winded explanation for this, but I'll keep it simple: the scum may want to claim if they know Patrick's claim to be false.

[Erg0]

I was kind of thinking out loud there in order to help myself reach a conclusion. Though I'm inclined to think that Tracker + Watcher + Vig is a reasonable town combo, I've been burned before when making similar setup assumptions, thus it does tend to nag at me in situations like this.

In any case, I don't think no-lynch is the approach to take - if we lynch scum and still lose then so be it.

However

, I stand by my belief that scum with information that contradicts Patrick's version of events should seriously consider claiming. If that doesn't happen then I'll continue to assume that Patrick is a vig and operate on that basis.

[Erg0]

I don't think that the information from day 2 is anywhere near as revealing as that from day 1 or day 3. I also think that relationships with Xyl are much more interesting than relationships with CO/G2. The reasons should hopefully be obvious.

That said, I don't want to state specifics until I've finished my big analysis post o' doom. Unfortunately I'll be out of town this weekend, so that won't happen 'til Monday. Try not to lynch each other until then.

[Erg0]

I don't think day 2 should be dismissed out of hand. We know that at least one scum was optimistic enough in Guardian's chances that they tried to keep him alive, and analysing that is what swung it for me in vigging Xyl instead of Oman.

Probably not dismissed out of hand, but certainly not the focus of our decision-making. Once CO/G2 was outed as likely scum, the other mafia would tend to modify their behaviour with his possible lynch in mind. I tend to think that the stuff that happened before this - when CO was under less pressure - will be more telling. I'm very big on the idea of the "tipping point" in mafia - i.e. the point at which it becomes more likely that a person will be lynched than not. Changes in behaviour before and after this point are some of the best scumtells I know.

In general, the choice between Jitsu and Matt_S looks to come down to whether we believe in distancing or bussing. My impression from re-reading has been that Jitsu was on a relatively even keel with Xyl and CO/G2 throughout the game, whereas Matt went after both Xyl on day 3 and CO on day 1 fairly aggressively, jumping onto both of their wagons early. His reasoning for going after Xyl at the start of the day 3 was pretty thin, relying more or less on his first couple of posts on that day rather than the fairly substantial prior evidence. His wavering stance on Guardian on day 2 was also a concern, and may well be the reason behind Xyl's image-improving fast Xyl-vote on day 3. I'm leaning towards Matt_S as our man based on initial impressions.

I'm working on something more comprehensive, but this is how I'm feeling based on mental notes. The (semi)patented Erg0 analysis o' dead scum is on its way.

[Erg0]

Ok, this is what I see in Xyl's posts regarding Matt and Jitsu. If you don't like PbPs then just skip to the conclusions at the bottom.

Jitsu

5 - arbitrary daykill discussion
6 - disagreement on definition of "arbitrary" - if this is distancing it's very weak
13 - "Fairly town. Seems pretty sharp. Logical, actively looking for scum."
41 - to me: "I don't see Jitsu's reaction as scummy." This relates to my case on Jitsu for backing down on his Oman vote, which Xyl hadn't commented on at all to this point.
43 - addresses Jitsu's questions on finding opie townish
47 - pushing Patrick to vote Matt_S over Jitsu
50 - responds to Jitsu's questions on opie and Guardian
Day 2 - nothing much
Day 3 - mild suspicion for comment re: wanting to lynch the SK first. Mentions this repeatedly in his last few posts before being lynched.

Matt_S

0 - random vote exchange
8 - unvotes to get on opie wagon
13 - "lightly scummy. Wants random bandwagons that get people nowhere near lynch (what good does that do?). Strangely defensive of Erg0. Seems to want to stay under the radar."
20 - picks apart Matt's FoSes on opie, Oman and him (I notice that Matt's reason for FoSing opie is not that far from Xyl's reason for voting him)
22-23 - argument about Adel's algorithm, like 6 this is pretty weak
25 - follows up on 20 by calling Matt's opie FoS "quite possibly the most stupid reason for a FoS I have ever seen"
28 - still talking about Matt's FoS, says "it's almost too obvious for him to be scum"
29 - yet more criticism, no vote though. Xyl unvoted opie in 21 (after he talks about Matt in 20) and moved his vote to TG, but has talked about Matt continuously since then without mentioning TG at all. "I'm unlikely to reply to any further responses from Matt_S unless they contain (a) good arguments and (b) sentence structure that doesn't make my brain try to flee through my ears."
30 -

now

he votes for Matt
35 - supports lynch of Matt_S or TG, wants to hear more on opie and Incognito. Note that two of these four players are confirmed town and one (Patrick) is very likely town (or at least not mafia). I'm not sure that he'd be putting four townies into that post.
37 - wants Matt to explain his logic further (possibly looking for an out so he can move his vote?)
41 - wants me to vote for Matt or TG
46 - "Matt_S is so clever that he noticed the trap and fell for it anyways."
47 - pushing Patrick to vote Matt_S over Jitsu
49 - unvotes to hop on opie wagon, "nobody else sees what I do about Matt_S"
52 - says Matt_S should be in my top 3
57 - asks Oman why I'm linked to Matt (disagrees with his theory)
60 - "I just did a review of Matt_S's recent posts, and it appears he hasn't done anything scummy in the last wee- er, the last couple d- well, in his last two posts. I'm oddly disappointed." - I don't see the point of this
Day 2 - "I looked at Matt_S because I was suspicious of him day 1, but I haven't seen anything odd in his recent play, so he's not on my list right now."
Day 3 - Fairly mild reaction to Matt's early vote on him. Comments towards the end of the day that he needs to re-read him.

ChaosOmega (for comparison)

13 - "Only one post. Appears to have been active in other games, perhaps he forgot about this one. Mod: Can we get a prod on ChaosOmega?"
40 - in response to CO putting him in his top 3: "You forgot to provide your reasoning."
42 - finds CO's response scummy
44 - "From my experience on this site so far, when a scum dies, anyone who he or she called scummy but didn't try to lynch is the first to attract attention as a possible scumbuddy." (could be a pointer for CO)
61 - "Lynching ChaosOmega will provide almost no information about any other players, because he has barely interacted with anyone. While I'm usually up for a lurker wagon, 2 days from deadline is cutting it a bit close, especially since I doubt CO's wagon will pass Guardian's..."
62 - prods CO for a case against him
63 - looks to be manufacturing an either/or situation with CO
68-70 - stays on CO until deadline
Day 2 - starts by saying that he thinks CO is scum, but buys Guardian's SK claim and wants to keep him alive.

Conclusions

Matt_S: Xyl goes after him on day 1, but never really made a convincing case for a lynch, just hanging around on the wagon until it died and occasionally saying "you guys should vote for Matt". Completely forgot about him for most of day 2 and never reacted much to Matt's somewhat weakly reasoned vote against him on day 3. This is the "distancing" option, and if we take post 44 above at face value then his behaviour towards Matt is consistent with the way that he would distance from a buddy. The other option, of course, is that Xyl was trying to push a day 1 mislynch and dropped it once the game moved on.

Jitsu: Really not much to see here - responds to a few questions on day 1, never really says much about him (besides that he seems like town) until near the end of day 3 when he expresses mild suspicion as he (Xyl) nears a lynch. Xyl also hardly commented on CO until near deadline on day 1, which leads me to think that he wouldn't be so neutral to his other buddy as well, especially since Xyl wasn't really attracting that much attention himself at that point. Prior to his 40th post, Xyl mentioned Jitsu and CO a total of four times between them - and that drops to twice if you don't count his all-player roundup in post 13. In that "against" column, Xyl totally ignores the day 1 mini-wagon on Jitsu and the day 3 discussion about Jitsu wanting to lynch the SK seems a little like an attempt to distract the town or set up an argument between them.

Comments and opinions are welcome. I'll be reading CO, Matt and Jitsu in isolation as well.

[Erg0]

Jitsu's vote was pretty much what I'd expect, since I don't think he really has another viable suspect. Matt, you've been very focused on defending yourself for the last little while; who are you suspecting at the moment?

A quick round-up of CO's behaviour towards Matt and Jitsu before I get to the full PbPs on those two.

Jitsu

12 - "Jitsu, I'll be lynched regardless of your vote."

Matt_S

0 - random vote (both scum random voted Matt?)

Xyl (for comparison)

4 - puts him in his top 3 (no case)
5 - vague suspicion
9 - bit more of a case, accuses him of bussing opie
11 - says he's buddies with Guardian^1

In summary: almost nothing useful. Co evidently took the "bus one, ignore the other" approach. The fact that Xyl and CO both random voted Matt_S is mildly interesting, but could just as easily be a coincidence.

Yes, I'm ignoring Guardian^2 for reasons already stated. I won't even read his posts again if I can help it - that way lies WIFOM.

[Erg0]

Wait, double post: Erg0, why didn't you think Jitsu would vote for you?

I just didn't see it as the play he would make as either town or scum. If he's town then he'd have to think that I bussed both of my buddies from day 1 onwards, and if he's scum then he'd likely see you as an easier mislynch to push. Jitsu often seems to use similar logic to me, and I'm pretty sure that

I

wouldn't vote for me if put in his position.

[Erg0]

Sorry, been putting this off until I have time to do the full Jitsu/Matt thing. Will have a big post tomorrow.

[Erg0]

A response to Matt's major points:

- Xyl and CO looked scummiest to me on day 1, I was suspicious of Oman but not comfortable with lynching him initially. As I said somewhere, I can never get a good read on Oman on day 1, but once things fell into place with my other two suspects I felt more confident in my opinion on him.

- My focus on CO/G2 on day 2 was borne of my belief that prolonged debate and/or lynching anyone else would be a waste of our time. I was initially looking at it as kind of a "free" day, though I didn't expect to have to fight so hard to get CO/G2 lynched.

- At the end of day 3 I hadn't looked at the game for a couple of (RL) days, and didn't want to hammer after only a very quick read. I was thinking we'd probably want to pressure Oman into a claim before the day ended, since it was quite likely that Patrick was going to vig him that night - hence my comment about killing him regardless of Xyl's alignment.

[Erg0]

I wanted to post summaries of both players at the same time, but I'm not sure how long it will be before I get Jitsu done so I'll throw Matt's out there now. I hope y'all enjoy reading.

Matt_S

Day 1

2 - Follows Incog and Jitsu in disagreeing with Xyl's "arbitrary" comment
4 - Votes Guardian for pushing my wagon (2nd vote on him), says he wants me to confirm or deny dayvig, shades suspicion of Oman
5 - To Guardian: "Once there's a better vote, I'll unvote you, but for now it stays" - did I mention this at the time? If not, I should have (Ooh, I did. Go me!)
6 - FoSes Oman for wagoning (3rd vote) - later clarifies that he thinks Oman's claim of trying to start discussion was a ruse. Disagrees with wagons to start discussion
11 - shades suspicion of opie for "trying pretty hard", but doesn't think he's voteworthy (opie has 1 vote)
14 - Unvotes Guardian (never really pushed him much), FoSes opie (2 votes), Xyl (0 votes), Oman (2 votes), seems to be most interested in opie. Reasoning here isn't great, very generalised. Xyl criticises him for this post, which leads to an argument between them over Adel's percentages.
17 - says he can't remember any "important" posts by opie, which doesn't seem right
18 - votes Xyl (1st vote), retracts FoSes on opie (3 votes) and Oman (1 vote) for reasons that more or less aplied when he originally made them. Shades new suspicion of Guardian (2 votes) based on Incog's case.
22 - thinks Jitsu is ok
23 - FoS on Adel (0 votes) for one of her "100%" posts
25 - "Adel does seem weird, but other than that he makes good points" - after Patrick and Oman both said they thought Adel was town
26 - Unvotes Xyl (again, no real pressure while his vote was on). "Guess [Guardian and opie] are the only lynches to choose from. Now to wait for opie to claim."
27 - would rather lynch opie, but calls him "fairly helpful" and "less helpful " in the same post. Doesn't seem to think either opie or Guardian is particularly scummy, but is content to lynch one of them.
28 - doesn't want a second claim from Guardian (per his later correction)
31 - votes ChaosOmega (3rd vote, simultaneous with my 2nd vote; opie has 5, Guardian has 4) "since I can't recall him doing anything really useful". 26 hours til deadline. If he's scum then I suspect he didn't think this wagon would go anywhere.
32 - Notes my simulvote (my reason for finding this interesting at the time is somewhat invalidated by CO being scum). Asks Adel why she switched to opie.
38 - mentions for the second time that he wants to hear from CO (close to deadline now). Again, never particularly pushes this wagon.

Day 2

39 - Player summary: Oman, Patrick, Jitsu and me are town; Adel, Xyl and Incog are middling; CO is scummy based on claim.
40+ - there's a whole bunch of posts here that just don't strike as being much of anything. Talks about his changing suspicions, asks a few questions, chastises Adel a little.
47 - summarises others' suspicions, then goes with CO/Oman/Xyl scumteam (change of mind on Oman). Thinks Patrick is town, iffy on Jitsu and Incog (depending on Oman's alignment).
48 - defence against Jitsu, says day 1 suspicions were based mainly on who looked helpful. Doesn't think that Oman will slip away if CO is scum.
50 - questions Adel on G2 as SK theory. Chases Adel for a while after this due to her inconsistencies, and votes her in 56 (first vote on her, shortly after Incog unvoted)
61 - votes Guardian "for the much safer alternative"
62 - backs away from Adel vote, claiming confusion. Something about thinking Adel had a plan, which doesn't really explain the vote. Disagrees with Xyl wanting to lynch Adel.
64 - kind of flip-flopping on Oman here - after retracting the day 1 FoS in 18, he said in 48 that the only FoS he would withdraw was the one on opie. Possible that he picked up on Oman again when he started to look like a good target early on day 2.
66 - appears to jump on board the G2 as SK wagon without a second thought.
67 - says he thinks Adel is town unless G2 is mafia (asked her a lot of probing questions if this is the case). Bit of number-crunching to attempt to justify non-G2 lynch. No more posts after this on day 2.

Day 3

68 - "Okay, there goes one of my top suspects" - is this referring to Adel?
69 - questions Xyl's bringing up day 1 lynch WIFOM
71 - votes Xyl (1st vote on him) for kill speculation (no mention of prior suspicion here)
72 - thinks Xyl is scum with Oman
74 - wishy washy on reasons for lynching Xyl before Oman, but thinks it gives more info
79 - "I can't see a mass claim helping that much, but I don't see it really hurting either at this point."
81 - more attack on Xyl
84 - ok with Patrick vigging Oman if Xyl is scum

Day 4

Go read it yourself.

Summary

I'm not fond of Matt's pattern of play for the first two days, when he moved his vote around a fair bit, sticking to wagons that had support from others and never really pushing any of them particularly hard. Adel and Oman, in particular, were subject to variations in his opinion which coincided somewhat with their chances of being lynched. His interactions with Xyl and CO on days 1 and 2 were somewhat adversarial without being dangerously so. I could see him as potential scum based on my usual scumtells.

The other thing that really caught my eye was his play on day 3. His attack on Xyl for a relatively minor tell (kill WIFOM) was far more strident and confident than anything he'd done to that point in the game, and he seemed to have trouble getting his story straight about why Xyl should be lynched before Oman. I can definitely see the building blocks of a scum plan here - Xyl knew that he would probably be lynched on one of the next two days, and decided to make his buddy look good on the way out. Matt had said in 67 that Adel was "fairly likely" to be G2's buddy if he were mafia, so she needed to be out of the way so that he could go after Xyl full force.

Obviously this is all a little conspiritorial, but I see it as a plausible scenario. With Xyl under heavy suspicion and Matt relatively in the clear, the scum may well have seen a bus as their best chance of getting a win.

I need to finish re-reading Jitsu before I vote, but at this point I'd say that Matt is looking like a very good suspect.

[Erg0]

Jitsu

Day 1

2 - questions Xyl's (somewhat flippant) "arbitrary daykills" comment
4 - fine with it after Xyl's explanation
5 - FoSes Oman for faked dayvig
6 - responds to Guardian1's request for comments on me, finds me pro-town, votes Oman (2nd on him)
7 - likes opie's case against G1 for pushing my wagon
8 - questions G1 on Oman
10 - has realised Oman's dayvig was a joke
12 - attacks Oman's case for voting me
13 - drops back from case against Oman, now treating wagon as random (this was the post that caught my eye on day 1). Kinda wishy washy round-up of opie, G1 and Oman. Talks about Adel's models for a bit, asks her about Oman and opie.
16 - Responds to Incog's questioning his backdown. Will comment on this below. Is suspicious of opie, G1 and Oman at this point.
17 - suspicious of Matt's "opie trying hard" post
19 - response to my suspicions, basically says to read 16 rather than 13 for Oman/G1 stuff and sticks to 13 for opie stuff.
20 - asks a few people questions
21 - unvotes Oman
24 - defence against G1, a lot of talk about being in the spotlight and meta (first time nerves?)
30 - asks G1 for a case on opie
33 - starts chasing G1 a bit
35 - votes G1 (3rd vote)
37 - questions CO on not voting G1
39 - "I'm almost certain Guardian is scum now", unsure on opie, thinks Adel is likely town, reluctant to move vote from G1
40 - thinks of Xyl as town
41 - thinks opie is scummy, but not G1's partner. CO is next suspect (decent case).
47 - challenges Xyl on apparent flip-flop on G1 (turns out to be a misunderstanding)
49 - suspicious of Xyl and CO, but wants to lynch G1

Day 2

52 - wants to slow down the CO wagon and discuss opie lynch - correctly concludes that the wagon was full of scum (town points for wanting to discuss this at this point)
53 - questions Adel on various things
58 - focuses on Oman, Xyl and CO after Adel's declaration that opie wagon was random
63 - roundup of players, good points against Xyl and CO here
69 - indicates that he thinks CO is more likely mafia than SK
76 - comments on potential LyLo situation if SK is present
77 - goes after G2 hard (fairly obvious points, but he's done his homework)
78 - mild suspicion of Matt_S
81 - "If my calculations are right, the optimal play is for the town to lynch a mafioso today, and not the SK." (before G2's SK claim)
84 - first post after SK claim - wants to hear from Adel but doesn't give own opinion
86 - questioning G2 on kills and kill methods, says he was holding back until getting info
89 - scenarios - throws in mention of possible mafia roleblocker(?). Mentions Xyl as possible SK. This whole post assumes that we have an SK, as do the next few. I end up agreeing with most of these conclusions in my own analysis later in the day.
97 - suspicion has moved to G2/Oman/Adel scumteam, Xyl 4th and Matt 5th.

Day 3

98 - thinks Oman/Xyl scumteam (Oman over Xyl), Matt_S as possible SK. "If we want to stay in control of our destiny, we need to lynch the SK (presuming there is one)."
102 - agrees with Xyl's earlier statement that there's probably a RB (hmmmm). THinks there is probably an SK based on revealed roles.
103 - mentions that he hadn't considered an unkillable GF
106 - opposed to a massclaim
110 - answers question from Xyl on setup scenarios. "For this specific point in this game, not knowing who the second killer is what concerns me most."
111 - wants claim from Xyl before he votes him
112 - supports killing Oman if Xyl is scum
114 - votes Xyl (L-1) after noticing Oman's vote didn't count

Summary

There's very little that I don't like about Jitsu's play in this game. The flip on day 1 was notable, but re-reading it now I can see that he took a similarly serious stance on Xyl's early "arbitrary" comment, and his explanation is a little better than I thought it was at the time. In his favour, he committed to his votes and pushed the wagons of the players that he voted. His sticky vote on Guardian1 is consistent with his earlier comments, and he showed supicion of Xyl just before deadline, at a time when I would not expect scum to suddenly decide to bus their other partner. Similarly, his post 52 raises strong points against Xyl in the face of the fast wagon on CO.

I'm slightly concerned about the fact that he never voted on day 2 and didn't vote on day 3 until Xyl was practically lynched, but given his tendency to raise good points against both lynched scum, I'd have expected him to follow up with an early vote once he'd committed to bussing them. The other thing that worries me a little is that he starts to drift slightly off course towards the end of day 2, dropping Xyl down his list in favour of Adel and then saying early on day 3 that we should be going after the SK as well as pushing on the identity of the second killer. This pings my scumdar a little, but not anywhere near as much as Matt_S' play. There are a couple of other posts noted above that make me wonder a bit, but nothing as substantial as I saw from Matt.

It's clear throughout the game that Jitsu's really reading others' posts in detail and probing on points of interest. If he's scum then he's doing one of the best townie impressions I've seen in a while, and would have to have planned exceptionally well for exactly the scenario that we're in now. Matt looks far more like scum scrambling to recover from a bad start for the team, whereas Jitsu would have to be scum that has read the flow of the game very well and stayed one step ahead at all times. I find the former more likely than the latter at this point.

Vote: Matt_S

With regard to Patrick's post above, if Jitsu's a mafia roleblocker then he'd have no need to ask for a massclaim at the start of the day today, since he could just block the vig and kill the other townie for the win tonight. I'm hoping this means that we can still pull this off if we're wrong about Matt. I have a good feeling about this vote, though.

[Erg0]

Given Adel's random lynch Day 1 and her votehopping on Day 2, would it not have been wise to not fully trust Adel at that point?

Am I the only one who saw Xylthixlm push so hard for Adel's lynch? Am I the only one who thought that was scummy? Am I the only one who then believed Adel was attracting scum?

This doesn't really add up with your behaviour on day 2, where you voted Adel in the middle of the day. Also, you never mentioned this at all when voting for Xyl on day 3. This strikes me as somewhat revisionist.

[Erg0]

/bates breath.

The delay in hammering makes me 99% sure that Patrick's

not

an SK, unless he was just screwing with us for funsies. This is A Good Thing.

[Erg0]

Nice!

[Erg0]

Also: Sorry, Oman.

[Erg0]

The town did a good job here, Matt was really painted into a corner on the last night as all of the remaining town players would be fairly tough to lynch on day 4 given their good play to that point. Three consecutive accurate lynches is pretty good, though we did effectively mislynch Oman in between.

I've been working on relaxing and following my first instinct a little more, and I was really happy with the way that it worked out here. Even so, I spent hours doing analysis on the last day and ended up voting exactly as I thought I would after my initial half hour speed-read of Matt and Jitsu's posts.

Balance was probably ok, the two kills with inconsistent flavour would probably have served to create enough confusion to stop the town from steamrolling the scum based on investigations. If the Tracker and Watcher hadn't both died on night 1 then CO's fake claim might have carried him a bit further, too. I do think that a roleblocker could potentially have neutered the vig somewhat, given the kill-immune godfather - maybe a scum role that could feed the tracker and watcher a fake result would be an interesting addition.

Posting the vanilla PM up front is always a good idea - I'm glad that we didn't see any shenanigans on the last day related to that.

I'm not really a huge fan of the totally random wagon that Adel pulled on day 1, but I do think it gave us a good springboard for the rest of the game. Tuning her out and looking at others' play towards her was a good source of information. I'm kind of glad she died when she did, though.

Poor Oman - he never had a chance once the confirmation bias kicked in. That claim didn't exactly help his cause, of course. I was feeling very proud of myself for finding all three scum on day 1 for a little while there, and then he had to go and spoil it by being a townie!

All in all, I'm very happy with this one. I liked the fact that we were able to win it mainly by scumhunting rather than relying on power roles. Having lost more than one game via daykills/blocks/whatever at endgame despite playing well, I really appreciate a setup that puts a good share of the power in the hands of the townies.

[Erg0]

Not killing Patrick didn't make a lot of difference in the end (I wouldn't have voted Incog today either), but it would definitely have been the safer play. I wonder whether Matt was hoping someone would take up the SK line of thinking?

[Erg0]

Regarding the nightkill flavour, my thought is that this should take one of three forms:

• All kill flavour is the same; or
  
• Each group and/or individual has a unique kill flavour that remains the same throughout the game; or
  
• No two kills have the same flavour throughout the game.

I don't usually read too much into kill flavour, but some people may have been misled by the fact that the person who was "shot" on night 1 was targeted by a different killer than the person who was "shot" on night 2. It's really not a big deal, but I'd suggest avoiding crossover between kill methods unless you've made a conscious decision to do things that way.

I liked the votecount method, it made it relatively easy for me to check the state of the voting at various points through the game while I was re-reading. In practice, the vote counts at the top of the page are perfectly sufficient, but the big list on the first page is a useful addition.

Very nice modding overall, I think.