KevinH

Assuming there are a limited number of queries, it's more efficient to do it in groups. The statement could be "Nerau-Narsis, Kaziocore, and Aquinas are townie." If it's true, you have cleared 3 people. If it's false, you can lynch with a least a 1 in 3 chance of catching scum.

The MSG Secure Hospital for the Criminally Insane (MSGSHCI) "We don't call them inmates, we call them patients." I think there might be more tied into the theme. I normally think of an insane cop as always getting the wrong result. Maybe something similar would have happened here if the cop didn't get night-killed right away. We assume there is a strong doc because we know there was a weak doc. Maybe the description weak was just meant to contrast it with normal in other games. . . . Note to those that will scream "scum-tell for role-fishing": please tell me how the scum will benefit before pointing the finger at me.

I'll agree with that! If there happens to be a truth-confirming role... I am townie and Falzis is scum.

Alternatively, it's so convenient for scum to step in, orchestrate a lynch and say, "Oh, I really thought Sojourner was scum."

Correct. My bad.

Narsis #1 was killed and proven to be townie so it's not him. Falzis and Electric Mango were the two that voted unsuccessfully to lynch a townie (proven later) on day 1. I understand it could have been a bad attempt at scum-hunting but we don't know for sure at this point. Kaziocore, Aquinas, and Sir Jesus just don't seem as suspicious. Narsis' replacing in has nothing to do with alignment. -M

Despite my saying I can't argue against it, I'll make a weak rebuttal. "I've put my head and neck too much out there to be a mafia." Maybe. But this is a case of Wine In Front Of Me. Wouldn't a mafia want to put his head and neck out there to appear that he's not mafia? "Sojourner's death cannot be solely placed upon me and cannot be a scum tell for me." Maybe. Two voted for him on the first day and six voted for him on the second day. I'm willing to bet at least one scum was part of the six that lynched on the second day. I haven't seen a reason to deviate from my first impression.

Now that I reread it, I see that I was wrong. I apologize for implying that you were misleading when you said that I was misleading when I said you were misleading.

Please link the post where Martino shot me down. It will be tough to do since Martino hasn't posted after I said I'd support lynching an inactive. Who's misleading whom? VOTE COUNT Falzis (2): KevinH, Theophilos Kaziocore (1): CanucksDynasty Sir Jesus (1): Electric Mango Electric Mango (1): Martino Not Voting (5): Narsis, Kaziocore, Falzis, Aquinas, Sir Jesus - Deadline is just over a week away.

"Lots of evidence to make a case for" So are you glad that you lynched Sojourner the townie? An inactive townie player hurts the town team worse than an inactive scum player hurts the scum team. I'll go a step further: an active player that leads the town to lynch townies is not helping the town.

OK, I'll expand a bit. Sure, the scum would prefer that they have an active player and it's a disadvantage to them if they have a inactive player. However, any lynch that kills a scum is a good lynch. The point I made is that an inactive scum doesn't stop the night kill. I don't feel it was "glossing over" an obvious fact when my goal is to lynch any scum I can.

Not at all. There's my answer.

Please note that Falzis brought "No Lynch" up again, not me. I won't say anything more regarding that. Nerau could have been scum or could have been townie. I need active townies in the end game and Nerau definitely would not have met that need. But Narsis is back and he'll be active. Welcome!

3 mafia = 1 night kill 2 mafia = 1 night kill 1 mafia = 1 night kill Do the mafia really need the help at this point?

I don't object to this. He's as likely to be scum as any and if townie will possibly not help the town when we need him. VOTE COUNT Falzis (2): KevinH, Theophilos Kaziocore (1): CanucksDynasty Sir Jesus (1): Electric Mango Electric Mango (1): Martino Nerau (1): Sir Jesus Not Voting (4): Nerau, Kaziocore, Falzis, Aquinas - Nerau still needs replacing. I MAY have a replacement ready. If you know anyone, shoot me off a PM anyway.

I'll back you up. Since there was a weak doc that knew something, there is probably a strong doc that knows something, too. If there is another cop or power role that could use protection, I could see a role claim asking for protection. However, in this game, at this point in time, I don't think a role claim is in order. The scum know whom the townies are. They don't know the specific roles. If they were told that so-and-so is has a power role and wants protection, then they would know not to target that player and instead hit another townie with an increased chance of hitting the strong doc. If the stong doc knows something and we are about to make a lynching mistake, that could be another case where a role claim would be prudent.

I like Kaziocore. I think he has an equal chance as the rest to be scum, but he's still learning and shouldn't be killed early without much evidence against him. VOTE COUNT Kaziocore (3): Martino, CanucksDynasty, Falzis Falzis (2): KevinH, Theophilos Sir Jesus (1): Electric Mango Not Voting (5): Nerau, Sir Jesus, Kaziocore, Aquinas - Nerau still needs replacing, I have no-one lined up, they're all busy. Anyone knows someone / anyone dead wants to do it, shoot me off a PM.

I figured as much. Regarding Falzis' defense, I think he makes a good case and can't really argue against it. However, I don't see anyone else that would make a better candidate. The fact remains that he pushed for the lynch of a townie.

It's just another weak attempt at humor. I think it is safe to assume that each person will declare themselves townie.

But not yourself? Hmmm....

Unfortunately, that's also how scum should play the game. He's got my vote.

It would take an experienced player to know the experienced players to kill. So maybe it was an inexperienced player that did the killing. Or maybe it was an experienced player trying to look like an inexperienced player...

At a minimum, a vote got placed that might have hit scum. That's better than not voting. Since Narsis was leaving, and it didn't really matter to the scum whom they killed, Narsis was as good a choice as any. Any other townie that was killed could have come back to replace Narsis, but the effect is the same.

Reminds of the liar's paradox ("Everything I say is a lie. I am lying" Am I a liar or not?) To answer your question, I always believe in WIFOM; just some times more than others.

We only had 2 players that didn't vote yesterday. Neither of those 2 got night-killed so in a sense, the scum did go after an "active" player. Narsis would have replaced by somebody agreeing to play so that would have been another "active" player coming in. The scum know if the active players are on the right track and if they are not, then the scum would be well-served to keep them alive. I almost just talked myself out of my vote on Falzis. Almost, but not quite.