Kazio himself referenced the two cases where his role could be legitimate:

1) Tracker's kill succeeded, Mafia's kill was blocked

2) Tracker and mafia tried to kill the same person

 

The third case of course that Tracker's role is a fake based on the flavor text as a support.

 

I'm a bit confused Preston

Tracker???

I am a simple townie and only have the power of my vote. I want to use it wisely.

 

Interesting to note that KevinH claims to have no power role whatsoever.

Even CD, though only a customer, has the friend role together with Nereu.

I'm a bit confused Preston

Tracker???

 

Sorry, casualty of writing a message THAT long :-p I meant your kill ON tracker, and got you two mixed up. You can see what I meant there though.

 

-Preston

As for BeeBs-

I need to read through more of BeeBs' posts, but those huge paragraphs kinda blur together @.@ Separate lines can help.

 

His most current appears to be mostly confirmation/analysis of Kazio's roleclaim and d3mon's reaction to it. He goes out of his way to say it's not a defense of d3mon, which is somewhat interesting - but I'm not certain if that's significant enough to affect the rest of this tangled web.

 

I tend to write that way pretty much always, more wordy than I need to be. I'll work on being more concise, it is a skill I need to work on anyway. However, I do believe, dense as it may be, that there is significant access to my thoughts within that post and others. So while it may be wordy, it is nevertheless legitimate.

 

The reason I went out of my way to make the claim is twofold.

First, because I do not want to fall into the precedent of defending someone without any evidence. Like I tried to explain, if Kaziocore's evidence is D3mon's profile visits then there is no way to really defend him within the realm of his actions within this thread. Therefore, i didn't want to stage a defense of him without legitimate groundwork to do so. I just sort of visioned, "BeeBs defended him without any new evidence when Kaziocore role claimed".

Second, I wanted to make claims about the evidence itself rather than what the evidence implied. Therefore, I wasn't commenting on D3mon, simply the nature of the evidence and its role in this game.

 

 

My gut-check reaction to Kazio's claim was "SCUM!" because of the "I had a role but used it already and nothing happened that I can conclusively say was me" element of it - which is exactly the sort of role our scum roleclaim planning discussed as viable when we were talking in game 2.

 

I like this reaction and I think it serves as a good compliment to mine. I'll restate that rather than making you search through those oh so terrible paragraphs; I thought that Kaziocore would be a townie because it seemed to make more sense to me that if he was scum he wouldn't have to use his power role on the next night to prove it and/or use it to the benefit of the town to demonstrate its legitimacy. However, thinking more about that now, that would be a pretty difficult thing to ask and then bank on when its potentially the last day.

 

I think both of these gut feelings are just flip sides of a coin?

As for BeeBs-

I need to read through more of BeeBs' posts, but those huge paragraphs kinda blur together @.@ Separate lines can help.

 

His most current appears to be mostly confirmation/analysis of Kazio's roleclaim and d3mon's reaction to it. He goes out of his way to say it's not a defense of d3mon, which is somewhat interesting - but I'm not certain if that's significant enough to affect the rest of this tangled web.

 

I tend to write that way pretty much always, more wordy than I need to be. I'll work on being more concise, it is a skill I need to work on anyway. However, I do believe, dense as it may be, that there is significant access to my thoughts within that post and others. So while it may be wordy, it is nevertheless legitimate.

 

The reason I went out of my way to make the claim is twofold.

First, because I do not want to fall into the precedent of defending someone without any evidence. Like I tried to explain, if Kaziocore's evidence is D3mon's profile visits then there is no way to really defend him within the realm of his actions within this thread. Therefore, i didn't want to stage a defense of him without legitimate groundwork to do so. I just sort of visioned, "BeeBs defended him without any new evidence when Kaziocore role claimed".

Second, I wanted to make claims about the evidence itself rather than what the evidence implied. Therefore, I wasn't commenting on D3mon, simply the nature of the evidence and its role in this game.

 

 

My gut-check reaction to Kazio's claim was "SCUM!" because of the "I had a role but used it already and nothing happened that I can conclusively say was me" element of it - which is exactly the sort of role our scum roleclaim planning discussed as viable when we were talking in game 2.

 

I like this reaction and I think it serves as a good compliment to mine. I'll restate that rather than making you search through those oh so terrible paragraphs; I thought that Kaziocore would be a townie because it seemed to make more sense to me that if he was scum he wouldn't have to use his power role on the next night to prove it and/or use it to the benefit of the town to demonstrate its legitimacy. However, thinking more about that now, that would be a pretty difficult thing to ask and then bank on when its potentially the last day.

 

I think both of these gut feelings are just flip sides of a coin?

K so dont try to remember how to set up a new computer :X

 

I dont agree that just b/c someone viewed the mod's profile b/c it doesnt mean anything

 

I wont place a bet on where Kevin is telling the truth b/c either he is or like the last few games there has been no vanillas so theres no telling

 

On where Kaz is a true viligante or a scum claiming something else. I agree there is no way to know for sure b/c the scum must attack each night if not whats the point. I dont know if a multi attack is even possible

 

Will try to post more if my head stops spinning

By "too incredible" I don't mean that it would be impossible to fabricate.

I just tend to think that it seems like it is truth.

 

We've got four days to make a decision.

Make that three and a half.

Make that three and a half.

 

Well, what information should we try and collect before the end of the day? I'll defer to experience on this one. If you (everyone) haven't cast a vote, why? Besides "I don't find anyone summy enough", is there some amount of information that could help bring you to a vote? Is there some type of thing that would help anyone make decisions? By type of thing I mean roleclaims, specific scum tells or something categorical like that. Otherwise, do you just have some decision making to do?

 

I'm surprised that Kaziocore nor D3mon have not voted for one another. It seems like they have significantly indited one another. If we assume (this may or may not be a fair assumption) they vote for each other:

 

D3mon: Kaziocore

Kaziocore: D3mon

 

Well with a quick recount, we can afford two wrong votes before the scum can pile on if there are three mafia.

 

If I vote for either of them and am wrong, then assuming the other voter is scum we have

 

Townie (D3mon or Kaziocore): Mafia (D3mon or Kaziocore), Townie (BeeBs), Townie X, Mafia Y, Mafia Z

 

What does this mean? The question is, do I reasonably think I could vote for either of them with a strong enough assurance of their scumminess right now and not have another townie feel the same way as me?

Considering FightingOkra's history, if I voted for D3mon I believe he would certainly consider following me. I don't think FightingOkra is scum, so that means a loss if I am wrong.

Considering Preston's post, if I voted for Kaziocore I believe he could entertain a considered vote for Kaziocore. I don't think Preston is scum, so that means a loss if I am wrong.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced they are on separate teams, but I'm going to defer to popular opinion for now.

 

I'm worried about setting a precedent that will lead to a loss in this fashion. It makes me want to revert back to previous claims against KevinH, but I don't feel like he has continued the patterns I identified earlier. Furthermore, again considering Preston's post, he could potentially be the second townie to make the vote. However, I still have those considerations in the back of my mind and may end up there.

 

What if we No Lynch? While this seems counter intuitive to me, but it does a couple things:

1) It gives us another day. A no lynch prevents our loss today, unless my math is wrong. If my math is wrong, this is a silly idea.

2) It means we increase from a 37% to a 42% chance to blind guess a mafia. With a little bit of consideration I think our chances would be better than that as well, especially if Nerau is safe. Considering he wasn't killed yesterday, I don't know if that makes him a more or less likely target.

3) An undeclared townie role would get another shot, though that is heavy speculation.

 

So, if the answer to my first question really is "no one seems scummy enough", then is this a better alternative? If you don't think our odds are much better than guessing or at least strong enough to make a good case, then would this make our last lynch more effective? We'd just have to bite the bullet in this case. I'm not advocating this yet, but it seemed worth mentioning.

The reason not to vote is if a townie places a vote on a townie, the mafia can pile on and get the lynch at deadline.

We must be careful.

 

Assuming 5 townies and 3 mafia, a no-lynch might not be too bad.

The difficulty is that when it's 4-3, you have to convince all 4 townies to vote for a scum and not be swayed by any of the 3 scum.

The problem though with no-lynch is that

it doesn't change our current situation.

It's still 50-50 as it's between me and d3mon

unless (if there is) a cop roleclaims the next

day with useful information.

 

Depending on the decision of the majority,

I will vote d3mon. You may believe me or

not but I'm telling the truth that I'm a vigilante.

 

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

 

To those who are still doubting me (which I

understand perfectly) If I was lying, why roleclaim

vigilante as I risk the real vigilante roleclaiming...

why not roleclaim easy roles like a simple townie???

 

Of course someone will argue...

 

"The mafia told you to roleclaim as vigilante

to lure the real vigilante into roleclaiming...

anyway you're in danger of getting lynched

anyway"

 

... then I'm afraid you'll just have to have faith in me.

I worked hard to post my thoughts

during the whole game in order to

reveal everything for the town to

make the right decision. I hope it

will not come to waste...

K so dont try to remember how to set up a new computer :X

 

I dont agree that just b/c someone viewed the mod's profile b/c it doesnt mean anything

 

I wont place a bet on where Kevin is telling the truth b/c either he is or like the last few games there has been no vanillas so theres no telling

 

On where Kaz is a true viligante or a scum claiming something else. I agree there is no way to know for sure b/c the scum must attack each night if not whats the point. I dont know if a multi attack is even possible

 

Will try to post more if my head stops spinning

 

That's why I showed two logical explanations

1) mafia targeted you but someone protected you during the night

OR

2) mafia also targeted Tracker

K so dont try to remember how to set up a new computer :X

 

I dont agree that just b/c someone viewed the mod's profile b/c it doesnt mean anything

 

I wont place a bet on where Kevin is telling the truth b/c either he is or like the last few games there has been no vanillas so theres no telling

 

On where Kaz is a true viligante or a scum claiming something else. I agree there is no way to know for sure b/c the scum must attack each night if not whats the point. I dont know if a multi attack is even possible

 

Will try to post more if my head stops spinning

Hope your new computer setup is done at this point Nerau - good to hear from you again!

 

Not sure what you mean by multi-attack; only one person died last night when Kazio claims to have used his ability. As Kazio himself has stated, either scum's nightkill was blocked, scum chose to kill tracker - or if Kazio's claim is false, then the single kill could mean there IS no vigilante this game given the absence of a counter-claim to refute him.

 

As Kevin states, we've got just a few days left - so please try to collect your thoughts for an opinion soon.

 

By "too incredible" I don't mean that it would be impossible to fabricate.

I just tend to think that it seems like it is truth.

 

We've got four days to make a decision.

What I remarked upon was the utter lack of any analysis posted or consideration that Kazio's role could be fake - especially when (in my limited experience anyway) it appears to be a textbook unprovable claim. It's very lengthy and could be real - but the way it was used as a combination claim-and-attack rubs me the wrong way.

 

As for the approaching deadline - RoT should be back by now. Given the importance of the day it may be worthwhile to ask for an extension; this is make-or-break time, and I havent seen a real rebuttal or counterclaim from d3mon yet - inactivity is NOT useful when he's one of the main suspects, and we saw where that got us yesterday with Angel.

 

What if we No Lynch? While this seems counter intuitive to me, but it does a couple things:

1) It gives us another day. A no lynch prevents our loss today, unless my math is wrong. If my math is wrong, this is a silly idea.

2) It means we increase from a 37% to a 42% chance to blind guess a mafia. With a little bit of consideration I think our chances would be better than that as well, especially if Nerau is safe. Considering he wasn't killed yesterday, I don't know if that makes him a more or less likely target.

3) An undeclared townie role would get another shot, though that is heavy speculation.

 

So, if the answer to my first question really is "no one seems scummy enough", then is this a better alternative? If you don't think our odds are much better than guessing or at least strong enough to make a good case, then would this make our last lynch more effective? We'd just have to bite the bullet in this case. I'm not advocating this yet, but it seemed worth mentioning.

KevinH responds effectively to the first part of your post:

The reason not to vote is if a townie places a vote on a townie, the mafia can pile on and get the lynch at deadline.

We must be careful.

Though I'll add that with 5 town and 3 mafia, we'd need TWO town to mis-vote before they could pile on and force a finish to the day - weve got at least something of a buffer to work with at least.

 

As for going no-lynch... I had not considered this, but I believe your math is correct. With 5 town/3 scum currently alive, if we no-lynch today we will start tomorrow with 4 town/3 scum - same LYLO pressure, but with slightly better raw odds. The only possible disadvantage I can foresee is that if we have/had a one-shot doc (or never had a doc at all), scum might try and kill Nerau tonight and succeed - thus we'd have to redo today's deliberations the day without our only confirmed townie. Therefore if we decide to no-lynch, it's important to get as much opinion/thought out of Nerau today as possible in case he does not survive the night.

 

The problem though with no-lynch is that

it doesn't change our current situation.

It's still 50-50 as it's between me and d3mon

unless (if there is) a cop roleclaims the next

day with useful information.

 

Depending on the decision of the majority,

I will vote d3mon. You may believe me or

not but I'm telling the truth that I'm a vigilante.

 

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

 

To those who are still doubting me (which I

understand perfectly) If I was lying, why roleclaim

vigilante as I risk the real vigilante roleclaiming...

why not roleclaim easy roles like a simple townie???

 

Of course someone will argue...

 

"The mafia told you to roleclaim as vigilante

to lure the real vigilante into roleclaiming...

anyway you're in danger of getting lynched

anyway"

 

... then I'm afraid you'll just have to have faith in me.

I worked hard to post my thoughts

during the whole game in order to

reveal everything for the town to

make the right decision. I hope it

will not come to waste...

Youre not claiming doctor or cop, which (I believe) always appear in these games in SOME form. Vigilante appears to be a less-used role; one of those that scum could feel safer claiming since there are less odds of there being an actual one to counterclaim.

 

And given that your roleclaim was also an attack on d3mon (the other in the 50/50 equation that seems to have developed), you can't really get credit for claiming on your own either - it was done to further your attack, and in response to people already suspecting you.

 

As for information I think we need before the day ends:

1) d3mon, please post something more tangible to respond to Kazio's roleclaim/attack on you so we can make SOME kind of a decision. Now is not the time to go inactive!

2) Need to hear more from Nerau, particularly on d3mon vs Kazio.

3) Since it's past 8/7, at this time RoT should be back as MOD, correct? One key piece of information we are missing is what role Tracker had, since EM did not know even a role name for it that would give us a hint as to what it did. Per KevinH's earlier post, it may have been a weak role (in which cop/doc are both as yet unclaimed) or a strong role (in which case it may have replaced one of them this game). So:

MOD: If you're back RoT, please give us the correct name for Tracker's role?

 

If the day were to end NOW and I had to vote... Im not sure which way I'd go. Kevin and kazio are both suspicious to me, but I havent seen a proverbial 'smoking gun' from either of them - and d3mon is just semi-inactive, which is NOT what we need from him right now. Are scum usually more or less active on LYLO days?

 

-Preston

The problem though with no-lynch is that

it doesn't change our current situation.

It's still 50-50 as it's between me and d3mon

unless (if there is) a cop roleclaims the next

day with useful information.

 

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

 

To those who are still doubting me (which I

understand perfectly) If I was lying, why roleclaim

vigilante as I risk the real vigilante roleclaiming...

why not roleclaim easy roles like a simple townie???

 

1) I didn't mean to start up some sort of false ultimatum in my last post. While obviously there are other lynch candidates, the two of you seem to relatively certain of each other. Furthermore, from everyone's discussion it seems like you've both caught the most heat. However, I would be happy to entertain other choices as well. KevinH has been mentioned by a few of us, as have others. Let's not get to sucked into simply voting for Kaziocore or D3mon and marginalize the other two scum that are out there.

 

2) Why role claim vigilante? As myself and others have pointed out, you can claim a power role without taking any further responsibility seeing has you have wasted your shot. I don't think we have much more reason to think there is another vigilante. Why not roleclaim as a simple townie? We've all been role claiming as a simple townie since Day 1. You could have simply disseminated your "evidence" against D3mon without any role claim what so ever. It doesn't seem to lend much credibility and could maybe even detract from your credibility.

Though I'll add that with 5 town and 3 mafia, we'd need TWO town to mis-vote before they could pile on and force a finish to the day - weve got at least something of a buffer to work with at least.

 

As for going no-lynch... I had not considered this, but I believe your math is correct. With 5 town/3 scum currently alive, if we no-lynch today we will start tomorrow with 4 town/3 scum - same LYLO pressure, but with slightly better raw odds. The only possible disadvantage I can foresee is that if we have/had a one-shot doc (or never had a doc at all), scum might try and kill Nerau tonight and succeed - thus we'd have to redo today's deliberations the day without our only confirmed townie. Therefore if we decide to no-lynch, it's important to get as much opinion/thought out of Nerau today as possible in case he does not survive the night.

 

I pointed out both of these in my last post as well. Unfortunately, in terms of buffer it doesn't do a whole lot of good. Its not a real beneficial buffer.

 

That's part of the reason why I don't see that a no lynch vote today would make us worse off tomorrow. We might lose Nerau, but whether we do or not our odds don't drop. Unfortunately, he hasn't been very active. If that continues through the end of the day I don't know that it wouldn't be better to no lynch today and vote tomorrow than to roll the dice today. If Nerau gets a little more involved his opinion in our vote today might be worth more than raw odds. I think it would have to be a pretty substantive opinion though....

 

Vote Today (Nerau Confirmed/3 Mafia Assumed)

3 mafia/7 reasonable contestants: 43% chance to lynch a mafia

 

No Lynch Today - Nerau Survives

3 mafia/6 reasonable votes: 50% chance to lynch a mafia

 

No Lynch Today - Nerau Dies

3 mafia/7 reasonable votes: 43% chance to lynch a mafia

 

Either way, we don't lose ground? (Please, double check my reasoning/math if you think something is funny.)

I am sorry for the inactivity, will definitely post something meaningful later in the day..

And given that your roleclaim was also an attack on d3mon (the other in the 50/50 equation that seems to have developed), you can't really get credit for claiming on your own either - it was done to further your attack, and in response to people already suspecting you.

Of course! Roleclaims are done in desperate situations especially in LYLO.

I know I'm pro-town and I find d3mon to be the most suspicious right now...

 

You're false roleclaim in the last game is different than mine.

You chose a role that appears very very rarely that most likely

no one would roleclaim against you. Mine is a vigilante that

is more probable to appear as it appeared in TMCWPTI #1.

 

2) Why role claim vigilante? As myself and others have pointed out, you can claim a power role without taking any further responsibility seeing has you have wasted your shot. I don't think we have much more reason to think there is another vigilante. Why not roleclaim as a simple townie? We've all been role claiming as a simple townie since Day 1. You could have simply disseminated your "evidence" against D3mon without any role claim what so ever. It doesn't seem to lend much credibility and could maybe even detract from your credibility.

 

Why role claim as a simple townie if you're really not one?

So you're saying I should have lied?

Why role claim as a simple townie if you're really not one?

 

A townie with a power role will make himself a target for the night-kill if he role-claims truthfully.

So usually everyone just says they are simple townies, whether they are scum or townies with power roles.

 

In my case, I really am a simple townie. Trust me. :angel:

Why role claim as a simple townie if you're really not one?

So you're saying I should have lied?

 

A) Because you are scum. Because you have a power role that is better left unknown. C) Having a power role at all, even a relatively weak one in Nerau's case (though obviously beneficial and could be used quite effectively...until the other one dies :facepalm: ), makes you a target for the scum that could significantly change the odds of victory, (See my last post) so you keep your mouth shut.

 

No, I'm saying everyone role claims they are a simple townie from Day 1. Your particular role claim did not add any evidence to your suspicions of D3mon and seeing as you wasted your shot, has lead to no tangible benefit to the town whatsoever. Therefore, I find it to be relatively moot that you role claimed at all in terms of actual game benefit, but I do find it interesting for other reasons. Namely, that you felt compelled to do so at that time, that you used it to bolster your credibility when it really doesn't seem to, and finally that you don't seem to think there is any problem with your role claim in these ways, and others, when you've also claimed that you "understand perfectly" that there are suspicions of it.

Sorry, I didn't mean anything with the . That should merely read "B )" with no spaces.

Of course! Roleclaims are done in desperate situations especially in LYLO.

I know I'm pro-town and I find d3mon to be the most suspicious right now...

 

You're false roleclaim in the last game is different than mine.

You chose a role that appears very very rarely that most likely

no one would roleclaim against you. Mine is a vigilante that

is more probable to appear as it appeared in TMCWPTI #1.

 

Why role claim as a simple townie if you're really not one?

So you're saying I should have lied?

I had forgotten that there was a vigilante in the first game - interesting, but my impression from reading mafiascum was vigilantes were still less common than other roles. And while you are correct that my fakeclaim last game was for a less common role, it was still a risk since mole had used the 'security guard' mechanic again and the 'curious child' was designed to offset that so it could have still been there. But yeah, that was then and this is now.

 

Kevin addresses the issues surrounding a fake town roleclaim fairly well - though I dont think it applies to single-use roles AS much, since they are post-claim normal townies. So at this point you are either now normal townie or scum - either case not at particular risk for being bumped off. It feels like I'm the only one even suspicious of your claim, which is a little disturbing to me - that people are so easily sold on a vigilante even existing when the 'obvious' symptom of two night kills has not been seen. Call me overly suspicious if you like, but it just doesnt sit right with me.

 

I am also rather curious about how inactive d3mon seems to be at this stage, while Kazio is responding quite swiftly - I know the conventional wisdom is for scum to lay low and avoid suspicion, but at this stage I'd almost think the inactivity (and lack of defense it creates) appears MORE town instead of less - while Kazio's rapid responses more fit the profile of trying to ensure their target gets lynched. Maybe I'm reading too much into it though - and I would FAR prefer a more active d3mon at this stage. His earlier "I'll post more later" post notwithstanding - I know RL can take up time, but right now we're on the cusp of either voting between him and kazio, or voting no-lynch - we need to hear his side.

 

In my case, I really am a simple townie. Trust me. :angel:

Heh... if only it were that simple, hm? Angel of innocence and everything... you MUST be scum!

 

In all seriousness, until I get more to evaluate from d3mon I am currently eyeing KevinH + Kazio as the two scum who voted for Angel. There's still a chance ONE of them could be real, but the immediate and unquestioning affirmation from KevinH in response to Kazio's claim is a far cry from his usual analysis and one hell of a red flag for me. And per above, Kazio's claim is still not sitting right with me. Again, its not a smoking gun from either of them... but absent any kind of cop that's the best I have to go on.

 

I am still convinced the 50/50 between demon and kazio appears to be valid - if d3mon claims or otherwise defends himself in a scummy/suspicious way, then I may reverse my opinion on kazio. But I need SOMETHING to evaluate from d3mon beyond just a response to Kazio's attack.

 

I am still waiting for RoT to give us Tracker's real role name, more opinion from Nerau as our only townie, and more ANYTHING from d3mon.

 

-Preston

A) Because you are scum. Because you have a power role that is better left unknown. C) Having a power role at all, even a relatively weak one in Nerau's case (though obviously beneficial and could be used quite effectively...until the other one dies :facepalm: ), makes you a target for the scum that could significantly change the odds of victory, (See my last post) so you keep your mouth shut.

 

No, I'm saying everyone role claims they are a simple townie from Day 1. Your particular role claim did not add any evidence to your suspicions of D3mon and seeing as you wasted your shot, has lead to no tangible benefit to the town whatsoever. Therefore, I find it to be relatively moot that you role claimed at all in terms of actual game benefit, but I do find it interesting for other reasons. Namely, that you felt compelled to do so at that time, that you used it to bolster your credibility when it really doesn't seem to, and finally that you don't seem to think there is any problem with your role claim in these ways, and others, when you've also claimed that you "understand perfectly" that there are suspicions of it.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean anything with the . That should merely read "B )" with no spaces.

Bah, you posted while I was posting!

 

Regarding the a/b/c bit, thats why I sometimes tend to do my lists with numbers instead

 

As for the rest of your post - if he had a real vigilante, it's gone now and so there's no additional threat to him, per my post above - so that's not a reason to keep quiet if he was town. The rest of what you said I believe I've already addressed, and Kazio acknowledged: that his claim was used as a defense and an attack on d3mon, who is basically the other suspect aside from himself. And it's obviously bolstered his credibility with KevinH, for whatever reason - Kevin as either duped town or complicit scum.

 

Anyway, unless someone ELSE has posted while Im writing this, I'll respond later tonight or tomorrow to any new developments - going to be busy for the rest of the day.

 

-Preston

I had forgotten that there was a vigilante in the first game - interesting, but my impression from reading mafiascum was vigilantes were still less common than other roles. And while you are correct that my fakeclaim last game was for a less common role, it was still a risk since mole had used the 'security guard' mechanic again and the 'curious child' was designed to offset that so it could have still been there. But yeah, that was then and this is now.

 

Kevin addresses the issues surrounding a fake town roleclaim fairly well - though I dont think it applies to single-use roles AS much, since they are post-claim normal townies. So at this point you are either now normal townie or scum - either case not at particular risk for being bumped off. It feels like I'm the only one even suspicious of your claim, which is a little disturbing to me - that people are so easily sold on a vigilante even existing when the 'obvious' symptom of two night kills has not been seen. Call me overly suspicious if you like, but it just doesnt sit right with me.

 

I am also rather curious about how inactive d3mon seems to be at this stage, while Kazio is responding quite swiftly - I know the conventional wisdom is for scum to lay low and avoid suspicion, but at this stage I'd almost think the inactivity (and lack of defense it creates) appears MORE town instead of less - while Kazio's rapid responses more fit the profile of trying to ensure their target gets lynched. Maybe I'm reading too much into it though - and I would FAR prefer a more active d3mon at this stage. His earlier "I'll post more later" post notwithstanding - I know RL can take up time, but right now we're on the cusp of either voting between him and kazio, or voting no-lynch - we need to hear his side.

 

 

Heh... if only it were that simple, hm? Angel of innocence and everything... you MUST be scum!

 

In all seriousness, until I get more to evaluate from d3mon I am currently eyeing KevinH + Kazio as the two scum who voted for Angel. There's still a chance ONE of them could be real, but the immediate and unquestioning affirmation from KevinH in response to Kazio's claim is a far cry from his usual analysis and one hell of a red flag for me. And per above, Kazio's claim is still not sitting right with me. Again, its not a smoking gun from either of them... but absent any kind of cop that's the best I have to go on.

 

I am still convinced the 50/50 between demon and kazio appears to be valid - if d3mon claims or otherwise defends himself in a scummy/suspicious way, then I may reverse my opinion on kazio. But I need SOMETHING to evaluate from d3mon beyond just a response to Kazio's attack.

 

I am still waiting for RoT to give us Tracker's real role name, more opinion from Nerau as our only townie, and more ANYTHING from d3mon.

 

-Preston

 

d3mon being inactive doesn't mean anything as it could be WIFOM

but if you insist if I was him I would defend myself if I'm really townie

as getting lynched means losing.

 

And of course I don't want to get lynched as it means the mafia will win.

If the rest of the players will not dedicate their time into playing

then we might as well No Lynch.

 

In the hypothetical situation that

d3mon, preston, kevinh or beebs

(whichever combination) are scum,

then the town will surely lose as the

other half is very inactive...

(nerau, ccabal's replacement, fighting okra)

If the rest of the players will not dedicate their time into playing

then we might as well No Lynch.

 

In the hypothetical situation that

d3mon, preston, kevinh or beebs

(whichever combination) are scum,

then the town will surely lose as the

other half is very inactive...

(nerau, ccabal's replacement, fighting okra)

 

This seems rather misleading.

 

First, you haven't put yourself on this list. So it is short one candidate.

Second, there is surely reason to divide between more than just two categories of activity.

Third, Nerau is town no matter what side of the list he is on.

Fourth, there are good reasons to be more inactive than active and visa versa, at this point in the game, as a scum.

Fifth, activity in terms of frequency it is just as important as activity in terms of content.

Sixth, you give no evidence to suggest that if one (or even two) people on your active list are scum that they will win or evidence to suggest that people on either list are scum or not. Seems more like a scare tactic.

Eighth, the scum need the townies to vote (a.k.a. be active) to get a day kill. If we're smart they won't win that way.

 

In addition, I think thinking in terms of activity for vote candidates is something we need to move past as it is a partial reason (maybe even the dominant reason) we're losing.

 

On the other hand, I concur with your conclusion about a no lynch for other reasons. If we don't decide to vote for someone collectively today, and we should, I think, before we actually use our vote power, then we might want to no lynch. It doesn't seem like anyone has demonstrated that this is a particularly stupid idea anyway. If we no lynch, tomorrow we will have to be especially careful about deciding who to lynch before we actually type in our vote.