A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [END GAME]

[Golden]

I don't see the merit in the discussion.

I agree. It's arguing policy again. Let glorf be glorf.

[Scotty]

I'm making a blanket statement that I trust none of you and will be voting a no-show or low poster. That there are 12/25 people not being civs, a coin flip isn't the worst thing in the world atm

[DrWilgy]

Besides my role, I haven't read any of the other roles yet. This is true. I intend to fix this.

I've only read my role and your role.

Odd... I've only read yours and snow dog's as well...

[Marmot]

I'm making a blanket statement that I trust none of you and will be voting a no-show or low poster. That there are 12/25 people not being civs, a coin flip isn't the worst thing in the world atm

Good point Scotty. I think I'll join you there.

[Golden]

Klaus role seems insanely broken but I don't see why he would do anything except investigate two baddies.

It would be insanely broken if you could infodump or if nightkills weren't immediately janitored - as it is, he could use both on baddies and we might never figure it out if he doesn't play it carefully.

Here is a civilian Klaus might look for - Hal.

[Golden]

@Epi

You never said Snow Dog was good, true.

What you said was "I won't be voting for him."

Well, for what it's worth, I won't be voting for you Day 1 either, Jack. It has nothing to do with your alignment (or his).

Oh yeah? Can't figure out how to use the polls either, then?

I'm really liking Jack

[Golden]

Uhhh

ishmael, given those recent revelations is a huge threat.

Explain... sounds like he could recruit baddies and help finish the game earlier in the Civs favour. I guess it works in reverse if he recruits Civs?

Mirrors my thoughts.

Could put us in the awkward situation where the cult and the town are the only groups left plus one scummer so that cult suddenly is motivated to not lynch the last scum.....then the entire cult disappears (I guess?) and the town kills the last scummer.

I mean, basically, this type of cult appears to be a super delayed serial killer that misses 50% of the time or if anyone else kills his targets in the next 1-6 phases. Plus he only has to "kill" half the other players instead of all of them and if he "kills" the last scum player, they die instantly instead of on a delay.

Overall, I'm not understanding the "Ishmael is a huge threat" thought process. He's a pretty freaking weak cult leader.

I agree with this assessment in principle.

There is, though, the possibility that the cult leader recruits a baddie first, the baddie says 'this is my teammates, lets not kill them', and their goal is to navigate that team to the win (along with the cult) at the expense of the civs. We can't guarantee Ishmael will be civ friendly.

[Scotty]

Klaus role seems insanely broken but I don't see why he would do anything except investigate two baddies.

It would be insanely broken if you could infodump or if nightkills weren't immediately janitored - as it is, he could use both on baddies and we might never figure it out if he doesn't play it carefully.

Here is a civilian Klaus might look for - Hal.

This exact dilemma has always made me pause in the no-info-dumping games. If I were in that position I'm not sure what I would do- I haven't yet had a role that I could do that, but I'm nervous in case I ever get it- I dunno if I would constantly go after the found Olaf in hopes that I will be some kamikaze and be lynched, thus making it glaringly obvious that the player I was jumping on is Olaf, or attempt to sprinkle on subtle suspicions over time, but not making it clear that he is bad. Either way, it's all down to making sure you don't get NK'd too early.

Good thing I'm not that role this game. But I intend to study the posts made by both Hal and Klaus once the game ends and I know who you all are, because I'm sure you'll do a great job.

[Scotty]

im also about to take off flying cross country today again for the second time in 2 days so I'm gonna be out pretty much all day

[Scotty]

Oh, and I will not vote for jack, soup, or Marco on day 1 because I have never played with you before and I'm pretty sure a few of you are new here and I ain't gonna just throw you out like an old cold bowl of Pho

[Golden]

Klaus role seems insanely broken but I don't see why he would do anything except investigate two baddies.

It would be insanely broken if you could infodump or if nightkills weren't immediately janitored - as it is, he could use both on baddies and we might never figure it out if he doesn't play it carefully.

Here is a civilian Klaus might look for - Hal.

This exact dilemma has always made me pause in the no-info-dumping games. If I were in that position I'm not sure what I would do- I haven't yet had a role that I could do that, but I'm nervous in case I ever get it- I dunno if I would constantly go after the found Olaf in hopes that I will be some kamikaze and be lynched, thus making it glaringly obvious that the player I was jumping on is Olaf, or attempt to sprinkle on subtle suspicions over time, but not making it clear that he is bad. Either way, it's all down to making sure you don't get NK'd too early.

Good thing I'm not that role this game. But I intend to study the posts made by both Hal and Klaus once the game ends and I know who you all are, because I'm sure you'll do a great job.

It's a tough road to travel, for sure.

[Golden]

And.... I'm caught up finally.

[Marmot]

And.... I'm caught up finally.

What have you learned? (I'm not caught up)

[Golden]

And.... I'm caught up finally.

What have you learned? (I'm not caught up)

Remarkably little. I have to get ready for work, but I'll post something slightly more detailed later.

[Dom]

I'm making a blanket statement that I trust none of you and will be voting a no-show or low poster. That there are 12/25 people not being civs, a coin flip isn't the worst thing in the world atm

How does one of these statements follow the other?

[Long Con]

I'm making a blanket statement that I trust none of you and will be voting a no-show or low poster. That there are 12/25 people not being civs, a coin flip isn't the worst thing in the world atm

But a single vote on its own is completely wasted. Your vote also should consider the other votes on the poll, or at least some prevailing suspicions.

This exact dilemma has always made me pause in the no-info-dumping games. If I were in that position I'm not sure what I would do- I haven't yet had a role that I could do that, but I'm nervous in case I ever get it- I dunno if I would constantly go after the found Olaf in hopes that I will be some kamikaze and be lynched, thus making it glaringly obvious that the player I was jumping on is Olaf, or attempt to sprinkle on subtle suspicions over time, but not making it clear that he is bad...

Neither... you study Olaf and learn to understand what the baddie motivation is behind his votes, his buddying, the sincerity of his accusations, and whatever else you can, and you build a case. Then, provided you are lucky enough to still be alive, you lay out the case, you vote for him, and dust off your hands. A good case, especially if you are earnest about it, should win hearts and minds enough.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I don't wanna talk about Glorf's moral principals.

Look y'all, life is like a box of chocolates mmk? Sometimes you get cherry cordial, and you didn't want cherry cordial. Sometimes you pop an almond in your mouth and you're allergic to almond. Next time just stick to an apple or something that has no chance to let you down.

FUJI APPLE FOR OFFICE 2020

Here's what I wanna talk about: the fires at the beach. Why were there fires at the beach?

And has anyone not checked in yet?

Probably because the story starts with a fire in the movie and presumably the books.

[Jackofhearts2005]

The easy route doesn't allow you to paint people as scum. For all the angles Zebra expects DDL and Jack to have considered, at a time when no decision or claim can even be close to final, she overlooks angles herself like culture clash and approaches their statements as definitive in terms of Snow Dog being their day one lynch.

I'll be voting Zebra for now.

Their statements were incredibly definitive. DDL said Snow Dog should either be policy lynched if not lying or, if lying, there was a 99% chance of being bad.

JoH listed three possibilities, truthful scum, truthful town, lying scum, but did not consider lying town. That's not 'all the angles zebra expects them to consider'. It was one - and a pretty blatant one at that. It's not hard to look at that list and see JoH as potentially deliberately not considering one option.

Zebra did not (although others did) expect them to consider the 'it's just day zero banter, referencing monkey island' angle, which might be what you would call 'culture clash'. By the way, DDL has been at this site nearly as long as me, and he's an ambassador, so I hardly think his views can be construed as 'culture clash'. He knows what to expect.

And in all of that, I did not see zebra rushing to call either Jack or DDL as scum. She just engaged them in a dialogue about why their perspective was limiting (which it was). I haven't really got a sense of how firmly Jack or DDL have stuck to their guns yet since I haven't finished a catchup, but I'd hope that they'd listen to the many people who (correctly) identified that Snow Dog was referencing Monkey Island.

Also, votes are permanent, so forget 'for now'... you voted zebra.

This is the most suspicious thing I've seen. It's incredibly misrepresentative of what occurred, and it's just a bizarre vote, almost like 'I'm voting zebra because I also experience culture clash at this site, and zebra doesn't seem to consider that'. I'm going to be strongly considering a vote for soneji.

The underlined section is 100% false. As previously discussed, I considered the option of "lying town" and have several times posted about how such a play would be poor strategy in my opinion. Because it would be such poor strategy, I dismissed the scenario outright.

Zebra then said that my logic was not sound because I had dismissed the other three scenarios for similar reasoning.

I then asked for clarification because I didn't understand what Zebra meant by my reasons for dismissing the other scenarios because I had not dismissed them. Zebra didn't respond.

I'm surprised you missed all the posts about this and are still operating under the idea "Jack did not consider that Snow could be a lying townie."

[Glorfindel]

I don't see the merit in the discussion.

I agree. It's arguing policy again. Let glorf be glorf.

Your eloquence has been rewarded, my friend

[Golden]

@Jack - I didn't miss those posts, but they represented a progression from the starting point. In the particular post that really set zebra out, you did LIST three possibilities, and not the fourth. I don't know how you can say that's 100% false - here's the post:

I could get behind splitting the difference with alignment only flips. While no janitoring is more comfortable to me, I'm big on trying new things.

I'm playing without reading my role.

This seems like a terrible idea.

If you're being truthful and you're town, this only hurts your performance.

If you're being truthful and you're scum, maybe you don't accidentally give yourself away with a scumtell.

You could also be scum and lying, using this as a shield. "Anything scummy I say can't actually be scummy cause I don't even know my alignment."

I'm with the marmot. You seem like a great first lynch.

Do you disagree that you set out three but not a fourth in that post? Do you disagree that zebra primarily was pointing out views about that fourth position that you did not include?

You say 'you dismissed it outright'. Well, you dismissed it outright to the point you did not consider it in your post. No-one can be expected to know (in that moment) that you had considered it in your mind.

My post that you are objecting to is analysing why I do not agree with soneji's assertions about zebra. Do you agree with them? Let's not make it about you for a second - for the purposes of my point, you're just a bystander who happened to be there when the action went down. Do you think zebra asked you to consider 'so many angles'? Do you think zebra was trying to paint you (and/or DDL) as scum? Do you disagree that your statements (and DDL's) were quite definitive in your perspective of lynching Snow Dog?

Do you, yourself, find zebra suspicious for the way in which she engaged you?

Do you, yourself, find soneji's synopsis of zebra's behaviour compelling and genuine?

[Golden]

I don't see the merit in the discussion.

I agree. It's arguing policy again. Let glorf be glorf.

Your eloquence has been rewarded, my friend

Ooooh, I see what you mean.

[Long Con]

He also didn't list "one of the secret abilities could be forcing you to claim this", "you may have a secret that results in a Civ benefit for saying these things", or "you're just kidding around".

There's not just four options any more than there are just three. And he never said those are the only three options. He just listed some options.

[Golden]

He also didn't list "one of the secret abilities could be forcing you to claim this", "you may have a secret that results in a Civ benefit for saying these things", or "you're just kidding around".

There's not just four options any more than there are just three. And he never said those are the only three options. He just listed some options.

I fixed that for you.

When someone wants to talk about the point instead of talking semantics, get back to me.

[Jackofhearts2005]

@Jack - I didn't miss those posts, but they represented a progression from the starting point. In the particular post that really set zebra out, you did LIST three possibilities, and not the fourth. I don't know how you can say that's 100% false - here's the post:

I could get behind splitting the difference with alignment only flips. While no janitoring is more comfortable to me, I'm big on trying new things.

I'm playing without reading my role.

This seems like a terrible idea.

If you're being truthful and you're town, this only hurts your performance.

If you're being truthful and you're scum, maybe you don't accidentally give yourself away with a scumtell.

You could also be scum and lying, using this as a shield. "Anything scummy I say can't actually be scummy cause I don't even know my alignment."

I'm with the marmot. You seem like a great first lynch.

Do you disagree that you set out three but not a fourth in that post? Do you disagree that zebra primarily was pointing out views about that fourth position that you did not include?

You say 'you dismissed it outright'. Well, you dismissed it outright to the point you did not consider it in your post. No-one can be expected to know (in that moment) that you had considered it in your mind.

My post that you are objecting to is analysing why I do not agree with soneji's assertions about zebra. Do you agree with them? Let's not make it about you for a second - for the purposes of my point, you're just a bystander who happened to be there when the action went down. Do you think zebra asked you to consider 'so many angles'? Do you think zebra was trying to paint you (and/or DDL) as scum? Do you disagree that your statements (and DDL's) were quite definitive in your perspective of lynching Snow Dog?

Do you, yourself, find zebra suspicious for the way in which she engaged you?

Do you, yourself, find soneji's synopsis of zebra's behaviour compelling and genuine?

"It's not hard to look at this list and see JoH deliberately blatantly ignoring an option."

That's the bit of your post I don't like cause I wasn't and my later posts addressed it. But I see what you're saying. As of that first post, okay. It was an assumption on Zebra's part and perhaps an understandable one but like LC said, there are infinite possibilities and removing the far fetched ones is reasonable.



Do I agree with Sonji's analysis and find it convincing.

Do I think I was asked to consider angles I had not? No. Angles Zebra though I had not considered. Probably.

Was Zebra trying to paint us as scum? No, not primarily. If anything, I consider buddying with Snow as a more likely evil plan. Easy enough to assume Snow wasn't going to get lynched and DDL and I probably weren't either, at least not over this exchange. Buddying is more lasting and more likely to succeed.

Do I disagree about my statement and DDL's being definitive? I disagree about mine. I suppose I don't about DDL. He was still calling for a Snow lynch last I checked.

Do I think Zebra's posts were suspicious? Yes. Culture issues aside, there were some nonsensical statements relating to "dismissed" options and lying as town but not lying as scum that were totally ignored by Zebra. This makes me think she got what she wanted, a buddying with Snow and looking like she was mixing things up and attempting to solve. She had no interest in taking things further than that and discussing her own inconsistencies.

Do I find Sonji to be genuine? Yes. Our styles seem to match up so when he says something about strategy that I have expressed in the past in other games, I believe that is his opinion. That doesn't mean he's town but his statement comes across as genuine.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Corrections:

Swap I and Do in my first sentence about Sonji.

DDL is calling for a Snow vig kill, not lynch.

[Golden]

"It's not hard to look at this list and see JoH deliberately blatantly ignoring an option."

That's the bit of your post I don't like cause I wasn't and my later posts addressed it. But I see what you're saying. As of that first post, okay. It was an assumption on Zebra's part and perhaps an understandable one but like LC said, there are infinite possibilities and removing the far fetched ones is reasonable.

There are infinite possibilities. My own explanation (Snow Dog is just having a bit of banter) is none of the four. But the way in which you framed that post (truthful town, truthful baddie, lying baddie...) invited seeing "lying town" as the option you missed. Just because of the way you framed your post. (For clarity, I don't give a flying fuck how many options Jack listed and how many others exist, that's what I was getting at to LC. It's not relevant to the point I was trying to make. What is relevant is whether Zebra's reaction was a genuine and reasonable one in the circumstances. Soneji thinks it was not. I disagree)

Thanks for answering those questions - it's a helpful take. It looks like (in summary) you basically say you can see both zebra and soneji as genuine in their approach.

As for zebra - I would like to see more from her again, she seems to have vanished somewhat.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I'm going to disagree with your summary of my read on Zebra as "genuine."

I do not view the way she went about that as "genuine."

She saw a very weak attack on a player, mischaracterized the severity and completeness of the reasoning of said attack, put forth a nonsensical and unnecessary defense of what was probably a joke and then didn't answer multiple questions regarding her posts.

I don't view that as a townie trying their best.


@Snow

What did you think of Zebra's initial defense of you?

[Golden]

I'm going to disagree with your summary of my read on Zebra as "genuine."

I do not view the way she went about that as "genuine."

She saw a very weak attack on a player, mischaracterized the severity and completeness of the reasoning of said attack, put forth a nonsensical and unnecessary defense of what was probably a joke and then didn't answer multiple questions regarding her posts.

I don't view that as a townie trying their best.


@Snow

What did you think of Zebra's initial defense of you?

Yes, sorry, that was more clear after your clarification.

Well, I disagree very strongly about the characterisation that both you and soneji have put forward about zebra. I'd say zebra looked much more flexible than those around her. In particular I'd say that

1) The attack that you and DDL put on Snow Dog, far from being weak, was very strong and way overdone for what it related to. You said outright you wanted to lynch him. So did DDL. You claim the idea of it being town lying was so unlikely that it deserved outright dismissal. DDL argued for a policy lynch and said there was a 99% chance Snow Dog was bad if he was lying. To me, the attack was strong and sustained far beyond what is reasonable from anyone with a town mind set - DDL was worse, but I do not like your content much in the exchange either, particular after zebra weighed in.

2) I do not think zebra ever mischaracterised either the 'severity' or the 'reasoning' of said attack. To me, as I read it in real time, she responded to the only reasons that could be reasonably implied from your posting. If you had reasons in your head that you didn't write in your posts, it's not fair to expect people to infer that and characterise your reasoning as something you haven't said.

3) "Put forth a nonsensical and unnecessary defence of what was probably a joke"... a: you didn't consider it a joke at the time, b: zebras defence makes perfect sense, what about it is nonsensical? and c) Two people were bearing down hard on another person for literally nothing, and you call the defence unnecessary?

4) What possible motivation would zebra have for making an 'unnecessary and nonsensical defence' of Snow Dog?

Having said all of that, I don't suspect you. I find your thinking a bit no u/omgus, but the first time I ever played with Zebra I tunnelled her into the ground on day one for suspecting me because she does come across (to the person being attacked) as someone who ignores the facts that don't suit her and seems to hone in only on the bits she wants to. I was wrong, and I think I've been wrong every time I have suspected Zebra for those reasons. I guess I now see it as one form of her town game.

I do suspect soneji, because his vote to me seems to be, in essence, 'I'm making a statement for playstyle - Jack is like me. Therefore, voting zebra', which is a terrible reason for a vote. Plus he was laissez faire with an unchangeable vote.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Before Zebra came in, I said not reading a role was a terrible idea and someone who would do so or pretend to do so sounded like a good D1 lynch target. Idk what everyone else thinks or thinks I think but I don't think you should actually decide who to vote for on D0 based one one post with one short post. In my mind, it should have been clear that I and MM were not strongly against Snow.

DDL is another matter and I'll not speak for him.

My continued addressing of the topic was primarily in relation to Zebra. I am not of the opinion that Snow was doing more than joking.



Logical inconsistencies/problematic stuff in Zebra's posts:
1) Says she never lies as scum but advocates townies lying to get reactions.
2) Says townies lying or acting scummy should be excused because they could just be trying to get a reaction

There's also a bit of OMGUS because I'm annoyed that she keeps arguing against positions I haven't taken or have since clarified (no, I was not calling for an immediate lynch of Snow Dog at the expense of any other options and no, the idea that Snow could have been a lying townie was not something that simply didn't cross my mind).

There's also my concern that Zebra ignored points 1 and 2 when called on them.

Your characterization of Zebra as someone who ignores facts that don't suit her when she's town is duly noted and appreciated.

[Golden]

In my mind, it should have been clear that I and MM were not strongly against Snow.

I do understand that now. But it wasn't clear to me on my first read through (bearing in mind I haven't played with you before). It's probably culture clash to some extent.

I knew MM wasn't, because 'chaos marmot'. I never took his posts about Snow Dog seriously to begin with.

[Marmot]

In my mind, it should have been clear that I and MM were not strongly against Snow.

I do understand that now. But it wasn't clear to me on my first read through (bearing in mind I haven't played with you before). It's probably culture clash to some extent.

I knew MM wasn't, because 'chaos marmot'. I never took his posts about Snow Dog seriously to begin with.

I seriously don't suspect Snow Dog for his antics.

[insertnamehere]

I don't wanna talk about Glorf's moral principals.

Look y'all, life is like a box of chocolates mmk? Sometimes you get cherry cordial, and you didn't want cherry cordial. Sometimes you pop an almond in your mouth and you're allergic to almond. Next time just stick to an apple or something that has no chance to let you down.

FUJI APPLE FOR OFFICE 2020

Here's what I wanna talk about: the fires at the beach. Why were there fires at the beach?

And has anyone not checked in yet?

They don't sleep anymore on the beach.

Cuz of the fire.

That didn't answer my question.

Did you start the fire?

[Quin]

I'm not used to having days end in the late afternoon. This rocks.

At this point I'm still likely to vote for Luffy. It looks like he thought day ended earlier than it usually does, so he should be around soon.

[Golden]

Time for some reads. I don't have one on everyone, but I'll do what I've got.

Daisy - slight town for her entry. I agree with her sentiment generally, although it might be a bit early for it right now in this game. But it felt town-minded.

DDL - slight scum for pursuing a policy lynch and being seemingly closed minded around Snow Dog. Having said that, I think DDL's early aggression can often get him in to trouble when town, and I'm mindful of this. There's also one post I do really like from him - the one where he said he had reads of zebra in two games at once and couldn't remember which was which. It seemed very genuine. I'd be unlikely to vote DDL today based on the Snow Dog stuff alone, but I'm watching this space.

Elohcin - slight town because she seems engaged. Epi will probably tell me Eloh has no town game, but for right now my first-hand experiences of her have been that she has a certain tone about her in early game when town, and I feel like I'm seeing it here.

Epignosis - moderate town. He could be snowing me, but he dealt with the Snow Dog thing in gruff Epi fashion, and I like his reasons for not voting either Dog or Jack (even though he didn't actually say what they were).

Jack - slight town. Looks like he is genuinely solvey. Also looks like he is making every effort to adapt to whatever culture surprises come his way. His direct and slightly defensive tone comes across well to me - there is nothing silver-tongued about his performance so far.

LoRab - slight mafia. This could shift on a reread, but at the moment my only memory of LoRab in this thread is that she likes Philadelphia. That bothers me.

MP - strong mafia. Only mafia would visit family for Christmas instead of playing this game

Scotty - slight town. Can't put my finger on why, he just feels like town scotty.

Snow Dog - slight town. He might have misjudged how much heat he would get for his little referential joke, but I tend to think a scum Snow Dog is unlikely to make a joke like that which is going to draw attention. He's not a chaos player like a Wilgy or a Marmot.

Soneji - moderate scum. I had an allergic reaction to his characterisation of Zebra. It felt more like a policy vote (or a lazy vote) than real analysis. Soneji's managed all of 5 posts. They are:

1) I don't like that NKs aren't shown by default
2) I'll go south
3) I don't like that NKs aren't shown by default + this analysis of zebra and Snow Dog amongst others:

Seems the issue with SD, INH, JoH, DDL and Zebra here is more tolerance of specific "playstyles". Not reading your role is basically akin to cheating in my eyes. Given Wilgy doing this in the Monkey Island game, which Snow Dog was part of, I wouldn't jump on it d1 unless other factors added onto it.

4) Sudden superficial analysis. He asks Nacho a no-win question about another obvious piece of banter, he disagrees with daisy's comment about mafia avoiding the Snow Dog conversation entirely (something to note for later if he is bad, but as shown in the above quote he basically avoided it entirely), and he flips around his earlier comments about zebra and Snow Dog where he had dismissed the whole thing, to this:

Zebra to me this game comes off as trying to push certain angles where none exist really. Snow Dog's claim of not reading his role naturally came off as a joke to anyone in Monkey Island but Zebra argued for what he did as some baiting tactic, with a catch-all pass to be scummy if you can claim or have it claimed that you were just luring out mafia.

First read - zebra is town. I love the way he is deconstructing DDL and Jacks arguments around Snow Dog, despite the much easier route being to do what I did and say 'Snow was not 'lying', he was just engaging in referential banter'.

The easy route doesn't allow you to paint people as scum. For all the angles Zebra expects DDL and Jack to have considered, at a time when no decision or claim can even be close to final, she overlooks angles herself like culture clash and approaches their statements as definitive in terms of Snow Dog being their day one lynch.

I'll be voting Zebra for now.

Which to me stands in stark contrast to what he'd said before and comes entirely out of nowhere. Jack has confirmed he didn't perceive that Zebra was painting him as scum, and I think there is no evidence zebra was doing so. Yet Soneji sees that as the 'easy move', when soneji has himself done exactly what I said was the easy move... and just said that 'Snow Dog's claim naturally came off as a joke to anyone in Monkey Island'.

5) Backing off the no-win nacho comment...

And that's it. Not that I'm expecting screeds of content, but my point is he really hasn't contributed much and his zebra vote came out of nowhere and didn't even quite fit with what he'd already said. I perceive at as something much closer to a playstyle dig.

Zebra - moderate town for reasons I've well explained already.

Everyone else - no read yet.

[Snow Dog]

I'm going to disagree with your summary of my read on Zebra as "genuine."

I do not view the way she went about that as "genuine."

She saw a very weak attack on a player, mischaracterized the severity and completeness of the reasoning of said attack, put forth a nonsensical and unnecessary defense of what was probably a joke and then didn't answer multiple questions regarding her posts.

I don't view that as a townie trying their best.


@Snow

What did you think of Zebra's initial defense of you?

I was a bit bemused at first because we didn't get along in the last game at all. Not a bit. So you can imagine my surprise. But this is only my second game with her. I know she can be aggresive towards some and defnesive towards others. She is a conundrum to me at the moment. She is growing on me.

[Snow Dog]

I have to vote now.

[Snow Dog]

I randomised and voted DDL, k?

[Golden]

I randomised and voted DDL, k?

Genuinely random or 'no u' random?

[Quin]

eek

[Marmot]

eek

eek what?

[Quin]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

[Marmot]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

There's no such thing as random.

[Golden]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

There's no such thing as random.

Thats not what random.org says

[Quin]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

There's no such thing as random.

Thats not what random.org says

[Jackofhearts2005]

What's the advantage of random voting at all?

If you're not the determiner, you might as well not vote.

If you are the determiner....you want to determine who should die randomly?

[Marmot]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

There's no such thing as random.

Thats not what random.org says

That is pseudo-random at best.

[Golden]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

There's no such thing as random.

Thats not what random.org says

That is pseudo-random at best.

OK, then, I present to you a second source of pure randomness.

Chaos Marmot.

QED.

[Marmot]

What's the advantage of random voting at all?

If you're not the determiner, you might as well not vote.

If you are the determiner....you want to determine who should die randomly?

Even if everyone random-votes, no one will randomly die.

[Marmot]

eek

eek what?

Snow Dog's 'random' vote just happened to fall on DDL, who is probably a top contender for the lynch.

There's no such thing as random.

Thats not what random.org says

That is pseudo-random at best.

OK, then, I present to you a second source of pure randomness.

Chaos Marmot.

QED.

Touchè.

Would you like a cookie?

[Golden]

What's the advantage of random voting at all?

If you're not the determiner, you might as well not vote.

If you are the determiner....you want to determine who should die randomly?

Not voting as any kind of deliberate choice is very much frowned upon in our history.

Having said that, I generally agree that any slight read is better than randomising.

I'm not convinced it was entirely random, though. Perhaps random within a pool, or perhaps not random at all.

linki - what kind of cookie?