Death Note Mafia [END]

[FZ.]

If that's the best case you can come up with, you're not going to manage to lynch a civ today like you so badly want to

What?

I defend myself from DH/him, and at the same time level my own accusations, he responds by saying "im gonna lynch u now" instead of defending himself, what are you asking about? Aceofspades is:

L/Light supporter
low poster
sharing other people's ideas exclusively - without even going back to the original "suspicious" posts

it's not concrete but it's multiple pings - lynching baddies consistently is about either an obvious slip (there have been none yet by anybody) or behaviour recognition over the course of several days.

If I have time this evening I'll read back through the thread and determine which people aceofspades is pulling theories from (be nice if he had used quotes instead of barely rephrasing) - if they are similarly L/Light supporters with other pings, I'm probably on to something here.

As I said before, keeping an eye on people who do something isn't remotely the same thing as lynching somebody for doing something - which is what DH and AceOfSpades are bother trying to do. The game isn't the simplistic - not if you want to win. Flag it and continue playing, vote the players with the most flags.

I have to say, that between you and Ace, he seems more baddie. He's acting very sure of himself for a day 1. This is something I sometimes do as a baddie- try to look very aggressive and go after someone strongly. I don't think I buy it. I think he's nitpicking.

[FZ.]

I want to lay this out there too:

DH thinks I'm bad because I think most of the Yotsuba are independents.

If you are bad, what's a clever strategy when you don't have BTSC with more than one person? Widen the net of potential bad guys maybe?

Why did you let it out there, by the way? Do you think he's bad? What do you think about your back and forth?

DH himself has given me no reason to think he's good- I cannot reconcile his actions and posts with those of an ideal civilian. There is one thing however, which I won't elaborate on, that is an indicator to me of civility.

Okay, thanks. I hope all the arguing was necessary to come to that conclusion :P

Be back later

[DharmaHelper]

(so many posts in a row) in addition,

1. if Aceofspades' only reasoning for voting L/Light was fun, why did he bother to make a list later of why it's "good?"

My reasoning is that it is the more fun option.

I like to have fun when I play games. The Light/L option is the most fun. Thus I voted for it. There are no other motives for my vote. Don't over think it, we're only on Day 0.

followed by this one - which as I mention above is faulty reasoning anyway

2. Know what's fun? Winning. Baddies want the best chance of winning for the best chance of "having fun"

The post you refer to as "this one". I take it this is the post you are referring to as well when you say Ace made a list of why the L/Light option is "good"?

[triceratopzeuhl]

yes

DH himself has given me no reason to think he's good- I cannot reconcile his actions and posts with those of an ideal civilian. There is one thing however, which I won't elaborate on, that is an indicator to me of civility.

Why won't you elaborate on it?

[Boomslang]

And I mean, if you want to talk about deliberately misleading, look at your own posts:

1. Normal Lynch is obviously the most "civie friendly" option because it keeps the most control in the hands of the most people.
2. I put "civie friendly" in quotes because the Normal lynch option is also completely safe for baddies. Baddies don't lose anything from picking it. It doesn't put them in any disadvantage at all.

Every other option gave a potential easily-exploitable advantage to the baddies, so Normal Lynch is equivalent to a disadvantage for them. Your entire reasoning to support L/Light was based on fallacious arguing, as is your reasoning to try and paint blame on me. Any gameable system will automatically favour the team that will know more of their teammates

Ok, "every other option" seems like overgeneralization to me. For example, I find it hard to see how the nihilistic approach would have provided an exploit to the baddies; I understand there's some back-and-forth sniping going on between you and Ace right now, so maybe you're not being as careful with your words as you otherwise would be.

In any case, I think L's team has a good number of ways to figure out its teammates. L's sleuthing, whatever Watari's mechanics are, the vast number of secrets for the Task Force members, explicit BTSC between two members. I figured the team knowledge would be about equal at the start for L/Light, which is why I went for that lynch option.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Nihilistic option gives them an advantage because they have both NKs and lynches hitting civs. But nobody would vote that one anyway because it's not even a game mafia at that point. Pretty sure Alex put that option in to be silly

[triceratopzeuhl]

ebwop "game of mafia"

[DharmaHelper]

yes

DH himself has given me no reason to think he's good- I cannot reconcile his actions and posts with those of an ideal civilian. There is one thing however, which I won't elaborate on, that is an indicator to me of civility.

Why won't you elaborate on it?

Great, because that's a lie. Ace was not advocating the L/Light option as the good option in that post. This is what he posted:

Nailed it. This + Rob's post are the number one reasons to look closely at L/Light voters in the next few days

You suggest that the L/Light option is where the baddies would vote. And boo suggest that I voted that option in order to fly low. But I put to you that Light and his follows and the other baddies would more than likely vote for the "Normal Lynch". "Normal Lynch" is the safe option. It doesn't rustle any feathers, and if anything that's the option that someone would go for if they wanted to fly low. Lets walk through the thought process of a baddie on day 0. Here is my thought process.


1. Normal Lynch is obviously the most "civie friendly" option because it keeps the most control in the hands of the most people.
2. I put "civie friendly" in quotes because the Normal lynch option is also completely safe for baddies. Baddies don't lose anything from picking it. It doesn't put them in any disadvantage at all.
2. The baddies probably assume that most people will want to keep lynches normal, rather than risk a new mechanic.
3. Baddies like to blend in with the crowd. So they will either vote with the group, or throw their vote away on one of the other shitty options.
4. This has the added benefit of baddies being able to fall back on this silly day 0 poll as a flimsy defense further on in the game. "Oh no, I can't be bad. Remember I voted to keep the lynches normal and safe?"
5. They also get the advantage of having a pool of scape goats to go after from the people who voted for L/Light lynches.

So given all that, why the hell would a baddie vote for L/Light lynches? That's a stupid move for them and the exact opposite of laying low. It makes much more sense to look at the people voting for normal lynches and/or the people tossing their votes away on options that clearly wont win.

Added for Mata: Yes, totally agree. Can't wait to get some.

Added for Boo: Seriously? What are you on about? I promise you, if I ever vote for someone and justify it with " lol so fun" you can all lynch me no questions ask. That is such a ridiculous leap boo.

He's saying that in his mind, its far more likely that a baddie flew under the radar and voted the safe "Normal Lynch" option. His list has nothing to do with his vote reasoning, nor is it an attempt to get people to vote L/Light.

[triceratopzeuhl]

He said baddies don't lose anything from normal lynch, I said they do. He suggests they do lose something voting for L/Light (becoming part of the "pool of scape goats"), while ignoring the fact that they almost certainly gain a mathematical advantage from that voting option. He's also suggesting that civvies would be voting L/Light and baddies wouldn't

[DharmaHelper]

He said baddies don't lose anything from normal lynch, I said they do. He suggests they do lose something voting for L/Light (becoming part of the "pool of scape goats"), while ignoring the fact that they almost certainly gain a mathematical advantage from that voting option. He's also suggesting that civvies would be voting L/Light and baddies wouldn't

His list, which you said was designed to show that the L/Light option was "good", was designed to show that his theory is that baddies would prefer the Normal Lynch option. There is a distinct difference there.

[triceratopzeuhl]

If he is saying that no baddie in their right mind would vote L/Light, it's implying that most of the L/Light voters are civ. His list was meant to show that baddies "should" vote normal, according to his logic. It doesn't have to say that L/Light is "good" option explicitly to still suggest it.

So what was ace doing on day 0? did he:
1) go through all his list/reasoning before voting, then pretend it was just for the "fun" option? - less likely
2) genuinely pick the L/Light option without really analyzing it, then once he realized some would scrutinize him for it, go "oh shit now I need to defend myself"? - more likely, in my mind

It is a coincidence that the group of people he doesn't want scrutinized due to their day 0 vote includes him? doubt it
Most importantly, why does he decide he's going to vote for me just because I level the same amount (actually much more) of analysis at his actions that he does at mine?

Nobody is infallible, but I'm here discussing things instead of going "fine I'm going to vote for you now!"

[boo]

Ok, this is high level stuff. Like fuck, it's only day one and i barely know what's going on, and not in a fun chaotic way.

Hey look boo! Is this the kind of low flying post you were wary about? I don't know how many times I've seen baddies post this sentence, or some close variation. I'm actually a little surprised you didn't bring it up yourself. Thoughts please.

Epi and DH

I am getting the impression that Epi is a Y-Group member. At least, that is where I am leaning at the moment. On the other hand, I don't see how he'd be so obvious about it. That is a mistake that I doubt someone like him would make. That being said, he's made some really good points. I'm putting a pin in him until further notice.

DH is DH. If he's bad he's going to get cocky and show off. If he's good he's going to get cocky and show off. Nothing really to say about that.

Boo.
I'm reading him as genuine. His trepidation on the type of player L could or should be read as real to me.

Made
That one post quoted above burned into my eyeballs. I usually find it more suspicious when people say "I'm so clueless" than when they go on for four plus pages arguing over the same points again and again (DH & Epi). It's just a really easy way to get people to ignore you.

Trice/Tricey/Dinosaur-Name-Porn-Star-Man
I don't think DH's quote from you was out of context or a misinterpretation. I think you very clearly suggested we focus on a group of people based solely on their Day-0 vote. Which would be fine, we do that all the time. But the way you did it was so mafia. Quote someone else, agree with them without saying much of your own, and shift attention to other people with little or no evidence to back yourself up. That has to be taken directly from the mafia play book.

Yes, sort of. It would need to be coupled with a vote that is also just fly-by, and/or a series of similar posts that make it essentially just playing the 'I have no idea' card to become suspicious enough to vote for. In a normal D1 it might even be enough to have me looking at made, but the D0 wasn't just thoughtless voting which gave us things to work with in this lynch, and people have said things today that are far more suspicious than that post imo.

Ya, I've already said I think Epi is Yotsuba, and that hasn't changed. It is probably not enough to make me vote for him today since I think there are better options, but I already don't trust him a lot.

[boo]

If that's the best case you can come up with, you're not going to manage to lynch a civ today like you so badly want to

What?

Yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Well who do you think baddies want to lynch? It's not other baddies

[boo]

Well who do you think baddies want to lynch? It's not other baddies

A) Yes, it is in any game with more than one baddie team.
B) That is not how I (and MM I imagine) initially interpreted your meaning in that post.

[Marmot]

Well who do you think baddies want to lynch? It's not other baddies

I don't know who (some of) the baddies want to lynch. There's a lot of ?????? in the spot where I would expect to see that answer.

[triceratopzeuhl]

His "case" (in the loosest sense of the term) literally consists of him not thinking that his actions should be up for scrutiny. He can come back if he actually has something to add to the baddie hunt. I meant "best case" in general and not "best case" against me - because he won't be able to build a valid case on nothing

[triceratopzeuhl]

and to be fair, you are right and baddies want to lynch anybody who isn't them

[DharmaHelper]

If he is saying that no baddie in their right mind would vote L/Light, it's implying that most of the L/Light voters are civ. His list was meant to show that baddies "should" vote normal, according to his logic. It doesn't have to say that L/Light is "good" option explicitly to still suggest it.

So what was ace doing on day 0? did he:
1) go through all his list/reasoning before voting, then pretend it was just for the "fun" option? - less likely
2) genuinely pick the L/Light option without really analyzing it, then once he realized some would scrutinize him for it, go "oh shit now I need to defend myself"? - more likely, in my mind

It is a coincidence that the group of people he doesn't want scrutinized due to their day 0 vote includes him? doubt it
Most importantly, why does he decide he's going to vote for me just because I level the same amount (actually much more) of analysis at his actions that he does at mine?

Nobody is infallible, but I'm here discussing things instead of going "fine I'm going to vote for you now!"

OK so here's the thing:

What you said, and I intentionally asked you to clarify this, was that Ace voted for the L/Light option and said he did so just for "fun", and then you claim he later made a list of why the L/Light option was a "good" option to pick in order to defend his choice. That is not the case. If you read his list, it describes a scenario where it would be more logical for the baddies to vote for the Normal Lynch option. As I said, the distinction there is significant. I believe you intentionally misrepresented the list by linking to it rather than directly quoting it.

Now as for your first two points in this post: You think the most likely option was that he was being genuine, and the least likely option is that he was prentending/being deceptive when trying to figure out where to post? This confuses me. Baddies are the less genuine players, not the other way around. If you think it is most likely that he genuinely voted for an option because it was "Fun" and for no other reason, why is that suspect?

And your last point:

It is a coincidence that the group of people he doesn't want scrutinized due to their day 0 vote includes him? doubt it

Do you own a mirror?

[boo]

His "case" (in the loosest sense of the term) literally consists of him not thinking that his actions should be up for scrutiny. He can come back if he actually has something to add to the baddie hunt. I meant "best case" in general and not "best case" against me - because he won't be able to build a valid case on nothing

Yes, once you pointed out that's what you meant it was easier to read that way, but I don't think most people are going to look at it and see it that way initially.

And I don't disagree, my problem is I think you and he are doing exactly the same thing from the opposite side.

[triceratopzeuhl]

If he is saying that no baddie in their right mind would vote L/Light, it's implying that most of the L/Light voters are civ. His list was meant to show that baddies "should" vote normal, according to his logic. It doesn't have to say that L/Light is "good" option explicitly to still suggest it.

So what was ace doing on day 0? did he:
1) go through all his list/reasoning before voting, then pretend it was just for the "fun" option? - less likely
2) genuinely pick the L/Light option without really analyzing it, then once he realized some would scrutinize him for it, go "oh shit now I need to defend myself"? - more likely, in my mind

It is a coincidence that the group of people he doesn't want scrutinized due to their day 0 vote includes him? doubt it
Most importantly, why does he decide he's going to vote for me just because I level the same amount (actually much more) of analysis at his actions that he does at mine?

Nobody is infallible, but I'm here discussing things instead of going "fine I'm going to vote for you now!"

OK so here's the thing:

What you said, and I intentionally asked you to clarify this, was that Ace voted for the L/Light option and said he did so just for "fun", and then you claim he later made a list of why the L/Light option was a "good" option to pick in order to defend his choice. That is not the case. If you read his list, it describes a scenario where it would be more logical for the baddies to vote for the Normal Lynch option. As I said, the distinction there is significant. I believe you intentionally misrepresented the list by linking to it rather than directly quoting it.

OK so here's the thing: they are the same thing. You are quoting me explaining how they are the same thing. If baddies won't vote L/Light, according to ace, then it is the "good" option. Full stop.

Now as for your first two points in this post: You think the most likely option was that he was being genuine, and the least likely option is that he was prentending/being deceptive when trying to figure out where to post? This confuses me. Baddies are the less genuine players, not the other way around. If you think it is most likely that he genuinely voted for an option because it was "Fun" and for no other reason, why is that suspect?

As I said, it's more likely that he didn't "think of" the idea that baddies should vote normal until after he already voted, when he had to choose between that and backpedalling. It would be much less suspicious to just leave it at "I voted for the more fun/interesting option" instead of trying to rationalize. I'm referring only to the notion that baddies would vote normal, not the idea that L/Light is better for one team or another.

And your last point:

It is a coincidence that the group of people he doesn't want scrutinized due to their day 0 vote includes him? doubt it

Do you own a mirror?

Show me where I'm not open to scrutiny. We can discuss anything I've said or done, and I won't vote for you just for wanting answers - like Aceofspades did.

[triceratopzeuhl]

In fact we already did that yesterday, did we not? You said you were satisfied.

[DharmaHelper]

In fact we already did that yesterday, did we not? You said you were satisfied.

I was satisfied. Past tense.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Is there something you aren't satisfied with? Or is aceofspades your teammate and you're cheesed off that I'm fingering him? It's a possibility I'm not willing to rule out. I want to know why epignosis thinks you are a civvie.

[DharmaHelper]

Is there something you aren't satisfied with? Or is aceofspades your teammate and you're cheesed off that I'm fingering him? It's a possibility I'm not willing to rule out. I want to know why epignosis thinks you are a civvie.

I'm cheesed off that you're using deceptive tactics and outright lying in order to push a case.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Show me where I lied? If, as aceofspades claims, baddies shouldn't vote L/Light, then by extension civvies would be the ones voting it. You for some reason don't agree with that, and it doesn't make me a liar. It just makes you intellectually dishonest. Who is being deceptive to push a case? I think it's you and aceofspades. To your credits, at least you waiting for some civvies to be fooled before voting

[triceratopzeuhl]

it's not the route I would like this game to take, but I admit it would be all sorts of hilarious if the active arguing posters are all civvy and the baddies just sit there watching us kill each other

[Epignosis]

yes

DH himself has given me no reason to think he's good- I cannot reconcile his actions and posts with those of an ideal civilian. There is one thing however, which I won't elaborate on, that is an indicator to me of civility.

Why won't you elaborate on it?

Because I do not wish to.

[Ricochet]

Fighting the post waves again, but this one stuck out easily:

"defend" is a bad word, I never actively defend people, just share my opinion on them

What is your opinion on them?

On who?

Regarding spacedaisy, she's only posted 4 times so I'm willing to believe she was just busy, but the pattern of posts on day 0 was perplexing at best:

15 Feb 2015, 16:19 - "either normal or L/Light. Gonna have to think about this one."
15 Feb 2015, 19:10 - "I am personally looking at either Normal or Light/L"
sometime between then and the poll end - votes L/Light without taking the time to even post 2 words "because busy"
16 Feb 2015, 22:23 - more than a day later - "I had already expressed that I liked both normal and light/l and just decided to cast a vote for the second because I was ok with either and decided to even it up a little more."

So if you agree with epig about "tipping the scales" as a baddie action, there is valid reason to suspect spacedaisy.

Aside from the fact that you decided to snip her entire first post (which was an entire analysis of the voting options) up to her last statement (you, who did nothing but to "ditto" on other people's views on D0 and say that all votes apart from the Normal are abnormal), what exactly is "perplexing at best" about that pattern? I'm reading the pattern as entirely consistent with her reasoning.

Regarding Epig's second point (which also seems to me a bit of a late addition, considering he was asked in detail about why spacedaisy is among his suspects), I also see her timing as rather more consistent than not, for a player who announced that she'll ponder on what to choose (pretty much like I did, so I'm probably biased to consider her side of the story).

The only problematic aspect of her vote was the manner in which she voted, no post, no rehash or conclusion of her reasoning.

[DharmaHelper]

Show me where I lied? If, as aceofspades claims, baddies shouldn't vote L/Light, then by extension civvies would be the ones voting it. You for some reason don't agree with that, and it doesn't make me a liar. It just makes you intellectually dishonest. Who is being deceptive to push a case? I think it's you and aceofspades. To your credits, at least you waiting for some civvies to be fooled before voting

You said this:

1. if Aceofspades' only reasoning for voting L/Light was fun, why did he bother to make a list later of why it's "good?"

Which brings into question Ace's personal motives for voting for the L/Light option. Except the list he made has nothing to do with his personal motives, as you implied. It is a list describing a theory that baddies would be more likely to vote for the Normal Lynch option.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Aside from the fact that you decided to snip her entire first post (which was an entire analysis of the voting options) up to her last statement (you, who did nothing but to "ditto" on other people's views on D0 and say that all votes apart from the Normal are abnormal), what exactly is "perplexing at best" about that pattern? I'm reading the pattern as entirely consistent with her reasoning.

The fact that she was in the thread at least 3 times during day 0 but still "too busy"

[triceratopzeuhl]

Show me where I lied? If, as aceofspades claims, baddies shouldn't vote L/Light, then by extension civvies would be the ones voting it. You for some reason don't agree with that, and it doesn't make me a liar. It just makes you intellectually dishonest. Who is being deceptive to push a case? I think it's you and aceofspades. To your credits, at least you waiting for some civvies to be fooled before voting

You said this:

1. if Aceofspades' only reasoning for voting L/Light was fun, why did he bother to make a list later of why it's "good?"

Which brings into question Ace's personal motives for voting for the L/Light option. Except the list he made has nothing to do with his personal motives, as you implied. It is a list describing a theory that baddies would be more likely to vote for the Normal Lynch option.

It's a list designed in the hopes that we ignore his vote. If he was civ why would he bother, especially while claiming to not have put thought into the vote?

[triceratopzeuhl]

you are constantly trying to deflect attention from my actual point by hanging on the word "good." There's a reason I put it in quotes every time

[Ricochet]

Aside from the fact that you decided to snip her entire first post (which was an entire analysis of the voting options) up to her last statement (you, who did nothing but to "ditto" on other people's views on D0 and say that all votes apart from the Normal are abnormal), what exactly is "perplexing at best" about that pattern? I'm reading the pattern as entirely consistent with her reasoning.

The fact that she was in the thread at least 3 times during day 0 but still "too busy"

The third time was D1 already.

[triceratopzeuhl]

yes

DH himself has given me no reason to think he's good- I cannot reconcile his actions and posts with those of an ideal civilian. There is one thing however, which I won't elaborate on, that is an indicator to me of civility.

Why won't you elaborate on it?

Because I do not wish to.

well that's certainly helpful...

[triceratopzeuhl]

Aside from the fact that you decided to snip her entire first post (which was an entire analysis of the voting options) up to her last statement (you, who did nothing but to "ditto" on other people's views on D0 and say that all votes apart from the Normal are abnormal), what exactly is "perplexing at best" about that pattern? I'm reading the pattern as entirely consistent with her reasoning.

The fact that she was in the thread at least 3 times during day 0 but still "too busy"

The third time was D1 already.

No. She came to the thread again to vote without posting.

[Ricochet]

Aside from the fact that you decided to snip her entire first post (which was an entire analysis of the voting options) up to her last statement (you, who did nothing but to "ditto" on other people's views on D0 and say that all votes apart from the Normal are abnormal), what exactly is "perplexing at best" about that pattern? I'm reading the pattern as entirely consistent with her reasoning.

The fact that she was in the thread at least 3 times during day 0 but still "too busy"

The third time was D1 already.

No. She came to the thread again to vote without posting.

Oh, I thought you meant from the three excerpts you quoted.

Nevertheless, she voted for the option she was inclined to, as stated in her very first post, from the beginning of the day, and with which she stayed consistent afterwards (confirmed by her second, intermediate, post).

[triceratopzeuhl]

The whole discussion of spacedaisy was brought up by epignosis because of his theory regarding late voters trying to "tip the balance" of a close vote. I merely expanded on it.

[Ricochet]

The whole discussion of spacedaisy was brought up by epignosis because of his theory regarding late voters trying to "tip the balance" of a close vote. I merely expanded on it.

No, that is an extra suspicion of his on spacedaisy. His initial reasoning was

spacedaisy voted Day 0 and didn't say why.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Both of her posts on day 0 were made such that one could handwave away either option she voted for, so if it wasn't close and there was no point in voting L/Light then she could avoid attention

linki. that was earlier and wasn't what I was posting about, though

[Ricochet]

Both of her posts on day 0 were made such that one could handwave away either option she voted for, so if it wasn't close and there was no point in voting L/Light then she could avoid attention

linki. that was earlier and wasn't what I was posting about, though

Again, if you decontextualize her analysis by jumping to her last statement, of course you'll make it seem like she was going either. Her reasoning for L/Light was stronger than for the normal option.

You said that was the whole discussion on her, though, and it was not.

[Ricochet]

EBWOP: going either way*

[Epignosis]

The whole discussion of spacedaisy was brought up by epignosis because of his theory regarding late voters trying to "tip the balance" of a close vote. I merely expanded on it.

No, that is an extra suspicion of his on spacedaisy. His initial reasoning was

spacedaisy voted Day 0 and didn't say why.

I don't reveal all my cards in one neat session. I wait. I bide my time. I watch.

Neat that you're defending her though.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Both of her posts on day 0 were made such that one could handwave away either option she voted for, so if it wasn't close and there was no point in voting L/Light then she could avoid attention
linki. that was earlier and wasn't what I was posting about, though

Again, if you decontextualize her analysis by jumping to her last statement, of course you'll make it seem like she was going either. Her reasoning for L/Light was stronger than for the normal option.

You say the reasoning is stronger. Daisy didn't. She said that she didn't know between the two. She also said that she voted L/Light to make the vote more even (after the fact). If she believed that L/Light was a stronger option back when she was making the two posts on day 0, she would have said so & voted it then, not later.

You said that was the whole discussion on her, though, and it was not.

I said this whole discussion, not the whole discussion. There is a distinct topic of the posts which we are talking about now, and it is the point regarding balancing the vote.

[triceratopzeuhl]

in retrospect I did say "the," I said "this" in my mind but now I look dumb

[triceratopzeuhl]

I'm going rock climbing, be back to argue with you gents later tonight

[Ricochet]

The whole discussion of spacedaisy was brought up by epignosis because of his theory regarding late voters trying to "tip the balance" of a close vote. I merely expanded on it.

No, that is an extra suspicion of his on spacedaisy. His initial reasoning was

spacedaisy voted Day 0 and didn't say why.

I don't reveal all my cards in one neat session. I wait. I bide my time. I watch.

Neat that you're defending her though.

Disagreeing with one's charges for a player isn't defending that player. It's I don't understand what you're charging that player with.

Nor does your bide-my-time reasoning tactic make the one who asks for your reasoning believe you more, if you give the reasons to him one every 10 hours.

[Ricochet]

Both of her posts on day 0 were made such that one could handwave away either option she voted for, so if it wasn't close and there was no point in voting L/Light then she could avoid attention
linki. that was earlier and wasn't what I was posting about, though

Again, if you decontextualize her analysis by jumping to her last statement, of course you'll make it seem like she was going either. Her reasoning for L/Light was stronger than for the normal option.

You say the reasoning is stronger. Daisy didn't. She said that she didn't know between the two. She also said that she voted L/Light to make the vote more even (after the fact). If she believed that L/Light was a stronger option back when she was making the two posts on day 0, she would have said so & voted it then, not later.

I didn't say she believed L/Light was a stronger option. I said her analysis of that option was stronger (as in more thorough) than on the normal option (which she simply described with the "If it ain't broke..." maxim).

I can get, though, why her motivation to even out the poll brought her the second charge. I missed that part in her first D1 post.

[Bass_the_Clever]

Hey everyone my aunt is in the hospital so I we be helping family out so I won't be able to be around till maybe tomorrow night Thursday at the latest . I going to random vote now. I so sorry everyone.

[Boomslang]

Show me where I lied? If, as aceofspades claims, baddies shouldn't vote L/Light, then by extension civvies would be the ones voting it. You for some reason don't agree with that, and it doesn't make me a liar. It just makes you intellectually dishonest. Who is being deceptive to push a case? I think it's you and aceofspades. To your credits, at least you waiting for some civvies to be fooled before voting

You said this:

1. if Aceofspades' only reasoning for voting L/Light was fun, why did he bother to make a list later of why it's "good?"

Which brings into question Ace's personal motives for voting for the L/Light option. Except the list he made has nothing to do with his personal motives, as you implied. It is a list describing a theory that baddies would be more likely to vote for the Normal Lynch option.

It's a list designed in the hopes that we ignore his vote. If he was civ why would he bother, especially while claiming to not have put thought into the vote?

Wait, so you think he designed a list about the option he voted for... so we would ignore his vote. That makes perfect sense.