Death Note Mafia [END]

[boo]

I agree with FZ, I think the arguments against her are trivial. It's only Night 1, I don't expect her to be decisive this early.

Oh ya? I guess I'll just stop voting on day ones then. And everyone else should to. Because we shouldn't have to decisive, it's really not a fair expectation.

[Turnip Head]

Boo are you saying that all civilians should be expected to be decisive in their suspicions on Day 1? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.

[boo]

Boo are you saying that all civilians should be expected to be decisive in their suspicions on Day 1? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.

I'm saying that all players should be expected to vote, and that not voting and then not giving actual answers to questions (and not even being straight foward about not answering the question) is not something that should be given a free pass.

[FZ.]

I think the FZ case is interesting. She stated she was thinking about voting for me and I hit her back hard. After that, she immediately backed off, which is not what I expected her to do. She's definitely someone I want to look at more going into Day 2.

For crying out loud, that's how I play. I accuse people and hear what they have to say, and then decide.

Why am I not on your list of "might have voted fors"?

Because as I told you yesterday, even though I didn't agree with your suspicions of TH, our back and forth made me feel better about you.

Can I ask a question? Why do people even bother discussing things with people if it's not for the sake of hearing what they say and deciding if they believe them?
For me, I get suspicious, I attack, I read what the other person says. If I still think it's fishy, I attack again, and read their answer again. If I'm eased, I lay off for the time being and look for a new "victim". I do this until I decide either to vote for a person or not.

And sometimes I just go with my gut on a whim. I'm a complicated person. I don't always do the exact same thing.


Bea, yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. I went away not knowing who to vote for intending to come back in the hopes that more people will post and it would get easier, and since I haven't had time to fully catch up on what happened yesterday, I'm saying it like it is.

All I've done today is defend myself and I'm tired of it, not to mention I can't baddie hunt myself. I'll be leaving soon. Very bad behaviour, I know

linki: Boo, do you want a dishonest answer? Because if I have no idea who I would have voted for, that's what I say. If I'd been there, believe me I would have voted. I don't know who, but I would.
I've played many many many games, and not once have I missed a vote. Ever!!

[S~V~S]

Boo are you saying that all civilians should be expected to be decisive in their suspicions on Day 1? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.

This wasn't your typical day one, either, TH. I would have expected civ FZ to be in the thick of it, not vacillating on the sidelines.

And Epi, I do not recall ever seeing MP have s role that puts a giant target on someone's back.

[Marmot]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

[Marmot]

ebwop: actual

[boo]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

Because lynching a participant over a non-participant encourages non-participation. Non-participants add nothing to the game. Participants do, regardless of their alignment, they're still there making the game fun. Keeping the non-participant around hoping they eventually stop being a lousy player and actually play or get replaced while killing off people who are actually playing just punishes the people actually playing.

This isn't a new argument, and for whatever reason (they think one person who isn't even playing can help them win I guess) there are still people who don't seem to get it.

[Marmot]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

Because lynching a participant over a non-participant encourages non-participation. Non-participants add nothing to the game. Participants do, regardless of their alignment, they're still there making the game fun. Keeping the non-participant around hoping they eventually stop being a lousy player and actually play or get replaced while killing off people who are actually playing just punishes the people actually playing.

This isn't a new argument, and for whatever reason (they think one person who isn't even playing can help them win I guess) there are still people who don't seem to get it.

The point is to lynch baddies, not punish playstyles.

This is a MP-hosted game. Punishing non-participants is not something we have to waste our time with. See Fight Club.

[boo]

Not playing is a playstyle now? Wow. There's a stretch.

Anyways...

For example:

Trice posted Day 0. Trice posted Day 1. Trice got lynched, a direct result of his posting. Clearly a terrible strategy, sorry Trice, maybe try the one that actually works next time?

Next game, Trice doesn't post Day 0. Trice doesn't post Day 1. Trice doesn't get lynched Day 1! What a great strategy Trice! So, instead of playing the actual game, lets play 'How Far Can You Push Your Luck?'. Trice doesn't post Night 1. Do we lynch him Day 2? Nah, still wouldn't be fair. Trice continues not to post during Day 2. Trice doesn't post Night 2. Trice still hasn't posted during Day 3. Maybe we're finally getting ready to lynch him? Ahh, but then he realizes that, and comes and starts posting (letting him get away with nothing while 2 people have been lynched and another person has been NKed). Or gets replaced (burning a replacement for someone who may actually have something come up irl and need a replacement, and cannot get one and either has to stick it out or be host-killed). Wow, good thing we didn't lynch him, he sure added a ton of helpful stuff to the game so far.


As for your point of MP punishing non-participants... that really isn't something that should have to happen, and I don't think it would happen if players would stop letting it happen and would just work to bring an end to the behaviour by not allowing it.

And yes, the point is to lynch baddies. Someone who isn't playing can just as easily be a baddie as someone who is (another absurd argument people like to bring up, but I'll try and move past that one), and Day 1 suspicions (as was the case with Trice) rarely pan out anyways.

[Tangrowth]

Hey folks! Just wanted to say: Contrary to my previously expressed sentiment, I have decided against ending any nights for this game regardless of whether I receive all necessary PMs. I thought about it and realized that it just seems better to always keep them 24 hours to keep us all on a consistent schedule so that both (1) no one is questioning when periods end and (2), especially so with all the posting, allow everyone the appropriate time to gauge their RL commitments and plan their participation. In addition, if I ended the Night before 6:30PM CST, that would work for the next cycle or so, but then I would likely have to push it back that late anyway, so I guess it doesn't make sense.

Nonetheless, please send me your PMs. :P And if you have questions, PM me!

[Long Con]

You people have a really weird way of baddie hunting.

What do you mean, "you people"?

[Marmot]

Not playing is a playstyle now? Wow. There's a stretch.

Anyways...

For example:

Trice posted Day 0. Trice posted Day 1. Trice got lynched, a direct result of his posting. Clearly a terrible strategy, sorry Trice, maybe try the one that actually works next time?

Next game, Trice doesn't post Day 0. Trice doesn't post Day 1. Trice doesn't get lynched Day 1! What a great strategy Trice! So, instead of playing the actual game, lets play 'How Far Can You Push Your Luck?'. Trice doesn't post Night 1. Do we lynch him Day 2? Nah, still wouldn't be fair. Trice continues not to post during Day 2. Trice doesn't post Night 2. Trice still hasn't posted during Day 3. Maybe we're finally getting ready to lynch him? Ahh, but then he realizes that, and comes and starts posting (letting him get away with nothing while 2 people have been lynched and another person has been NKed). Or gets replaced (burning a replacement for someone who may actually have something come up irl and need a replacement, and cannot get one and either has to stick it out or be host-killed). Wow, good thing we didn't lynch him, he sure added a ton of helpful stuff to the game so far.


As for your point of MP punishing non-participants... that really isn't something that should have to happen, and I don't think it would happen if players would stop letting it happen and would just work to bring an end to the behaviour by not allowing it.

And yes, the point is to lynch baddies. Someone who isn't playing can just as easily be a baddie as someone who is (another absurd argument people like to bring up, but I'll try and move past that one), and Day 1 suspicions (as was the case with Trice) rarely pan out anyways.

You've simplified this to the point of being incorrect. Trice was not lynched because he posted, he was being lynched because of WHAT he posted. Very different reasons.

I agree it is something that MP shouldn't have to do, but that doesn't mean we should be passing judgment on each other.

I understand that if you have no better options to lynch than an inactive/non-participant, then you could fall back on that, but your argument that an inactive could be bad just as much as civ doesn't hold water. Active players can be read, and inactive players cannot. It's a shot in the dark when you lynch them. Anyway, in my experience, inactive players tend to be bored, vanilla civs over any other role.

[Turnip Head]

Boo, Trice got lynched for the content of his posts, not because he committed the simple act of posting. Don't make him the straw man in your argument. Are you saying we should lynch Russ for not posting, regardless of whether the silence is role-enforced or not?

[boo]

Not playing is a playstyle now? Wow. There's a stretch.

Anyways...

For example:

Trice posted Day 0. Trice posted Day 1. Trice got lynched, a direct result of his posting. Clearly a terrible strategy, sorry Trice, maybe try the one that actually works next time?

Next game, Trice doesn't post Day 0. Trice doesn't post Day 1. Trice doesn't get lynched Day 1! What a great strategy Trice! So, instead of playing the actual game, lets play 'How Far Can You Push Your Luck?'. Trice doesn't post Night 1. Do we lynch him Day 2? Nah, still wouldn't be fair. Trice continues not to post during Day 2. Trice doesn't post Night 2. Trice still hasn't posted during Day 3. Maybe we're finally getting ready to lynch him? Ahh, but then he realizes that, and comes and starts posting (letting him get away with nothing while 2 people have been lynched and another person has been NKed). Or gets replaced (burning a replacement for someone who may actually have something come up irl and need a replacement, and cannot get one and either has to stick it out or be host-killed). Wow, good thing we didn't lynch him, he sure added a ton of helpful stuff to the game so far.


As for your point of MP punishing non-participants... that really isn't something that should have to happen, and I don't think it would happen if players would stop letting it happen and would just work to bring an end to the behaviour by not allowing it.

And yes, the point is to lynch baddies. Someone who isn't playing can just as easily be a baddie as someone who is (another absurd argument people like to bring up, but I'll try and move past that one), and Day 1 suspicions (as was the case with Trice) rarely pan out anyways.

You've simplified this to the point of being incorrect. Trice was not lynched because he posted, he was being lynched because of WHAT he posted. Very different reasons.

I agree it is something that MP shouldn't have to do, but that doesn't mean we should be passing judgment on each other.

I understand that if you have no better options to lynch than an inactive/non-participant, then you could fall back on that, but your argument that an inactive could be bad just as much as civ doesn't hold water. Active players can be read, and inactive players cannot. It's a shot in the dark when you lynch them. Anyway, in my experience, inactive players tend to be bored, vanilla civs over any other role.

No, it's very simple. Trice doesn't post, Trice doesn't get lynched, someone else does. It's that simple. Until that isn't the case, just not posting is a great way to not get lynched, far better than actually posting is.

You're just flat out wrong. And it's painful, but that's what it is, and I'll just have to live with it.

[Marmot]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

3) I thought of another possibility. There is a chance that Russti WANTS to be lynched, and is doing this for that reason.

And to my second point, if he were to gain benefits/abilities for being silent, then I would expect him to have to vote (hence the day 1 vote), so missing the vote yesterday changes things.

Linki: Can I get you some ibuprofen?

[boo]

Boo, Trice got lynched for the content of his posts, not because he committed the simple act of posting. Don't make him the straw man in your argument. Are you saying we should lynch Russ for not posting, regardless of whether the silence is role-enforced or not?

Again, he doesn't post, he doesn't get lynched. That simple.

It isn't, and if it were, the chance the lynch actually goes through and doesn't simply allow him to start posting is pretty much 0. So yes, I would be more than happy to see someone who isn't even playing lynched tomorrow over someone of any alignment who is actually here and trying to have fun and make the game more fun for everyone else. Russ, whether by choice or role, is not making the game fun, and I see no reason to prioritize keeping people like that in the game over everyone else.

[boo]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

3) I thought of another possibility. There is a chance that Russti WANTS to be lynched, and is doing this for that reason.

And to my second point, if he were to gain benefits/abilities for being silent, then I would expect him to have to vote (hence the day 1 vote), so missing the vote yesterday changes things.

Linki: Can I get you some ibuprofen?

No, but a dose of you stopping being wrong would be excellent.

[Turnip Head]

Boo's stance on inactive players is a lot like Kira's stance on criminals.

[Marmot]

Boo, Trice got lynched for the content of his posts, not because he committed the simple act of posting. Don't make him the straw man in your argument. Are you saying we should lynch Russ for not posting, regardless of whether the silence is role-enforced or not?

Again, he doesn't post, he doesn't get lynched. That simple.

It isn't, and if it were, the chance the lynch actually goes through and doesn't simply allow him to start posting is pretty much 0. So yes, I would be more than happy to see someone who isn't even playing lynched tomorrow over someone of any alignment who is actually here and trying to have fun and make the game more fun for everyone else. Russ, whether by choice or role, is not making the game fun, and I see no reason to prioritize keeping people like that in the game over everyone else.

I'm sorry Russ isn't letting you have fun.

I'm not prioritizing keeping people like that, but why should the microscope be focused on them on Day 1? Why are you prioritizing such behavior. What if we have 4 inactives, and we lynch them over the next 4 days. Tell me where that will get us. Imagine it being Night 5. We've lynched 3 inactive civs and 1 inactive baddie. Unfortunate for the civs, but yay we lynched a baddie. Too bad he didn't talk so we cannot make any connections to other players. In terms of discussion and reading player behavior, we might as well be the equivalent of Day 1, which is a terrible spot to be in.

Linki: I noticed that theme as well, and almost mentioned it.

[thellama73]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

Because lynching a participant over a non-participant encourages non-participation. Non-participants add nothing to the game. Participants do, regardless of their alignment, they're still there making the game fun. Keeping the non-participant around hoping they eventually stop being a lousy player and actually play or get replaced while killing off people who are actually playing just punishes the people actually playing.

This isn't a new argument, and for whatever reason (they think one person who isn't even playing can help them win I guess) there are still people who don't seem to get it.

Where have you been all my life?

[juliets]

Btw, someone mentioned Russ had voted day 0 and probably not been back to the thread. That is incorrect. I saw him here yesterday - in the thread not sitting outside the thread at the main index. I almost called him out but figured he must be about to post. When he didn't that strongly reinforced my feeling that for some reason he can't post. I don't think he'd just be in the thread for fun or reading if he wasn't still playing.

[FZ.]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

Because lynching a participant over a non-participant encourages non-participation. Non-participants add nothing to the game. Participants do, regardless of their alignment, they're still there making the game fun. Keeping the non-participant around hoping they eventually stop being a lousy player and actually play or get replaced while killing off people who are actually playing just punishes the people actually playing.

This isn't a new argument, and for whatever reason (they think one person who isn't even playing can help them win I guess) there are still people who don't seem to get it.

Where have you been all my life?

Yeah, I have to side Boo on this. That said, I think it's more a point of punishment and not something that in fact helps the civvies. But if we go and lynch some players who barely post a few times, maybe the civvies will lose (like that doesn't happen often), but possibly, the low posters would stop using that strategy, or stop playing altogether. It always feels unfair that a player who posts a lot gets scrutinized for his posts. Even If someone is a baddie and is giving it his all by posting and putting himself out there to be looked at, he should be awarded for it, not punished by being lynched over those who barely contribute to the game. That's my stance

[FZ.]

Interesting, Julliets. Maybe Epi is on to something after all

[boo]

Boo, Trice got lynched for the content of his posts, not because he committed the simple act of posting. Don't make him the straw man in your argument. Are you saying we should lynch Russ for not posting, regardless of whether the silence is role-enforced or not?

Again, he doesn't post, he doesn't get lynched. That simple.

It isn't, and if it were, the chance the lynch actually goes through and doesn't simply allow him to start posting is pretty much 0. So yes, I would be more than happy to see someone who isn't even playing lynched tomorrow over someone of any alignment who is actually here and trying to have fun and make the game more fun for everyone else. Russ, whether by choice or role, is not making the game fun, and I see no reason to prioritize keeping people like that in the game over everyone else.

I'm sorry Russ isn't letting you have fun.

I'm not prioritizing keeping people like that, but why should the microscope be focused on them on Day 1? Why are you prioritizing such behavior. What if we have 4 inactives, and we lynch them over the next 4 days. Tell me where that will get us. Imagine it being Night 5. We've lynched 3 inactive civs and 1 inactive baddie. Unfortunate for the civs, but yay we lynched a baddie. Too bad he didn't talk so we cannot make any connections to other players. In terms of discussion and reading player behavior, we might as well be the equivalent of Day 1, which is a terrible spot to be in.

Linki: I noticed that theme as well, and almost mentioned it.

The next game you don't get 4 inactives. You're too focused on winning a single game, when letting people who should be enjoying it (Trice) not get that full opportunity because you think it will be harmful to your chance of winning. This isn't even a single game argument, it's about improving the game as a whole. Inactive players do not do that, active players do. Punishing inactive players sends the message that it's a behaviour that won't be tolerated (in the same way a lynch can be used to punish a role-outer, or an asshole who just wants to spew crap but is borderline enough that the host can't really justify taking action, where the players can decide, 'hey, this asshole is making the game less fun. so lets just kill them and get back to it').

[S~V~S]

I think Russti cannot post, not that the forgot to or whatever else. But to make the assumption it's for a bad reason is a huge stretch.

I have seen him in the thread as well.

[thellama73]

I think Russti cannot post, not that the forgot to or whatever else. But to make the assumption it's for a bad reason is a huge stretch.

I have seen him in the thread as well.

I am in complete agreement with this.

Boo is also right.

[Marmot]

I just have a hard time believing that MP would give a baddie a role that would be so easy to detect by not being able to post.

People are also acting like that's somehow more likely because while he hasn't posted Russ still has had some activity. He voted in the D0 poll. He didn't vote D1. It's entirely possible (and imo a far better explanation) that he read none of the D0 discussion, came into the thread, figured it's D0 and he could treat it like a normal one (they've mostly become something people don't put any thought in and just use to establish that they got their role PM and are ready to play) and voted without posting and hasn't been back to the game since.

I'd still lynch him for it, because a non-participant is valueless, but people have a strange willingness to let that go here, apparently to the point where deciding that a role that isn't allowed to post at all somehow makes sense.

And this I don't understand about other websites. Why lynch a non-participant when you can lynch someone with an actualy suspicion? The lynch is the civvie's biggest asset, so it would be silly to use it on a player for not speaking. There is 0 evidence (for those who like facts), and it's too early to pass judgment on it.

Linki @Epi: I can think of 2 reasons.
1) He lost interest in the game after his Day 0 post. (I'm unconvinced this is the reason)
2) He has something to gain by being silent. I just finished watching Episode 25. I wouldn't say it centers around Rem and Misa though, but they are involved, and I do suddenly see where you are coming from. I'll give no spoilers though.

Because lynching a participant over a non-participant encourages non-participation. Non-participants add nothing to the game. Participants do, regardless of their alignment, they're still there making the game fun. Keeping the non-participant around hoping they eventually stop being a lousy player and actually play or get replaced while killing off people who are actually playing just punishes the people actually playing.

This isn't a new argument, and for whatever reason (they think one person who isn't even playing can help them win I guess) there are still people who don't seem to get it.

Where have you been all my life?

Yeah, I have to side Boo on this. That said, I think it's more a point of punishment and not something that in fact helps the civvies. But if we go and lynch some players who barely post a few times, maybe the civvies will lose (like that doesn't happen often), but possibly, the low posters would stop using that strategy, or stop playing altogether. It always feels unfair that a player who posts a lot gets scrutinized for his posts. Even If someone is a baddie and is giving it his all by posting and putting himself out there to be looked at, he should be awarded for it, not punished by being lynched over those who barely contribute to the game. That's my stance

That happens to me every game, and I don't see it as a punishment for posting too much.

[thellama73]

That happens to me every game, and I don't see it as a punishment for posting too much.

It happens to me every game, and I do see it as a punishment for posting too much.

But I can't stop myself. It's like a disease.

[Marmot]

That happens to me every game, and I don't see it as a punishment for posting too much.

It happens to me every game, and I do see it as a punishment for posting too much.

But I can't stop myself. It's like a disease.

I must be in denial then.

I've tried posting less. Next thing I know, I've just spammed 5 pages of the thread.

[Marmot]

Oh look, Russ is watching.

[boo]

I think Russti cannot post, not that the forgot to or whatever else. But to make the assumption it's for a bad reason is a huge stretch.

I have seen him in the thread as well.

I am in complete agreement with this.

Boo is also right.

Good, because not being able to see it both ways is another mistake people will probably wind up making. Whether what I've said is true of Russ or not, it is true of non-participants in general.

And I don't think it's true of Russ, I think he's just not playing.

But sure, lets say he just isn't allowed. I don't think MP would make a role that isn't allowed to post (or vote in lynches apparently, which is something MP hates like any other host), and if he did, I do not think that role would be killed the first time a lynch attempt is made, but that the lynch attempt (or x number of votes maybe) would be what would allow that role to begin posting and playing normally. And until Russ can begin playing normally, he cannot be read, so I think it's still worth putting votes on him. I'd like to see that as an actual lynch attempt, but I'm going to guess x = 5 if that guess is the case, so if 4 other people voted (or were considering voting for him at the time I voted), I would vote for Russ in the hopes that that is the mechanic in play as well.

[Bass_the_Clever]

I understand lynching people who just aren't playing but where do you draw the line. I mean it almost sounds like even if you are a low poster you might have to worry about people wanting to lynch you for not being as active as them.

[Marmot]

I think Russti cannot post, not that the forgot to or whatever else. But to make the assumption it's for a bad reason is a huge stretch.

I have seen him in the thread as well.

I am in complete agreement with this.

Boo is also right.

Good, because not being able to see it both ways is another mistake people will probably wind up making. Whether what I've said is true of Russ or not, it is true of non-participants in general.

And I don't think it's true of Russ, I think he's just not playing.

But sure, lets say he just isn't allowed. I don't think MP would make a role that isn't allowed to post (or vote in lynches apparently, which is something MP hates like any other host), and if he did, I do not think that role would be killed the first time a lynch attempt is made, but that the lynch attempt (or x number of votes maybe) would be what would allow that role to begin posting and playing normally. And until Russ can begin playing normally, he cannot be read, so I think it's still worth putting votes on him. I'd like to see that as an actual lynch attempt, but I'm going to guess x = 5 if that guess is the case, so if 4 other people voted (or were considering voting for him at the time I voted), I would vote for Russ in the hopes that that is the mechanic in play as well.

I do see it both ways. I'm just saying that I'm not going to prioritize lynching inactives. That's my call. I still stand by my previous comment. It would be foolish to vote someone for not posting on Day 1.

Russ has been reading the thread.

Linki: Agreed Bass.

[Marmot]

Damnit, where'd the night poll go, I was gonna test Russ on it if he couldn't post.

[boo]

I understand lynching people who just aren't playing but where do you draw the line. I mean it almost sounds like even if you are a low poster you might have to worry about people wanting to lynch you for not being as active as them.

I think low posters should be just as worried about being lynched as medium and high posters. Because I believe in equality for all. I don't think in the early game that that is ever the case, its rarely before D3-D4 where a low poster really needs to be concerned about getting lynched. But that comes with the trade-off of being more likely to get NKed (usually), so it kind of balances out.

My ranting is about actual non-participants.

I would like more from low-posters, and for people who that's just their playstyle, I don't get the appeal of the game, and I don't like the mentality of granting them immunity (almost always) in the first couple of lynches no matter how suspicious they may be just because there is less quantity to find suspicious. But it isn't the same thing.

And for your point of a low poster needing to be more worried about a high poster lynching them, I'd argue they should be. Who are the people most likely to jump onto a bandwagon? Low posters. Who is most likely to get bandwagoned? A high poster. There is a reason yesterday when llama took a third (accidental) vote from BR he became worried he could actually be lynched. I'm pretty confident when I say it wasn't the high-posters llama was worried about coming in and lynching him.

[bea]

I think Russti cannot post, not that the forgot to or whatever else. But to make the assumption it's for a bad reason is a huge stretch.

I have seen him in the thread as well.

I'll second the agreement of this. It's what I've been trying to say about Russ all day I'm just not as eloquent as SVS.

And I do see both sides of the inactives argument. Just not sure where to draw the line betwen inactive and low poster. Is bass still playing? DP? DF if he were in this game? Me if I were still working 11ty billion hours? LC? BR?

linki- ok -thanks for clarifying boo.

[Bass_the_Clever]

I understand lynching people who just aren't playing but where do you draw the line. I mean it almost sounds like even if you are a low poster you might have to worry about people wanting to lynch you for not being as active as them.

I think low posters should be just as worried about being lynched as medium and high posters. Because I believe in equality for all. I don't think in the early game that that is ever the case, its rarely before D3-D4 where a low poster really needs to be concerned about getting lynched. But that comes with the trade-off of being more likely to get NKed (usually), so it kind of balances out.

My ranting is about actual non-participants.

I would like more from low-posters, and for people who that's just their playstyle, I don't get the appeal of the game, and I don't like the mentality of granting them immunity (almost always) in the first couple of lynches no matter how suspicious they may be just because there is less quantity to find suspicious. But it isn't the same thing.

And for your point of a low poster needing to be more worried about a high poster lynching them, I'd argue they should be. Who are the people most likely to jump onto a bandwagon? Low posters. Who is most likely to get bandwagoned? A high poster. There is a reason yesterday when llama took a third (accidental) vote from BR he became worried he could actually be lynched. I'm pretty confident when I say it wasn't the high-posters llama was worried about coming in and lynching him.

I understand what you are saying. I think it makes sense, but I also know that sometimes RL stuff comes up and you can't be around. So I think its something its worth considering. I the case of Russ I think it has to be something role related because he was in the thread when he was being discussed and didn't say anything. I don't understand why someone would do that.

[Epignosis]

Russ is gone, and he was replying in the thread. I am now under the impression that he cannot post until Day 2. And I believe more than ever that is due to his role. So I have this analysis.

First, let's all agree that Russtifinko actually got a role in this game, and that his role is one of those on the front page.

Detectives (12)

Detectives win when all killers (Kiras) have been stopped and justice has prevailed.

L – The world’s most renowned detective, L is incredibly intelligent, logical, and diligent. Consequently, he suffers extreme insomnia, determined to catch Kira. Every night, L searches an individual to determine whether they are Kira. He subsequently comes up with a percentage as to their likelihood of being the murderer. No one knows his true identity other than Watari. (Secrets)

Watari – L’s right-hand man and guardian. Knows L’s true identity and helps him run the logistics of his operation. (Secrets)

Soichiro Yagami – The Chief of the NPA and father of Light Yagami, Soichiro’s perseverance in catching Kira is nearly unmatched, but, like many others, he is blinded by the manipulative skills of his son. However, his strong sense of justice and duty inspire other officers below him, particularly Matsuda. He is the figurehead of the Japanese Task Force. (Secrets)

Shuichi Aizawa – Takes his job very seriously and can be rather opinionated, and thus clashes at times with Matsuda and Misa Amane. He has some respect for L, but seems to hold him in contempt. At some point, the tensions may become too high for Aizawa, and he may choose to leave the Japanese Task Force. (Secrets)

Hideki Ide – Characterized by a fiery temper and a hatred for foolishness, Ide especially does not get along with L, and refuses to abide by his methods. If he ever votes for L to be lynched, his vote that day is worth 5. Gains BTSC with Shuichi Aizawa if Aizawa quits the Japanese Task Force. (Secrets)

Kanzo Mogi – One of the most dedicated members of the Japanese Task Force, but also one of the most reserved. (Secrets)

Touta Matsuda – Enthusiastic but inexperienced, Matsuda means well but often proves a hindrance to his fellow investigators, particularly L. Although he is not convinced that Kira’s killing of criminals is necessarily a bad thing, Matsuda nonetheless remains absolutely dedicated to the Japanese Task Force. His recklessness sometimes pays off, but other times it can get him into trouble. Every night, Matsuda can decide whether to take a risk or play it safe. Additionally, if Higuchi starts killing, Matsuda can instead decide to attempt to spy on Yotsuba. If he does so, he may be able to discover the true identity of the Third Kira, but regardless of his success he may also get caught in the process. (Secrets)

Hirokazu Ukita – Perhaps the most emotional member of the Japanese Task Force, Ukita is nonetheless absolutely determined to catch Kira, and does not hesitate to demonstrate passionate, admirable bravery. (Secrets)

Near – One of two possible individuals being groomed to be the successor to L in case of disaster, Near is much like a younger version of L: socially awkward, but incredibly intelligent and cunning. If L dies, Near takes over the Kira investigation and starts the Special Provision for Kira (SPK), determined to catch Kira before Mello does. (Secrets)

Mello – One of two possible individuals being groomed to be the successor to L in case of disaster, Mello is always considered to be #2 to Near, a position he resents greatly. His intelligence is also high, but sometimes he lets his emotions get the best of him. If L dies, Mello forfeits the successor position to Near, and joins the mafia. He intends on catching Kira before Near does and will do anything to stop Near from getting ahead. (Secrets)

Raye Penber – An FBI agent who begins investigating Light Yagami when L tells him to. Has BTSC with Naomi. (Secrets)

Naomi Misora – A former FBI agent and fiancée of Raye Penber. If Raye dies while investigating Light, she picks up where he left off. Has BTSC with Raye. (Secrets)

Russ could be one of eleven remaining detectives. If you are a detective, then he cannot be your role, so that makes it ten.

Yotsuba Group (7)

While Higuchi possesses a Death Note, every night all members of Yotsuba decide on whom Kira should kill. They do not share BTSC by default. Members of Yotsuba Group win by ??????.

Kyosuke Higuchi (Third Kira) – A very greedy and power-hungry man who becomes the owner of a Death Note if a certain chain of events occurs. However, little does he know he is no more than a tool in an elaborate scheme orchestrated by the original Kira. Each night, while in possession of a Death Note, he votes on a victim for Kira to kill, concealing the fact that he is actually the one deciding others’ fates. (Secrets)

Shingo Mido - After Higuchi has killed two victims, he invites Namikawa, Shimura, and Ooi to a secret meeting. (Secrets)

Reiji Namikawa – After Higuchi has killed one victim, he receives an anonymous phone call. (Secrets)

Suguru Shimura

Eiichi Takahashi

Masahiko Kida

Takeshi Ooi

Does someone want to ask me a question?

Are the Youtubers without role descriptions vanilla?

Other than voting on the kill when Higuchi possesses a Death Note, technically yes.

If Russ is Yotsuba, then he can only be one of the three not marked out.

Kira and His Sympathizers (7)

Unlike typical baddie teams, these roles do not all share BTSC by default. See individual roles for publicly known BTSC information. Kira and His Sympathizers win when Kira has eliminated the Detectives and subsequently starts his utopian New World.

Light Yagami (Kira) – The initial finder of a Death Note, Light is a high-school senior who quickly grows obsessed with power, declaring himself the ultimate decider of criminals’ fates. Determined to create a new perfect world without evil, Light will manipulate or kill anyone in his way. Has BTSC with Ryuk. (Secrets)

Ryuk – A shinigami who appears to Light shortly after he discovers his Death Note, Ryuk explains that he has to stay with Light until he either dies or the Death Note is destroyed, and that he ‘dropped’ the Death Note into the human world because he was bored. As a shinigami, he cannot be harmed by humans, nor can he be seen by humans who have not made contact with his Death Note. Oh, and he loves apples. Has BTSC with Light Yagami. (Secrets)

Misa Amane (Second Kira) – A famous model whose parents were murdered by a man that Kira kills with his Death Note, Misa becomes infatuated with Kira and makes desperate moves to meet him. She thereafter becomes Light’s girlfriend, incredibly complacent to his demands. Gains BTSC with Rem when she receives her Death Note. (Secrets)

Rem – A shinigami who appears to Misa after she discovers her Death Note, Rem accompanies Misa and guards her at any cost. As a shinigami, she cannot be harmed by humans, nor can she be seen by humans who have not made contact with her Death Note. Gains BTSC with Misa Amane when she gives her the Death Note. (Secrets)

Teru Mikami (X Kira) – As a devoted worshiper of Kira, Mikami has a strong sense of justice and feels evil absolutely must be punished. He adheres to a very strict, daily schedule. (Secrets)

Kiyomi Takada – Classmate and former girlfriend of Light Yagami, Takada becomes the official spokeswoman for Kira if Demegawa dies. (Secrets)

Hitoshi Demegawa – A very greedy man who feeds off of publicity, Demegawa is director of Sakura TV. If L dies, Demegawa asserts himself as Kira’s spokesman and constantly rallies for Kira supporters to participate in various violent acts of protest. (Secrets)

Russ could be any of these seven.

Independent (1)

Sidoh – A shinigami whose Death Note was stolen, he searches for Ryuk every night to retrieve his notebook. If he finds Mello, something happens. As a shinigami, he cannot be harmed by humans, nor can he be seen by humans who have not made contact with his Death Note. (Secrets)

Russ could be this critter.

++++

From a detective's perspective, one who believes that Russ cannot be one of the vanilla Yotsuba, there is a 52.3% chance Russtifinko is not a detective. Someone feel free to correct my math. I did this in a hurry because I am cooking and I have to leave soon.

[Elohcin]

Boo, Trice got lynched for the content of his posts, not because he committed the simple act of posting. Don't make him the straw man in your argument. Are you saying we should lynch Russ for not posting, regardless of whether the silence is role-enforced or not?

Again, he doesn't post, he doesn't get lynched. That simple.

It isn't, and if it were, the chance the lynch actually goes through and doesn't simply allow him to start posting is pretty much 0. So yes, I would be more than happy to see someone who isn't even playing lynched tomorrow over someone of any alignment who is actually here and trying to have fun and make the game more fun for everyone else. Russ, whether by choice or role, is not making the game fun, and I see no reason to prioritize keeping people like that in the game over everyone else.

I kind-of have to agree with boo. I mean, I've been in many games and when we know for sure someone is silenced (and they are a suspect already) players won't lynch the silenced. They will wait until the next day to hear what the silenced player has to say. And...non-active players don't get lynched until close to the end of games b/c players want to rule out those who ARE playing and seem bad first. I say, if we see someone as suspect (and obviously they are active), we ought to lynch them first. But...if we see no one as suspect...then it is perfectly alright to go after a non-active or low poster in the first few days. There are usually baddies among those categories. Honestly, I think those who are posting A LOT should hush a little (no offense) which may encourage low posters (like me ) to post more. Anyone else not posting a lot b/c they are overwhelmed at the amount of pages to read at the end of the day?

[DharmaHelper]

From a detective's perspective, one who believes that Russ cannot be one of the vanilla Yotsuba, there is a 52.3% chance Russtifinko is not a detective. Someone feel free to correct my math. I did this in a hurry because I am cooking and I have to leave soon.

I don't understand your point. Mainly due to the fact that (unless I'm mistaken) the odds are similar or actually worse that anyone else is a non-detective role?

[bea]

I feel your pain with the amount of posts Eloh - it's been ok for me today because a) it's night and b) I've had the day off. I do not look forward to my catch up tomorrow night after work though. I'm torn - I like a lively discussion - hate playing catch up.

[DisgruntledPorcupine]

Maybe he has one of those crazy roles that gains power but getting people to talk about him, and this is his strategy.

[DisgruntledPorcupine]

EBWOP: but should be by

[Epignosis]

From a detective's perspective, one who believes that Russ cannot be one of the vanilla Yotsuba, there is a 52.3% chance Russtifinko is not a detective. Someone feel free to correct my math. I did this in a hurry because I am cooking and I have to leave soon.

I don't understand your point. Mainly due to the fact that (unless I'm mistaken) the odds are similar or actually worse that anyone else is a non-detective role?

I said I did it in a hurry. If Russ isn't vanilla Yotsuba, Trice's role, and the role you are (if you are a detective), then it's more likely Russ is bad was my meaning.

[DharmaHelper]

From a detective's perspective, one who believes that Russ cannot be one of the vanilla Yotsuba, there is a 52.3% chance Russtifinko is not a detective. Someone feel free to correct my math. I did this in a hurry because I am cooking and I have to leave soon.

I don't understand your point. Mainly due to the fact that (unless I'm mistaken) the odds are similar or actually worse that anyone else is a non-detective role?

I said I did it in a hurry. If Russ isn't vanilla Yotsuba, Trice's role, and the role you are (if you are a detective), then it's more likely Russ is bad was my meaning.

Alrighty, but is the same not true (or even worse) for literally everyone else?

[DharmaHelper]

My point being I don't want to put faith in a suspicion founded on little more than a coin flip.

[Tangrowth]

Night 1: Silence

In the Shinigami Realm, various Shinigami sit around, bored, discussing Ryuk's disappearance.

SHINIGAMI 1: Has anyone seen Ryuk around lately?
SHINIGAMI 2: Maybe he was serious about losing his death note.
SHINIGAMI 3: It was probably picked up by some human before he could get to it.
SHINIGAMI 4: No way. Then he'd be stuck there till the end of that human's life or until the death note was destroyed. That could take a while.
SHINIGAMI 5: Yeah, I can't picture Ryuk doing something so boring.
SHINIGAMI 1: But do you know what? I actually heard he was carrying two death notes.
SHINIGAMI 4: Seriously why would he need two?
SHINIGAMI 5: Beats me. I'll never understand that guy.

Meanwhile, at Japanese Task Force headquarters, no new victims have been killed since the appearance of the Lynch Note.

ZOMBERELLA12: What's going on? No one has died?
SNOWMAN: It appears that way.
ACEOFSPACES: I don't understand.

juliets runs into the room.

JULIETS: Look!

She throws papers entitled "Roles" onto the table. The players gather around.

JULIETS: It appears someone has revealed some pertinent information for our investigation.


No one has been killed by Kira.
Some role secrets have been revealed.

It is now Day 2.

You have 48 hours to find and lynch Kira.

[Tangrowth]

Hello, everyone. This is L.

I am gathering information on the Kira investigation as we speak. I will report my results to you in the forthcoming nights.

[DharmaHelper]

TH Has already voted for Llama