The Syndicate

Golden wrote:And if he is civ and his ability is to survive a death, why not survive this one?

Stopping a lynch is hardly predominately a scum ability.

I'll admit though... I'm interested in JJ's reaction too, because I think you are more likely to fight to avoid using up your ability if it is a team ability and you can only use it on one person. If I'm town and can survive a lynch, I probably make it more clear that I can survive and put less effort into not being lynched than JJ did.

Exactly, it doesn't read like a town action to me.

Not a terrible result.

HOSTS: Did this result occur because of a tie? What is your policy for ties?

Also, if Jimmy is scum, by doing this they also managed to devalue this narrow gap. If they know the lynch doesn't count, they know that anyone voting for Jimmy could have just as easily been bussing without a worry. It's also therefore expected that someone from Jimmy's scumteam would have been around in the last hour or two as the bandwagons built. The results of this don't make Dharma look good, at least.

Draconus wrote:Not a terrible result.

HOSTS: Did this result occur because of a tie? What is your policy for ties?

1) Not Saying

2) Still not saying

Nice try

S~V~S wrote:

Draconus wrote:Not a terrible result.

HOSTS: Did this result occur because of a tie? What is your policy for ties?

1) Not Saying

2) Still not saying

Nice try

I think you mean nice tie.

So there's at least a possibility that this was a tie, and that scum knew this could be the result of a tie. If that was the case, one more thing in favor of Jimmy being scum.

S~V~S wrote:

Draconus wrote:Not a terrible result.

HOSTS: Did this result occur because of a tie? What is your policy for ties?

1) Not Saying

2) Still not saying

Nice try

That's what I'm trying to get at, HB.

HamburgerBoy wrote:Also, if Jimmy is scum, by doing this they also managed to devalue this narrow gap. If they know the lynch doesn't count, they know that anyone voting for Jimmy could have just as easily been bussing without a worry. It's also therefore expected that someone from Jimmy's scumteam would have been around in the last hour or two as the bandwagons built. The results of this don't make Dharma look good, at least.

Or you, or me. Why would DH be the person who it doesn't make look good, and not me who you were already questioning the motives of?

Voting for him at any rate. He must be lynched.

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:Jimmy

A moment ago, your vote for Jimmy was primarily comparative, in that you'd perhaps have voted for others (eg sorsha) before voting for him.

So why are you immediately voting for him again?

linki @marmot Oh, Bowie Rickman

Because Jimmy was leading and if he's scum and his team can stop a lynch, why not this one?

And if he is civ and his ability is to survive a death, why not survive this one?

Stopping a lynch is hardly predominately a scum ability.

I'll admit though... I'm interested in JJ's reaction too, because I think you are more likely to fight to avoid using up your ability if it is a team ability and you can only use it on one person. If I'm town and can survive a lynch, I probably make it more clear that I can survive and put less effort into not being lynched than JJ did.

Sorry, a what?

Here's a number of reasons for this outcome that I can see, in no specific order...

1. Jimmy was scum, LoRab was town. His team agreed to spare him this lynch with a specific power, either because it was a limited-time offer (e.g. a position-related power), or because saving Jimmy was really important to them, or something along those lines.
2. Jimmy was scum, LoRab was town. His team had a couple hidden extra votes up their sleeves, and knew that a tie would end in a no-lynch.
3. Jimmy was town, LoRab was scum. Her tear team thought Jimmy would look even worse for not being lynched, and while it means they wasted an opportunity to lynch a strong town player in the short run, they managed to turn a double-day (something usually favoring town) into a single day and still get Jimmy in the end, all the while making everyone that voted Jimmy look horrible.
4. Jimmy was scum, LoRab was scum (both on the same teams). Lose-lose for them, and since the LoRab bandwagon was largely propagated by golden (who I still lean town on), maybe they didn't want to risk giving up their team in order to create a third lynch.
5. Jimmy was indy with a protective ability, LoRab was who even cares what. Jimmy wouldn't have a choice but to protect himself.

Someone feel free to add more or explain why you think any of them are highly improbable.

MacDougall wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:Also, if Jimmy is scum, by doing this they also managed to devalue this narrow gap. If they know the lynch doesn't count, they know that anyone voting for Jimmy could have just as easily been bussing without a worry. It's also therefore expected that someone from Jimmy's scumteam would have been around in the last hour or two as the bandwagons built. The results of this don't make Dharma look good, at least.

Or you, or me. Why would DH be the person who it doesn't make look good, and not me who you were already questioning the motives of?

You too of course. I thought DH would be less likely to speak out if I had flipped things and only accused you, though.

HamburgerBoy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:Also, if Jimmy is scum, by doing this they also managed to devalue this narrow gap. If they know the lynch doesn't count, they know that anyone voting for Jimmy could have just as easily been bussing without a worry. It's also therefore expected that someone from Jimmy's scumteam would have been around in the last hour or two as the bandwagons built. The results of this don't make Dharma look good, at least.

Or you, or me. Why would DH be the person who it doesn't make look good, and not me who you were already questioning the motives of?

You too of course. I thought DH would be less likely to speak out if I had flipped things and only accused you, though.

HamburgerBoy wrote:Here's a number of reasons for this outcome that I can see, in no specific order...

1. Jimmy was scum, LoRab was town. His team agreed to spare him this lynch with a specific power, either because it was a limited-time offer (e.g. a position-related power), or because saving Jimmy was really important to them, or something along those lines.
2. Jimmy was scum, LoRab was town. His team had a couple hidden extra votes up their sleeves, and knew that a tie would end in a no-lynch.
3. Jimmy was town, LoRab was scum. Her tear team thought Jimmy would look even worse for not being lynched, and while it means they wasted an opportunity to lynch a strong town player in the short run, they managed to turn a double-day (something usually favoring town) into a single day and still get Jimmy in the end, all the while making everyone that voted Jimmy look horrible.
4. Jimmy was scum, LoRab was scum (both on the same teams). Lose-lose for them, and since the LoRab bandwagon was largely propagated by golden (who I still lean town on), maybe they didn't want to risk giving up their team in order to create a third lynch.
5. Jimmy was indy with a protective ability, LoRab was who even cares what. Jimmy wouldn't have a choice but to protect himself.

Someone feel free to add more or explain why you think any of them are highly improbable.

Oh, and

6. A well-intending townie decided to cancel the lynch because they thought it came up too suddenly, felt bad for both suspects, and wanted to see more discussion on it.

I really hope it isn't that though.

What do you mean by position related power?

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:Jimmy

A moment ago, your vote for Jimmy was primarily comparative, in that you'd perhaps have voted for others (eg sorsha) before voting for him.

So why are you immediately voting for him again?

linki @marmot Oh, Bowie Rickman

Because Jimmy was leading and if he's scum and his team can stop a lynch, why not this one?

And if he is civ and his ability is to survive a death, why not survive this one?

Stopping a lynch is hardly predominately a scum ability.

I'll admit though... I'm interested in JJ's reaction too, because I think you are more likely to fight to avoid using up your ability if it is a team ability and you can only use it on one person. If I'm town and can survive a lynch, I probably make it more clear that I can survive and put less effort into not being lynched than JJ did.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:Jimmy

A moment ago, your vote for Jimmy was primarily comparative, in that you'd perhaps have voted for others (eg sorsha) before voting for him.

So why are you immediately voting for him again?

linki @marmot Oh, Bowie Rickman

Because Jimmy was leading and if he's scum and his team can stop a lynch, why not this one?

And if he is civ and his ability is to survive a death, why not survive this one?

Stopping a lynch is hardly predominately a scum ability.

I'll admit though... I'm interested in JJ's reaction too, because I think you are more likely to fight to avoid using up your ability if it is a team ability and you can only use it on one person. If I'm town and can survive a lynch, I probably make it more clear that I can survive and put less effort into not being lynched than JJ did.

Sorry, a what?

Like, if one person in a team has a lynch stop, you can use it to successfully save anyone in your team. As opposed to just yourself.

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:Jimmy

A moment ago, your vote for Jimmy was primarily comparative, in that you'd perhaps have voted for others (eg sorsha) before voting for him.

So why are you immediately voting for him again?

linki @marmot Oh, Bowie Rickman

Because Jimmy was leading and if he's scum and his team can stop a lynch, why not this one?

And if he is civ and his ability is to survive a death, why not survive this one?

Stopping a lynch is hardly predominately a scum ability.

I'll admit though... I'm interested in JJ's reaction too, because I think you are more likely to fight to avoid using up your ability if it is a team ability and you can only use it on one person. If I'm town and can survive a lynch, I probably make it more clear that I can survive and put less effort into not being lynched than JJ did.

Sorry, a what?

Like, if one person in a team has a lynch stop, you can use it to successfully save anyone in your team. As opposed to just yourself.

Oh. Duh

MacDougall wrote:What do you mean by position related power?

Meaning if they only had a lynch-cancel because they were in a specific position, using it today would not impact use of it on a later day. (I'm talking about positions as described in Zebra's role, in case that was the confusing part.)

What the absolute fuck?

I've caught up and holy bandwagon, batman!! Seriously, people.

There is more than one person who voted for me who either hasn't mentioned me at all and should know better (Tranq) or who has never played with me before and can't even give me the benefit to answer votes (motel room). A few others who are somewhere in the middle, but that was the most obvious late lynch bandwagon I have ever seen.

And I agree with others that it was a clear attempt to save a teammate. And noting that he didn't act like a civ who had a save to use during the lynch.

*votes JJJ*

HamburgerBoy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:What do you mean by position related power?

Meaning if they only had a lynch-cancel because they were in a specific position, using it today would not impact use of it on a later day. (I'm talking about positions as described in Zebra's role, in case that was the confusing part.)

I guess this is possible, not that we have any evidence either way. But if this theory were to turn out to be evidenced in a role reveal later, I guarantee that JJ's lynch train would have teammates on it.

Where did all this talk of a tie come from?

LoRab wrote:And I agree with others that it was a clear attempt to save a teammate. And noting that he didn't act like a civ who had a save to use during the lynch.

*votes JJJ*

Who are these others? Uzzers

Who are 3J's teammates who voted against you?

Why would he have to act like a civilian who had a save to use during a lynch?

What does it mean to act like a civilian who has a save to use during a lynch (I had two of them in Harry Potter Mafia- I never let anyone know).

If he did act like a civilian who had a save to use during the lynch (if), would you still be voting for him?

Why didn't you post a number?

Epignosis wrote:

LoRab wrote:And I agree with others that it was a clear attempt to save a teammate. And noting that he didn't act like a civ who had a save to use during the lynch.

*votes JJJ*

Who are these others? Uzzers

Who are 3J's teammates who voted against you?

Why would he have to act like a civilian who had a save to use during a lynch?

What does it mean to act like a civilian who has a save to use during a lynch (I had two of them in Harry Potter Mafia- I never let anyone know).

If he did act like a civilian who had a save to use during the lynch (if), would you still be voting for him?

Why didn't you post a number?

A few people mentioned the obvious lynch wagon in various ways and that it looked like JJJ was looking to have been saved. I don't specifically remember who, off hand. I will look tomorrow.

I named a couple that I'm eyeballing. I'm not sure who that jumped on the lynch train is most suspicious. I need to reread when I'm not quite as livid as I am now.

I find that there are patterns of behavior that tend to be extant with civies who have lynch saves vs baddies who have lynch saves. That's not to say that every civie does the same thing. But I don't think JJJ seemed like a civ with a save. Especially because a bunch of people popped up to vote for another player in order that he be saved. It's a combination of factors that makes me think that he isn't civ.

I don't think I played that game of HP Mafia (as opposed to a much earlier game of HP mafia, in 2 parts, actually). So I'm not sure how you behaved as a civ with lynch saves.

How he responds when he comes back will further inform my thoughts and may convince me differently. If I thought he were civ, yes, I would think differently. Not sure I understand your question.

And post a number? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Oh, wait...did you mean why don't I suspect a specific number of people who voted for me? OF the 8 who voted for me, I'm not sure which are bad. I don't particularly suspect you or Sorsha because your suspicion of me is well documented. The other 6 I'm iffy on.

LoRab wrote:And post a number? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Oh dear.

LoRab wrote:Oh, wait...did you mean why don't I suspect a specific number of people who voted for me? OF the 8 who voted for me, I'm not sure which are bad. I don't particularly suspect you or Sorsha because your suspicion of me is well documented. The other 6 I'm iffy on.

Not at all. Behold:

Epignosis wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Do you have a stake in LoRabs survival? Are you absolutely sure she won't flip bad? I'm not, in fact I think she will flip mafia. I am interested in other avenues though, like JJJ and Tranq. What avenues do you want us to explore?

linki: We did! *high five*

Definitely not certain, but I just don't find the case on her compelling. I think Epignosis has been the most thorough and to me looks the most genuine in his case on her, but it's still for tone/wording (sorry Epi in this case they're interchangeable to me ) reasons. Saying "seem" to neutralize an accusation somewhat, and an accusation against someone that flipped town, doesn't ping me super heavy. In the sense that it could show a scum distancing from an inevitable town flip, maybe, but then you could much more easily accuse me of worse, being that I actually defended Rico's early posts and said they looked useful to me. If people stay on LoRab for this, we may as well just do a tally of every player and the number of times they tried to soften an accusation.

Maybe you could update your case on her? I don't think you responded to my points about your case here, only the parts about Jimmy's suggestion of a connection between you and Zebra. Just from general experience, it never seems to be good when the popular early-game candidates just keep getting mentioned over and over, and landslide lynches are almost impossible to get meaningful information from unless it's against scum.

That's not the only reason I suspect Lorab. I also suspect her because Black Rock came out early against her, which I would not expect if Black Rock were bad and trying to set Lorab up. Her suspicion of Lorab would be subtler, and as I said if you are reading the thread and paying attention to people's posts, please take the opportunity to include a number, whether spelled out or not, in your next post- I would appreciate that very much. As I said, if Black Rock is bad and setting up Lorab, I would be surprised, because I don't see her doing that if she is bad.

Hence this:

LoRab wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Black Rock wrote:A question for LoRab before I go back and do what I said I would do... What do you think of HB defending you?

Just finished reading up. Will answer this before I go off to sleep. Will answer other things tomorrow. But this is a direct question and came at the end (I may have cut and copied a bunch of quotes to paste into a window to respond to during my read, and then forgot I did, and cut and pasted something else and lost that entire thing).

Quite honestly, I find it suspicious. I think your suspicion of me is misguided but honest. I believe that you honestly think that I'm bad--it's not like you to make that up. And you wouldn't do that against me. I think those points are BS. I know that you're wrong. But I think that it's coming from the right place. You may be bad, but your suspicion of me isn't evidence of that.

HB's posts, though, they feel like they're sucking up. He's being too nice about it, if that makes sense. And it's not like he knows me well enough to know how to read me. The more he defends me, the less good I feel about it. A civ, I think, wouldn't defend another civ that strongly because it would put targets on both of them. A baddie would defend a civ to gain credit. So, yeah, it makes me increasingly uneasy about him.

So you're completely caught up?

I've been caught up throughout the game--whether I've had time to fully respond has been my challenge. I know I have things to respond to from the past RL day (as I said). I will get to that tomorrow. Am not nearly awake enough at the moment.

I thought that was exclusively directed to me. I don't see others posting numbers either. Are you being serious right now?

HamburgerBoy wrote:I thought that was exclusively directed to me. I don't see others posting numbers either. Are you being serious right now?

Welcome to my hell.

HamburgerBoy wrote:I thought that was exclusively directed to me. I don't see others posting numbers either. Are you being serious right now?

A number (ha) of people posted numbers in their subsequent posts. No, it was not directed at you, and yes, I am serious.

So, I may have not focused on 1 sentence within one post on one page of the game. Sorry about that. And, uh, yeah--upon seeing it now, how would I know that was directed at me? And, really, in reading a dozen pages of posts, I miss a sentence or 2 here and there. It's a fact of life. I'm sorry I don't hang on every single word that you write.

HamburgerBoy wrote:I thought that was exclusively directed to me. I don't see others posting numbers either. Are you being serious right now?

I took it at that way too. When epi talked about people failing his test, I still hadn't even put two and two together that he was talking about the number thing.

LoRab wrote:So, I may have not focused on 1 sentence within one post on one page of the game. Sorry about that. And, uh, yeah--upon seeing it now, how would I know that was directed at me? And, really, in reading a dozen pages of posts, I miss a sentence or 2 here and there. It's a fact of life. I'm sorry I don't hang on every single word that you write.

You don't hang on every single word I write? Shocker.

"How would I know that was directed at me?"

and

"And, really, in reading a dozen pages of posts, I miss a sentence or 2 here and there?"

Pick an excuse. You either saw it and thought it was meant for someone else (HamburgerBoy didn't post a number either), so if you saw my ruse, why didn't you call him on it?

Or you "miss a sentence here and there." And you happened to miss my sentence as one of those here or there? Lies.

You are bad and I hope you hang.

Two-hundred and eighty-nine

Isn't it wonderful to come home after a long day of class, having missed the lynch, and see a case raised and disappeared on your name?
Did JJJ raise this case to save his own hide after determining the Lorab case wouldn't succeed?
Can't you see that my criticism of Mac for the sig lynch stemmed from his driving role, not the vote itself?
Isn't leading people astray more culpable than being led astray?
Is JJJ's survival the result of baddie ability?
Wouldn't we think that a second lynch would prove this?
Is this style of posting annoying to anyone else?

Epignosis wrote:

LoRab wrote:So, I may have not focused on 1 sentence within one post on one page of the game. Sorry about that. And, uh, yeah--upon seeing it now, how would I know that was directed at me? And, really, in reading a dozen pages of posts, I miss a sentence or 2 here and there. It's a fact of life. I'm sorry I don't hang on every single word that you write.

You don't hang on every single word I write? Shocker.

"How would I know that was directed at me?"

and

"And, really, in reading a dozen pages of posts, I miss a sentence or 2 here and there?"

Pick an excuse. You either saw it and thought it was meant for someone else (HamburgerBoy didn't post a number either), so if you saw my ruse, why didn't you call him on it?

Or you "miss a sentence here and there." And you happened to miss my sentence as one of those here or there? Lies.

You are bad and I hope you hang.

You missed the "upon seeing it now" part of the "How would I know" section of your selective quoting. I didn't see it. But even if I had, and in rereading it in retrospect, its intent isn't clear.

Selective quoting to pick a post apart doesn't work if you totally miss a relevant point of the post. Please don't try to twist my words. It's inelegant.

I'm not bad. You're trying to make me look that way. I get you suspect me--and I don't mind that. You've suspected me in every game we've played together (which is more than just a couple of games as you claimed earlier). And I think now, no matter what I say, you're going to twist my posts to make them fit your theory.

You are wrong. Stuboorn, but wrong.

But, really, if you're going to respond directly to a post of mine, at least read it fully and accurately.

HB did post a number in his subsequent post, epi, without any further prompting from you.

Boomslang, you should check but I think your curse is over, based on SVS clarification earlier.

Although I disagree that 'leading people astray' is more culpable than 'being lead astray'. I would, because I tend to lead not follow. But, I think either can indicate a level of culpability. Each person is responsible for where they put their vote, whatever their reasons are. Baddies might intentionally lead a mislynch on someone. Baddie might intentionally blend in and intentionally 'be lead astray' by someone they know isn't going after someone on their team.

Golden wrote:HB did post a number in his subsequent post, epi, without any further prompting from you.

Boomslang, you should check but I think your curse is over, based on SVS clarification earlier.

Although I disagree that 'leading people astray' is more culpable than 'being lead astray'. I would, because I tend to lead not follow. But, I think either can indicate a level of culpability. Each person is responsible for where they put their vote, whatever their reasons are. Baddies might intentionally lead a mislynch on someone. Baddie might intentionally blend in and intentionally 'be lead astray' by someone they know isn't going after someone on their team.

Ah, that is a relief. Thanks, SVS! And I agree that baddies might be found on either side of the leader/follower coin. But I'd argue that baddie leaders do more damage among undecided civs, swaying them with arguments they know to be incorrect. A leader can bring more than just his or her vote to bear on an undesirable lynch, is what I'm trying to say.

Golden wrote:

FZ. wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:I just realised - Boomslang currently has the curse Draconus had on day one.

I hadn't noticed this either. Good eye.

I'm willing to bet the question-curser is on a separate mafia team to Zebra's. Unless Boom was cursed by a team mate (here we go again), that'd be a tick in his favor at least for one side.

Boomslang was being talked about and suspected. He had more to gain than you in terms of using the curse on himself if he's on that team. And again, what is the curse?

Speaking only in yes/no questions.

How do you know it's just yes/no questions, as opposed to just speaking in questions?

Turnip Head wrote:Turnip Head even sat with them, and while blowing the petals off a daisy...

Blowing the petals off a daisy? That's not a thing.

HamburgerBoy wrote:So there's at least a possibility that this was a tie, and that scum knew this could be the result of a tie. If that was the case, one more thing in favor of Jimmy being scum.

I don't think the hosts would tell the scum team(s) information like that if they weren't willing to make it public.

Lame result. Might as well vote the Jimster again. *votes JaggedJimmyJay*

Actually, something just came to mind, not sure if this was mentioned already. If Jimmy was scum and used Boomslang as a convenient target for a lynch, this would mean the team that cursed Boomslang almost certainly wouldn't be on Jimmy's team. Under certain circumstances I could see that as a gambit, but JJJ was seriously in trouble and I don't think he would have thrown away a convenient get-away, allowing his team to spare a lynch-cancel, just to pull that. I know people have already suggested a symmetry where both teams can curse, but this seems like more concrete evidence of that. Of course, if the lynch was canceled for some other random reason unrelated to whether or not Jimmy is actually scum, then it could still imply the team that cursed Boomslang was the same that canceled the lynch.

Long Con wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Turnip Head even sat with them, and while blowing the petals off a daisy...

Blowing the petals off a daisy? That's not a thing.

Please tell me which flower I'm thinking of. It's it a daffodil? I wrote the post in like 5 minutes, no time for fact checking!

HamburgerBoy wrote:Actually, something just came to mind, not sure if this was mentioned already. If Jimmy was scum and used Boomslang as a convenient target for a lynch, this would mean the team that cursed Boomslang almost certainly wouldn't be on Jimmy's team. Under certain circumstances I could see that as a gambit, but JJJ was seriously in trouble and I don't think he would have thrown away a convenient get-away, allowing his team to spare a lynch-cancel, just to pull that. I know people have already suggested a symmetry where both teams can curse, but this seems like more concrete evidence of that. Of course, if the lynch was canceled for some other random reason unrelated to whether or not Jimmy is actually scum, then it could still imply the team that cursed Boomslang was the same that canceled the lynch.

I should add: assuming two symmetrical scum teams, that would mean the people that cursed Boomslang were on a different team from Zebra's. Most of my reasoning against Jimmy has been from the POV that he is a scummate of Zebra's, so I'm actually starting to consider that it wasn't Jimmy's team that stopped this lynch, which would imply disregard for Jimmy's reputation in this game.

Turnip Head wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Turnip Head even sat with them, and while blowing the petals off a daisy...

Blowing the petals off a daisy? That's not a thing.

Please tell me which flower I'm thinking of. It's it a daffodil? I wrote the post in like 5 minutes, no time for fact checking!

Dandelion.

Daisies are plucked in a loves me, loves me not sort of way.

LoRab wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Turnip Head even sat with them, and while blowing the petals off a daisy...

Blowing the petals off a daisy? That's not a thing.

Please tell me which flower I'm thinking of. It's it a daffodil? I wrote the post in like 5 minutes, no time for fact checking!

Dandelion.

Daisies are plucked in a loves me, loves me not sort of way.

I liked it the way you did it though, TH.

Golden wrote:I'd actually be ok seeing Sorsha or LoRab lynched.

you think we're seeing baddie sorsha?
like we saw in a world reborn?
like the one you trusted?

FZ. wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

Golden wrote:I'd actually be ok seeing Sorsha or LoRab lynched.

I agree with 50% of this statement. Voting LoRab again.

I don't like this vote. Because you just ignored all discussion and just voted for someone else.

To be fair, you literally did something quite similar later.

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Golden wrote: I literally cannot conceive of any game scenario where calling people a civ is detrimental to my chances of winning as a civ.

In a game with multiple mafias, their night kills have a chance of taking out each other, making the civs' jobs easier. If instead they are able to target people they know are civs, that possibility goes away, making the civs' jobs harder. You literally cannot conceive of that? I literally don't believe you.

Why would any Mafia team avoid taking out an opposing voting bloc that also stops them from killing every night?

That's a good question, but I think it happens a lot in the early game. It's usually beneficial for mafias to cut down the number of civilians and wait to go after each other once there is a nice cushion, and then turn on each other in the mid to end-game.. Remember that lynches are still happening, so the presence of a competing mafia acting like mafia makes for good lynch competition. At least that's my experience.

I get what you're saying, but if I don't think I can lynch someone I know is bad, then why wouldn't I kill them?

Golden wrote:If JJ is lynched and comes back civ, I'm holding HB and Mac responsible.

This is weird.

Epignosis wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:I thought that was exclusively directed to me. I don't see others posting numbers either. Are you being serious right now?

A number (ha) of people posted numbers in their subsequent posts. No, it was not directed at you, and yes, I am serious.

I thought it was directly to HB....

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:

FZ. wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:I just realised - Boomslang currently has the curse Draconus had on day one.

I hadn't noticed this either. Good eye.

I'm willing to bet the question-curser is on a separate mafia team to Zebra's. Unless Boom was cursed by a team mate (here we go again), that'd be a tick in his favor at least for one side.

Boomslang was being talked about and suspected. He had more to gain than you in terms of using the curse on himself if he's on that team. And again, what is the curse?

Speaking only in yes/no questions.

How do you know it's just yes/no questions, as opposed to just speaking in questions?

TRU

I intend to spend 0% of this phase defending myself. It's clearly pointless, I'd be talking to a brick wall.

I'll endeavor to figure out who among my accusers is swimming in confirmation bias like a good wrong townie, and who is delighted by my plight like a baddie. I'll share my reads.

And then I will die. Oh well.

For now though, I'm off to work.

Go ahead and lynch me. Talk about someone else while you do it. Stop wasting 3.1 on the guy who is clearly going down regardless.

My vote was where I wanted it before the first lynch was up, and it's in the same place now. Nothing has changed for me yet, although I will be looking into the 11 other voters for you. That's a lot of voters.