The Syndicate

trying to catch up, but I still have 3 pages and I need to pause because I have a headache coming on. And I'm supposed to Skype my girl momentarily. Apologies if my input gets delayed; it will be in before EOD, but it's hard to say how long before

I had been wondering if motel room had deliberately linked himself to me, but that voting record suggests otherwise. Each time our votes aligned, his came before mine so that wouldn't make sense. I do still think there's potential that motel room's game is a mirror of my own, short of the post count, and that I shouldn't lambaste him for making the same mistake I did about Mac.

I hope he stops by tonight and states his case.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:When I read someone as town and they're on the chopping block, I will defend them to the bitter end. The reason people have been so perturbed by my treatment of Mac is that it was loud and constant -- which is what all of my content is in every game ever. Naturally when I get one wrong it turns the thread against me.

Normally I don't get them wrong. I'm not going to doubt my own read on Strawhenge just because of what happened with Mac. Your responses to me right now are rather timid -- I am threatening to help kill you without having built a case of my own, and you're only resistance to that is to lightly discredit my ability to read people and waffle on my intentions.

I don't anticipate that you'll vote for me though. Just because you townread Strawhenge doesn't mean you trust his judgment, and you have given no inclination that you do.

I don't see how a townie makes this post. Your true concern is whether I'll vote for you, not why.

METALMARSH89

The first thing I notice (because it's the first thing I looked for) was that motel room had 0 posts Night 5. So that off the bat puts him on my naughty list.

motel room wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

motel room wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I'm not sure how I feel about this MacDougal character.

Seems genuine to me so far. What about him makes you feel otherwise?

His overall hostility requires evaluation. I'm not sure I think he's malevolent, but he's someone I definitely want to watch.

I hope a bit of friendly hostility isn't an alignment indicator over here.

That sounds genuine to me, rather than a Mafia member talking about another.

motel room wrote:Sig, how would you feel about switching to Long Con with me?

This looks good for Day 1, but why sig though? Why not make an effort to get LC lynched Day 1?

motel room wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Question for the group:
Was Bea's reaction to one early, changeable vote an overreaction or an appropriate reaction?
Discuss.

Current track: Brian Eno - Sparrowfall (3) (1:24)

This has been arguably one of the most quoted and replied to posts, imo anyway. No one seemed to bite against Bea.

So then this

Long Con wrote:

FZ. wrote:LC's vote for Bea did strike me as fake...

I have to get ready and leave for work soon, so it's time to cast a real vote. The bea vote was actually fake. I thought, since votes are changeable, I'd make a fake case and see if I could catch any opportunistic baddies trying to latch on to it and follow the vote. It didn't really bear fruit; looking over BWT's reasons for voting bea, he is coming from a completely different angle. The truth is, bea's behaviour is pretty normal for her, and I don't suspect her much at all.

My real vote today will go to sig. Despite the reasonable explanation he had for my original suspicion of him (that he was crafting his posts too much, in a baddie way), I've found a few of his reactions suspicious. His reaction that I was "distancing" from him when I forgot he was the third player involved in an earlier discussion was bizarre, as was his assertion that I (and others) are "desperate to try and get him lynched".

sig, saying we're desperate to try and get you lynched strikes me in two ways, neither of them making me feel comfortable about you. On one hand, it's overdefensive and paranoid, and on the other, it's a way to buffalo us out of voting for you... because who wants to looks "desperate" to lynch someone on Day 1?

It's not much, but it's the behaviour I found most suspicious today, and it's time for me to lock in a vote.

Sorry for using you, bea!

Feels pressured and gross. Long Con's wording on his vote for bea was so confident. This feels like backpedalling.

But motel room ended up voting sig alongside LC.

sig
4
motel room (11), JaggedJimmyJay (16), Long Con (21), birdwithteeth11 (26) 11%

But this interaction with MacDougall and Sorsha seals it for me:

motel room wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

motel room wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

motel room wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

motel room wrote:Alright, switching to Choutas, hi

Based on what?

I want to know why he voted long con and a reaction. And i'll be here from now til end of day so my vote is my weapon.

But you were sus of LC too right? So you changed your vote once Choutas voted for the same player as you? Why?

Yeah I still am and might switch back but I can't ignore the amount of players outright vouching for him.

Look who it is though... people who actually know him. And look at who is voting for him... people who don't know him.

Yes. Exactly. Hence me moving elsewhere atm. What's your point?

I don't think motel room is Mafia.

motel room wrote:

MacDougall wrote:I can assure you that "chaos posting" was a result of the fact that I was losing interest without having people engaging me thinking I was scum. It was boring me.

I just always remember chaos mac in Sloonei's pirate game where you tried to get everyone to lynch the mod and then announced your nightkill in the thread and declared it the next day. that was a fun game lol.

Separately, voting espers for now.

motel room wrote:

MacDougall wrote:linki: please remind me I cannot remember that

#60
https://rateyourmusic.com/board_message ... msg5004603
always makes me laugh.

Yeah, these interactions ring true to me.

I endorse a lynch of either Marsh or Floyd. I'd like to hear how everyone feels about Marsh right now though, specifically in light of his interaction with Strawhenge.

I'd also appreciate if anyone not named Marsh can tell me if they find this perspective agreeable:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:When I read someone as town and they're on the chopping block, I will defend them to the bitter end. The reason people have been so perturbed by my treatment of Mac is that it was loud and constant -- which is what all of my content is in every game ever. Naturally when I get one wrong it turns the thread against me.

Normally I don't get them wrong. I'm not going to doubt my own read on Strawhenge just because of what happened with Mac. Your responses to me right now are rather timid -- I am threatening to help kill you without having built a case of my own, and you're only resistance to that is to lightly discredit my ability to read people and waffle on my intentions.

I don't anticipate that you'll vote for me though. Just because you townread Strawhenge doesn't mean you trust his judgment, and you have given no inclination that you do.

I don't see how a townie makes this post. Your true concern is whether I'll vote for you, not why.

METALMARSH89

Jay, do you think that Strawhenge would say these things to me if he was 100% certain I was mafia based on something that he knew the rest of us didn't? He made all of these posts on Day 6. I realize the last post doesn't fit what I'm saying by itself, but considering he went from the first two posts to the third in the same day phase, I think not.

Strawhenge wrote:I know that was my case, sillypants, but were they good words?

I looked back and you certainly used some more words. I like that. What's wrong with Epi right now? What are your thinks? You voted in response to a thing he said, but I don't see anything wrong with it, on the surface. Esplain?

Strawhenge wrote:Baffled, maybe. I have had very little time for this very fast-moving, info-heavy game; I am, as you say, drowning in text.

I honestly have no idea. You look better, Devin and Sorsha and espers are dead, and it appears I am terrible at this game because they were all town anyway... Yeah, I don't know. Epi, maybe? Rico? JJJ? Mac? Choutas? Diiny? Strawhenge? You? DrWigly? sig? Floyd? motel room? seaside? MattF? Brian? Black Rock? Bullzeye? Elohcin? fingersplints? Russti? RadicalFuzz? Roxy?

Probably one or more of those people.

:'|

Strawhenge wrote:I voted Marsh because I still don't trust him, and I'm stupid.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:When I read someone as town and they're on the chopping block, I will defend them to the bitter end. The reason people have been so perturbed by my treatment of Mac is that it was loud and constant -- which is what all of my content is in every game ever. Naturally when I get one wrong it turns the thread against me.

Normally I don't get them wrong. I'm not going to doubt my own read on Strawhenge just because of what happened with Mac. Your responses to me right now are rather timid -- I am threatening to help kill you without having built a case of my own, and you're only resistance to that is to lightly discredit my ability to read people and waffle on my intentions.

I don't anticipate that you'll vote for me though. Just because you townread Strawhenge doesn't mean you trust his judgment, and you have given no inclination that you do.

I don't see how a townie makes this post. Your true concern is whether I'll vote for you, not why.

METALMARSH89

And I will retort; what alignment would a player who makes this post be, and why?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Jay, do you think that Strawhenge would say these things to me if he was 100% certain I was mafia based on something that he knew the rest of us didn't? He made all of these posts on Day 6. I realize the last post doesn't fit what I'm saying by itself, but considering he went from the first two posts to the third in the same day phase, I think not.

Strawhenge wrote:I know that was my case, sillypants, but were they good words?

I looked back and you certainly used some more words. I like that. What's wrong with Epi right now? What are your thinks? You voted in response to a thing he said, but I don't see anything wrong with it, on the surface. Esplain?

Strawhenge wrote:Baffled, maybe. I have had very little time for this very fast-moving, info-heavy game; I am, as you say, drowning in text.

I honestly have no idea. You look better, Devin and Sorsha and espers are dead, and it appears I am terrible at this game because they were all town anyway... Yeah, I don't know. Epi, maybe? Rico? JJJ? Mac? Choutas? Diiny? Strawhenge? You? DrWigly? sig? Floyd? motel room? seaside? MattF? Brian? Black Rock? Bullzeye? Elohcin? fingersplints? Russti? RadicalFuzz? Roxy?

Probably one or more of those people.

:'|

Strawhenge wrote:I voted Marsh because I still don't trust him, and I'm stupid.

Why would you reference D6 statements from Strawhenge if his relevant shoutout for you to be "immediately" lynched came after Night 7?

Ricochet wrote:Why would you reference D6 statements from Strawhenge if his relevant shoutout for you to be "immediately" lynched came after Night 7?

Plus this little guy:

Strawhenge wrote:Channeling Seaside right now: if we lynch Metalmarsh89 and he's town, I will endorse my own lynch the following day and I will never, ever play Mafia again.

Also, not to be too pretentious, but Epig, you basically cleared motel room based on interactions up to D2 at the latest, from which two out of three quotes feel like saying that two RYMers chatting about past games and about how Mac being more hostile is in his nature must mean they're just that and definitely not in a team together. Does that mean that a teammate would rather distance himself from Mac being hostile, for instance, and call him out on it? Doesn't seem so relevant, so the example itself doesn't feel that relevant.

Ricochet wrote:Why would you reference D6 statements from Strawhenge if his relevant shoutout for you to be "immediately" lynched came after Night 7?

Because objectively, the third of those posts looks like "info".

He dropped the bomb on Day 7, but he'd been advocating my lynch since Day 4.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:And I will retort; what alignment would a player who makes this post be, and why?

I think gauging someone else for their willingness to place a vote on them without a serious interest in the purpose for that vote is definitive of the anti-town mindset.

Ricochet wrote:Also, not to be too pretentious, but Epig, you basically cleared motel room based on interactions up to D2 at the latest, from which two out of three quotes feel like saying that two RYMers chatting about past games and about how Mac being more hostile is in his nature must mean they're just that and definitely not in a team together. Does that mean that a teammate would rather distance himself from Mac being hostile, for instance, and call him out on it? Doesn't seem so relevant, so the example itself doesn't feel that relevant.

Cleared? No...but I have to express an opinion one way or another. That was it.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Why would you reference D6 statements from Strawhenge if his relevant shoutout for you to be "immediately" lynched came after Night 7?

Plus this little guy:

Strawhenge wrote:Channeling Seaside right now: if we lynch Metalmarsh89 and he's town, I will endorse my own lynch the following day and I will never, ever play Mafia again.

Eh, to be honest, although I get what you mean, I don't usually appreciate these kinds of "trust me or lynch me tomorrow if I have failed you, brothers" statements.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Why would you reference D6 statements from Strawhenge if his relevant shoutout for you to be "immediately" lynched came after Night 7?

Because objectively, the third of those posts looks like "info".

He dropped the bomb on Day 7, but he'd been advocating my lynch since Day 4.

Strawhenge wrote:Hey guys. Kill Metalmarsh89.

Strawhenge wrote:He's either Life During Wartime or Psycho Killer. Vote him immediately.

Strawhenge wrote:Oh, I'm just more sure of it than ever.

Day 8, amigo.

Maybe he tested what he advocated and got a positive.

It's certainly starting to feel that way.

Ricochet wrote:Eh, to be honest, although I get what you mean, I don't usually appreciate these kinds of "trust me or lynch me tomorrow if I have failed you, brothers" statements.

I think that depends upon the player. Not everyone is willing to convey this kind of emotion with the intent to deceive -- it can be called distasteful.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:And I will retort; what alignment would a player who makes this post be, and why?

I think gauging someone else for their willingness to place a vote on them without a serious interest in the purpose for that vote is definitive of the anti-town mindset.

I am interested in your purpose in voting for me, hence my request for a reason.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Eh, to be honest, although I get what you mean, I don't usually appreciate these kinds of "trust me or lynch me tomorrow if I have failed you, brothers" statements.

I think that depends upon the player. Not everyone is willing to convey this kind of emotion with the intent to deceive -- it can be called distasteful.

One, I'd find it hard to believe that such a backlash subsequent lynch would happen, say 9 times out of 10. We either do it because we think that player duped us as mafioso, or we don't and find other leads.

Two, if a civilian blundered a big hunt and offers himself the next Day, it would be mislynching two civilians in a row. Which civ faction in their right mind would endorse this?

So yeah, such statements lead to pretty much nothing.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:And I will retort; what alignment would a player who makes this post be, and why?

I think gauging someone else for their willingness to place a vote on them without a serious interest in the purpose for that vote is definitive of the anti-town mindset.

I am interested in your purpose in voting for me, hence my request for a reason.

Asking the question isn't the same as genuinely giving a crap. Your recent sequence of posts strongly suggests to me that you are being very careful with your typing fingers -- this is a scenario which should incite the raging bull within you, not make you uneasy.

Ricochet wrote:Two, if a civilian blundered a big hunt and offers himself the next Day, it would be mislynching two civilians in a row. Which civ faction in their right mind would endorse this?

One who anticipates a near-zero likelihood of the first lynch being a mislynch. I understand where you're coming from. For most players I would probably be less moved. Strawhenge is a special case though.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:And I will retort; what alignment would a player who makes this post be, and why?

I think gauging someone else for their willingness to place a vote on them without a serious interest in the purpose for that vote is definitive of the anti-town mindset.

I am interested in your purpose in voting for me, hence my request for a reason.

Asking the question isn't the same as genuinely giving a crap. Your recent sequence of posts strongly suggests to me that you are being very careful with your typing fingers -- this is a scenario which should incite the raging bull within you, not make you uneasy.

Then let me also play the "You don't know me very well card", and inform you that receiving votes, regardless of the reason behind them, isn't something that gets me going (not like it once did anyway). I have high expectations of you as a player, and just because you don't meet my expectations doesn't mean I'm going to go apeshit on you. So yeah, maybe I just don't feel any reason to "release the raging bull".


But for the record, I won't forgive you.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Two, if a civilian blundered a big hunt and offers himself the next Day, it would be mislynching two civilians in a row. Which civ faction in their right mind would endorse this?

One who anticipates a near-zero likelihood of the first lynch being a mislynch. I understand where you're coming from. For most players I would probably be less moved. Strawhenge is a special case though.

If the civs feel they've been tricked, yes. Any other mixed feeling should not give course to such a punishment lynch.

Besides, I doubt a mafioso would blatantly say that stuff in the first place. Hence, less the chances of it being a trickery we'd fall into. Just a case gone awry.

Ugh, sorry I really don't have time for this game any more Will vote in a moment.

Strawhenge wrote:Guys, we need to lynch Metalmarsh. Come on.

And if anybody asks me 'why' again, I swear...

Why would you want to lynch MM? Are you sure you want to lynch MM? I don't think lynching MM is that great of an idea :P

Metalmarsh89 wrote:So yeah, maybe I just don't feel any reason to "release the raging bull".

Not even potentially being mislynched because one guy vaguely accused you in absolute terms and another guy or three jumped on the wagon without supplying a substantive case -- relatively late in a game in which the town might already be losing?

Elo, could you talk about why you want to lynch me now?

*Voted Russti* since he's my oldest suspicion in the game and I think there are decent reasons to believe he's bad. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Floyd or Bcornett lynch today - one of those is a lot more likely than the other of course.

Bullzeye wrote:*Voted Russti* since he's my oldest suspicion in the game and I think there are decent reasons to believe he's bad. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Floyd or Bcornett lynch today - one of those is a lot more likely than the other of course.

Which one?

So right about now I must tearfully admit that I won't be able to finish the reads up to every single player. I'm only human. I could in theory try to squeeze in Matt until the EoD, but he's hardly a lynch story today, he didn't made me particularly interested to scan him before in the game (other than to arrive to the obvious conclusion that Paranoid Android might be the most fitting song for him [/invisiblesarc]) and I'd rather spend the remaining hours discussing things in real time (and trying not to fall asleep). It's regarding JJJ that I'm now stuck in the same place I was a Day phase ago. Yes, JJJ pointed at every case about him being in the open already, but thing is what I know from play, without revision, leaves me undecided about him; which means I've made no progress toDay either.

Here's my last read.

MetalMarsh89

Interactions with LC
-- talks with LC about RVS usage
-- comments, in reply to LC, on BWT's choice to be zany, considering his Recruitement past game
-- (post-lynch) calls Russ's D2 suspicion on LC forced
-- (post-lynch) remarks theory on Russ unlikely to have bussed LC without developing it further
-- (post-lynch) case on espers based on LC interactions, finds content weird

Interactions with MacBaddie
-- D1 invites Mac to vote Russtifinko
-- N4 calls Mac, espers and Russ looking the worse in Sorsha wagon, in case Devin is bad
-- D5 comments on Matt's Found a Theory about Mac; initially, doesn't buy that he'd automatically be a winner, nor that Sorsha could have picked a winner whilst already dead
-- very next post, not opposed to lynching Mac
-- comments on Mac's alternative theories being good
-- -- puts MacDougall in his D5 top 6 scum list
-- [url=http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=734&p=185514#p185514]expands case on MacDougall[/ur]
-- banter talk and mutual suss with Mac
-- asks JJJ to differentiate between MacGoodie and MacBaddie
-- likes Mac's Girlfriend theory (though he is mistaken...)
-- comments on JJJ's meta vouching for Mac being just that... meta
-- D6 pinged by Mac's comments to Rico, votes him
-- critical of JJJ's insistence that Mac is town, considers lynching him or Mac
-- questions Epig lynching Mac over BR
-- questions Mac self-preserve voting Wilgy
-- [url=http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=734&p=187059#p187059]reiterates case for lynching Mac to JJJ
-- asks Mac for read on JJJ
-- (post-lynch) further clarifications on voting Mac (insincere and inconsistent in gameplay, plus weird Diiny counterwagon)
-- (post-lynch) considers Russ mafia, based on Mac refusing to join Russ lynch on D1

Interactions with Black Rock
-- in reply to JJJ, comments on BR/Russ being a likely team, plans BR ISO
-- D6 places first vote on BR
-- D7 plans to finish BR ISO
-- reads BR civ in D7 GTH :eyeball:
-- reads Russ bad and judges BR wagon dissipation based on BR angle
-- clears... JJJ? in relation to BR wagon?
-- makes conclusions on BR interactions: Epignosis, JJJ, Matt, Golden, splints

LC interactions with MM
Nada.

MacBaddie interactions with MM
-- exchange mutual invitations with MM to lynch low posters (but insists on reywaS)
-- rolls his eyes at MM banter on Floyd being town
-- reads MM good in D3 GTH
-- reads MM bad in D5 top 6
-- calls his read on MM softened on N5
-- calls MM bad in final D6 top 6
-- [rest of interactions are the same pointed out over at MM's side]

Black Rock interactions with MM
-- D5 questioned by MM, says she hasn't decided on top suspects

Side-note #1: questions JJJ, upon his b24 good/bad 6 mafioso role call, how many mafia does he think there still are ...?

Votes
D1 votes Russ based on pings
D2 votes sea based on his two mafia nominations
D3 misses vote
D4 votes JJJ becuase...OMGUS?
D5 votes espers based on case
D6 votes Mac based on suspicions
D7 votes espers based on case

Read
LC interaction is absolutely nowhere and, what's worse, MM's D1 to D4 votes look completely weaksauce. Gets into a groove with the case on Mac, but my feeling upon revising it is that it's not sounding as genuine as, say, Epig or Wilgy building their suspicions on Mac. It's just a feeling, of course, for which I don't think I can rule that MM, based on this alone, tried to cook in real time a Mac distancing. Mac is completely unenganged in what MM thinks of him until he starts reading him bad D5 and D6 - although it was his way of reading everyone bad from then on, probably for massive smoke bomb throwing. MM's BR sussing also appeared rather out of nowhere - or maybe it was linked to Russ? idk, it's not clear. Anyway, lot of delays in reading a two-page history made by BR, lots of linking others around BR's orbit (particularly Russ) and also dat D7 GTH civ read on her.

These interaction would have me place MM in wary camp.

However, unrelated to all this, given today's events, if Strawhenge would be able or willing just give his case just a little more push in the right direction, I'd be willing to treat it as something worth following and cast my vote on MM.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:So yeah, maybe I just don't feel any reason to "release the raging bull".

Not even potentially being mislynched because one guy vaguely accused you in absolute terms and another guy or three jumped on the wagon without supplying a substantive case -- relatively late in a game in which the town might already be losing?

No. Shit happens. I've already pointd out that no substantive case has been made (and you are currently admitting it, so fooey on you).

I don't know why Elohcin continues to defend me, but does that factor into your decision at all?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:*Voted Russti* since he's my oldest suspicion in the game and I think there are decent reasons to believe he's bad. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Floyd or Bcornett lynch today - one of those is a lot more likely than the other of course.

Which one?

Well given that one of those suspects has four votes today while the other has none and I've seen very few other people call him suspicious, that shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

Bullzeye wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:*Voted Russti* since he's my oldest suspicion in the game and I think there are decent reasons to believe he's bad. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Floyd or Bcornett lynch today - one of those is a lot more likely than the other of course.

Which one?

Well given that one of those suspects has four votes today while the other has none and I've seen very few other people call him suspicious, that shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

Yeah I misread that. I thought you said one was more likely to be mafia, not to be lynched.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:*Voted Russti* since he's my oldest suspicion in the game and I think there are decent reasons to believe he's bad. I also wouldn't mind seeing a Floyd or Bcornett lynch today - one of those is a lot more likely than the other of course.

Which one?

Well given that one of those suspects has four votes today while the other has none and I've seen very few other people call him suspicious, that shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

Yeah I misread that. I thought you said one was more likely to be mafia, not to be lynched.

Oh, I see. I think all three are pretty much equally likely to be bad.

Rico, I voted for seaside on Day 7. :P

ture, my mind copypasta'd espers in there, because of the same reasoning (making a full fledged case on both for voting)

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I don't know why Elohcin continues to defend me, but does that factor into your decision at all?

It makes for an interesting clash, doesn't it.

Strawhenge, my biggest hold-up with the lynch you're pursuing is that you've labeled Marsh either the SK or the mafia killer. That you haven't chosen a specific role makes it harder for me to believe you're basing your suspicion upon hard, irrefutable evidence. If I'm wrong, you should try to find a way to convey that. Maybe you can build a massive case (in terms of number of posts referenced).

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I don't know why Elohcin continues to defend me, but does that factor into your decision at all?

It makes for an interesting clash, doesn't it.

Strawhenge, my biggest hold-up with the lynch you're pursuing is that you've labeled Marsh either the SK or the mafia killer. That you haven't chosen a specific role makes it harder for me to believe you're basing your suspicion upon hard, irrefutable evidence. If I'm wrong, you should try to find a way to convey that. Maybe you can build a massive case (in terms of number of posts referenced).

That's true, if Straw has something on MM as a killer, then it comes as a coincidence, independent of Straw's info, that both the mafia and the SK squandered a kill last Night.

We have a town protective role in the game, a town role that cannot be night killed, and another with roleblock capacity. Since both bad factions attacked the same person and failed, that strongly implies that the target was either protected or the role "Blind".

Either of those scenarios leaves no room for hard evidence against the killer as far as I can tell.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We have a town protective role in the game, a town role that cannot be night killed, and another with roleblock capacity. Since both bad factions attacked the same person and failed, that strongly implies that the target was either protected or the role "Blind".

Either of those scenarios leaves no room for hard evidence against the killer as far as I can tell.

It leaves room for either of the two killers having been blocked, in addition.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We have a town protective role in the game, a town role that cannot be night killed, and another with roleblock capacity. Since both bad factions attacked the same person and failed, that strongly implies that the target was either protected or the role "Blind".

Either of those scenarios leaves no room for hard evidence against the killer as far as I can tell.

If the target was protected, then the most likely player to be targeted by both enemies was Epignosis, I think.

Oh, you also forgot a role that can become growingly immune to night actions, if successful so far in not having been targeted at all or most of the times during the Night.

Ricochet wrote:It leaves room for either of the two killers having been blocked, in addition.

They definitely could have been blocked, I just don't know how the roleblocker can know that they blocked the killer in this scenario. That might be the initial impression when the failed kills are revealed, but them being on the same player means it had to be protective in nature or Blind. Unless I'm missing something.

linki -- yes, that one too.

Or maybe Strawhenge is Love for Sale and continues to have his vote forced?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:It leaves room for either of the two killers having been blocked, in addition.

They definitely could have been blocked, I just don't know how the roleblocker can know that they blocked the killer in this scenario. That might be the initial impression when the failed kills are revealed, but them being on the same player means it had to be protective in nature or Blind. Unless I'm missing something.

linki -- yes, that one too.

Well the civ blocker is actually a civ double targetter (blocker and pardoner). It knows which two players it nominated. It becomes revealing who received pardoned. He can piece together and think that blocked player can be a killer, due to the failed kill attempt. He cannot extrapolate, however, which of the two killers. Hence... the "either"?

linki: why "continues"? Continuing from where? Didn't Straw vote Floyd the previous Day?

There was no Night 6, and Strawhenge did not vote for me on Day 7. He did vote for me Day 5, Day 6, and Day 8 with what Jay has admitted was not a substantive case.

This might just be paranoia though.

Ricochet wrote:linki: why "continues"? Continuing from where? Didn't Straw vote Floyd the previous Day?

Yes, but there was no Night 6, and so no one could make an offer for his vote.

Either way, I would not see it as common practice for the role with his vote forced (or sold) to come shouting at the top of my lungs as soon as Day begins that X must die - and not only that, but because he's killah. There are plenty other methods such a role can try.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:linki: why "continues"? Continuing from where? Didn't Straw vote Floyd the previous Day?

Yes, but there was no Night 6, and so no one could make an offer for his vote.

So? I don't get the angle. Love for Sale receives an offer to sell his vote in a direction during the subsequent Day. It can or can't have anything to do with the player he wanted to vote the previous Days.