Mini 684: Quacks and Masons Mafia- Game Over

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all

I am replacing Sotty7, so in keeping with the instructions I received via PM by the game mod:


/confirm


I will have to read the entire thread to get up to speed, and will post something substantive as soon as possible.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Whew.

I had to read the entire thread from start to finish twice to make sense of what happened on Day 1, and I've also been working my way through reading each player's posts in isolation to try to get a sense of who's who in terms of pro-town v. scummy players. I haven't got through all of the players' posts in isolation yet, but in the meantime, I thought I should post my overall impressions so far.

As a replacement coming into Day 2 after a disastrous Day 1, I am cognizant that I have a different benefit of hindsight than those of you who were here on Day 1, since I wasn't here at the time that you were all posting what you did on Day 1, so I have tried to keep that in mind while re-reading the second time. I have tried to separate out the things that struck me as suspicious

only

with the benefit of hindsight from those that struck me as suspicious even

without

the benefit of hindsight. Of course, it is impossible to do that with 100% accuracy, for obvious reasons, but I have tried.

Overall, I find roflcopter the most suspicious for his constant exaggeration of the alleged scumminess of others by way of very short posts almost entirely devoid of substance and entirely devoid of evidence in support of his allegations. I am not impressed or swayed by dramatic accusations in the absence of evidence, and roflcopter seems to be trying to hone "dramatic accusations in the absence of evidence" to an art form.

The player who pings my scumdar most after roflcopter is Sun Tzu, because he seems to be flying under the radar without contributing much to the thread, but then showing up to hammer once the townies have committed to a (in my view, flawed - sorry to say) plan which was very likely to end badly for the town. It is often the case that among scum teams, there are vocal ones who take the lead and quiet ones who sit back and try to fly under the radar, showing up only when necessary. Sun's Day 1 history seems to fit the bill for (one of?) the quiet ones among the current scum team as he's posted very rarely, and has offered little, if anything, in the way of analysis but showing up when absolutely necessary to support the scum team.

As I said, I tried to separate out the hindsight parts of my review for my first substantive post since I wasn't here on Day 1 and most of the rest of you were, but I will be happy to expand on the rest of it further during the course of discussion.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

i've got some things to say to jazz but no time to say them atm

No worries, I will be around later too. Take your time.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

got a flight to catch tonight and too much to do in preparation for this trip, but theoretically i'll have wifi at my hotel so you'll hear from me tomorrow

As I said, no worries, take your time. I look forward to hearing from you when you have access.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

You do realize that articulating reasons for your suspicions is not only desirable but required, and that simply making bald allegations is neither desirable nor compelling, don't you?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Pacman, I think you are doing something I just learnt about in another game known as "active lurking". You post irrelevant messages every now and then perhaps to aviod being prodded,

This is a good point.

Anyway, Hello Jazz, fellow replacement

Hello, militant.

I will post my thoughts about Sun tommorow, he seems to be acting a little shifty. Strange also how when he is accused or called out he posts a lot but before hand he did not post a lot at all, Sun is another one that could be said to be "activley lurking" I think.

Yes, I noticed that he didn't post much at all until after I called him out on that very point.

i can only assume you're talking about the stretch of posts from me, addressed at clammy, earlyish on day one. did you read me in isolation, or with clammy's posts interspersed? i think you'll find i make a lot more sense when you see what it was i am responding to. and make sure to check out the timestamps, as a large chunk of that exchange took place in very quick succession.

I don't recall now whether I read your posts in isolation or in the thread proper (although I think I did both), but I will go back and read them as you suggested.

you've clearly never read any of my games (and why would you have) but yes, for me it is an art form. i make cases based on gut reads, and generally evidence comes after i build up some momentum. in this case, my push against clammy garnered support directly because of his own actions, so i didn't need to implicitly state anything myself.

No, I have never read any of your games, except for this one. I will re-read the thread with this, too, in mind and see if that alleviates my suspicions.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I understand this perfectly. I recognise my lack of content.

I'll try hardly

and I'll be more productive.

Um, what? You seem to have been hardly trying all game.

@ALL: Please calm down.

Coming from someone who has barely participated in the game at all so far, this is a somewhat unusual post.

We have only 9 alive now, and if we mislynch a doc and the quack commits a mistake, the game will be over before daybreak.

Nice of you to finally take notice.

hmm... and this activity sucks...
aww

Oh, the irony. FoS: pacman

[Jazzmyn]

I'm still leaning towards Sun and rofl as most suspect at the moment, but pacman's active lurking is also pinging my scumdar.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Add onto this that there's a chainsaw by rofl, and we've caught two scum.

What is a "chainsaw"? I have no idea what this means.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

"chainsaw" is when player a attacks the person making a case against player b in order to defuse the case against player b

Ah, I see. Thanks.



I am going to attempt to re-read tonight, and hope to have more to add soon.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I have read and re-read the entire thread and I'm comfortable with voting Sun at present, but rofl and pacman are still pinging my scumdar.

So,

Vote: Sun Tzu

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

While waiting for a claim; lynch theories:

In the event Sun is scum - Good. Doctors should hold night actions.
In the event Sun is a doc - Bad. Doctors should hold night actions.
In the event Sun is the quack - Moderate. Doctors should protect, as they are now confirmed to be protectors.

Yes, this makes sense.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I AM A QUACK.

I'M A "DOC", AND I TARGETTED DATTEBAYO TONIGHT. FEEL FREE TO LYNCH ME IF YOU WANT.

Why would you target Dattebayo during the night after reading this:

In the event Sun is scum - Good. Doctors should hold night actions.
In the event Sun is a doc - Bad. Doctors should hold night actions.
In the event Sun is the quack - Moderate. Doctors should protect, as they are now confirmed to be protectors.

??

[Jazzmyn]

actually i'm pretty sure i have a good idea of who at least two of the masons are, i'm glad the scums didn't reach the same conclusion as me last night. rice is probably right,

we can go ahead with masons claiming.

its not like the masons are about to lynch each other anyway, and if it keeps the scum in the dark so much the better.

My bolding.

Surely, Rice's stated position was the exact opposite of this. So, the question is whether that was a typo or a scum slip up on your part.

FoS: roflcopter

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Pacman,

I would like an answer to my post #357.

If you are a doc, why would you try to protect someone last night, in light of the obvious good reasons not to do so?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Well, let's see what pacman has to say in response to my #357 and to the similar requests of others about why he would, if he is a doc, have tried to protect someone during the last night.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Raider's #367 makes sense to me. I have no problem with waiting for pacman's return rather than seeking a replacement, as we can carry on in the meantime.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

hi. shitty access recently. guess we're waiting for pacman to say something more before we lynch him? cause that needs to happen.

Not exactly. Have you not read the thread?


I'm going to go ahead and

Vote: roflcopter

[Jazzmyn]

Thinking out loud about pacman's quack claim and what it means in various scenarios.

If he is a quack as he says and we lynch him, that leaves us with 3 masons and 1 doc going into Night. The doc can attempt to protect someone and it is possible that we would go into the next Day with all four townies still alive and 2 scum, or if the doc protect is not successful, we go into the next day with 3 townies (either 3 masons or 2 masons + 1 doc) vs. 2 scum. In this scenario, if the three townies left are all masons, it's game over, town wins as they would know for certain who the 2 scum are by process of elimination. But if it's 2 masons + 1 doc v. 2 scum, that's not a particularly appealing scenario odds-wise because both of the scum will fake-claim and things will be highly uncertain.

If we lynch pacman and he flips scum, then we go into the Night with 3 masons, 1 doc and 1 quack, and after the remaining scum NKs someone, we go into the next Day with 4 townies v. 1 scum. The composition of the remaining townies will still be at least 2 masons, and perhaps 3 if the remaining scum NKs the doc or the quack. This seems like poor odds for the remaining scum, so why would they attempt to pull off a fake claim like this?

However, if pacman's claim is true and we successfully lynch someone else who we think is scum, we go into the Night with 3 masons, 1 doc and one known quack. Pacman does nothing during the Night, and the doc tries to protect someone. If the doc protect is successful, we go into the next Day with all 5 townies v. 1 scum. In this scenario, that means 3 masons, 1 known quack, 1 doc v. 1 scum. Very good scenario for the town as the masons could claim and the lynch target could only be either the doc or the scum. Even if town mislynches the doc, it will be a win the next day because that leaves 3 town v. 1 scum on the next day and everyone's roles will then be known. Insta-lynch, game over, town wins.

If the doc protect is not successful, we go into the next Day with 4 townies v. 1 scum. In this scenario, there would be a minimum of 2 masons still alive and perhaps 3. If all 3 masons are still alive, they would be so with either pacman the quack or the doc. If it's 3 masons + known quack v. 1 scum, game over, town wins. If instead it is 2 masons + known quack + doc v. 1 scum on the next Day, masons claim, only lynch targets are the unknown doc and the remaining scum. If town gets it right, game over, town wins. If towns gets it wrong and lynches the doc, we go into the next night with 3 town (2 masons and known quack) but the next day, we have 2 known town v. 1 scum. Town wins.

I could very well be missing some possible scenarios here, but as I said, I am just thinking out loud. If I've got something wrong, by all means correct me and/or point out things that I may have missed.

But so far I'm not seeing the logic behind a scum-pacman fake-claiming quack, so I tend to believe his claim. If he is telling the truth, it seems to me that we would be far better off to try to lynch scum today, rather than our remaining quack.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I'm still fairly convinced rofl/militant are the two remaining scum.

I agree.

That could very well be, certainly. Those presently voting for pacman seem most suspect to me at the moment, though, especially since both of them did so without expressing any real reasons for doing so, but I can also see at least one of the scum laying off of trying to bandwagon pacman in the circumstances. That said, since rofl is in both camps, I'm quite content with a rofl lynch today. It's worth seeing who steps up to hammer, and how rofl flips, and it will give us much more information to work with tomorrow.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I am posting this in all of my games.

Mod: I will have no access from tonight until December 7 or 8.

Players: Due to a sudden death in the family, I have to leave tonight for the west coast and will not return until Sunday, December 7 or Monday, December 8. If you feel that the length of my absence will be unduly detrimental to the game in light of the stage of the game, etc., please do not hesitate to seek my replacement, as you see fit. I do not want my absence to hold things up or kill the momentum of a game, so I will take no offence at all if you think it's best to replace me.

So, I will either see you back here next week or I will see you in another game in the very near future.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all.

I am back from the west coast, and I thank you all for your patience and understanding, and for not replacing me in my absence. I have a lot to catch up on (both in real life and in my ongoing 5 games) after nearly a week away, but I will do so as quickly as possible. This particular game has not had very many posts since I've been gone so I should be able to get up to speed on this one in pretty short order.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Well, I have read what I missed while I was away and first things first:

Congratulations, raider!

I have also re-read much of the thread and I remain comfortable with my current vote on roflcopter. I haven't seen anything to induce me to change it at this point.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

At this point who do you think the other scum is?

At this point, I think it is either Netlava or you.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Actually, now that I re-read a bit and now that I look at the lynch of scum SunTzu again, and specifically at who was voting at the time but not voting for scum SunTzu, I think I will revise that to you being ahead of Netlava for my suspicion as to who the other scum is.

The Final vote count for the day

Sun Tzu(5)- Dattebayo, Netlava,Jazzmyn,Riceballtail,raider8169
Riceballtail (2)-

militant, roflcopter

Dattebayo(1)-

Sun Tzu

Not Voting (1)-pacman281292

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Well, that's that, then. Here's hoping we've lynched correctly.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Netlava or militant, militant or Netlava.... I'm going to have to re-read.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Vote: militant

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Unvote: militant

for now.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Because Netlava is now confirmed to be non-scum, so I want to look at her suspicions of you further, and I also want to hear from you. Please provide your thoughts on the game, i.e. who is most suspicious to you and why?

Thanks,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

How so?

Is that your biggest concern? I would also like to hear from you about who you think is most likely scum and why.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I've just re-read the entire thread and I think that militant is most likely the remaining scum. There are just too many links between him, roflcopter-scum, and SunTzu-scum to be ignored, and too many of his posts that scream 'scum trying way too hard to look town' to be ignored.

So, I still think that the remaining scum is either militant or Netlava (my post saying Netlava was confirmed non-scum was for reaction purposes) and more signs point to militant, so:

Vote: militant

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Unvote: militant

I think that a mass claim might be the way to go, after all, and I want to think about this some more.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see the downside to the masons claiming at this point.

Without mass claiming, if we lynch scum today, awesome, it's game over and town wins.

But, if we're wrong and don't hit scum with today's lynch: since one mason is dead, there are only two left, and if they don't claim and the scum kills one of them overnight, then the remaining mason cannot be confirmed tomorrow.

Doesn't that just benefit the scum if the remaining mason cannot be confirmed?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Thats what I was saying in 491

Yes, I realize that. My post was more directed to those who seem to be against mass claiming.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I can see the logic behind a mass claim, but I don't think it's the best option atm.

Why not? Please explain.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Riceballtail, a question for you. Do you believe that Porochaz is the quack?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Hmm... I like the idea of scum not knowing who the masons are and

missing the last scum if a mislynch occurs

.

Please explain what you meant here. Thanks.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I meant missing a mason.

So, why did you say "missing the last scum"?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Oddly enough, I just logged in after deciding that I should claim and I see that you've changed your mind at least partially, Porochaz. Can you help me out as to why you're now only 50-50 on the idea?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Because my plan only worked if I could act as a vig, which I cant because I cant kill scum. It doesnt matter now whether the masons claim or not, im indifferent.

Ah, I see.

Well, it seems that we're at a deadlock over claiming so although it's against my better judgment, I'll refrain from claiming.

Vote: militant

Good night.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

I am the third mason. I believe Porochaz's claim that he is the quack. Therefore, the only thing for me to do is:

Vote: Netlava

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Oh, wow. I guess that makes Jazz the final scum, not Porochaz. I am the third mason.

Vote: Jazzmyn

Porochaz, if you have any questions, feel free to ask.

Ha. Nice try, Netlava. I doubt that Porochaz will be fooled by you, though. I think he can read the thread and the voting patterns for himself, and come to the correct conclusion.

Let me know if there's anything more you need from me, Porochaz. Then vote Netlava, as he is most definitely scum as his fake claim has made 100% clear.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Urgh... not what I need atm. I will decide later tonight hopefully. It would be useful instead of both players shouting "your scum" to give me reasons why the other person is scum and they aren't. I have an idea who Im going to vote for but it would be unwise to until the reread.

Yeah, it's no fun being put in the position of being the last man standing, so to speak, and having to make the decision that determines the game. Been there, done that, and didn't like the pressure. So, I hope this helps.

When you re-read the thread, you will see that none of the masons ever voted for or FoSed or HoSed any of the other masons, ever. We addressed each other but we were never overtly critical of one another, and this was consistent throughout the entire game (which, in retrospect, probably also allowed the scum to identify us, but time was on our side, I think, so by the time the pattern became clear, we were in pretty good shape despite this, I think).

Look at the voting (we backed each other up on lynching wagons all game) and look also at the agreement among the masons about plans that were tossed around about outing the masons early, etc.

Netlava, SunTzu and roflcopter were all initially in favour of outing the masons early on, while none of the masons were. No mason would ever really be in favour of such a plan, but it took Netlava a while to figure out that he needed to distance himself from his own ridiculous idea to out the masons on day 1 and have quacks target each other or have them lynched (in short, he wanted everyone but the doctors and the scum to be outed, so what does that tell you about him now claiming mason?), and it took him a while to figure out that he needed to distance himself from his scumbuddies, too. Take a look at raider, Riceballtail, and my predecessor, Sotty7 on Day 1. They were all dead set against Netlava's ridiculous "plan" to out the masons, and they were all dead set against Clammy's plan that would involve outing the masons the next day, as well.

It is true that Netlava was on the SunTzu wagon, but if you look at the timing, he voted SunTzu early on as the second vote on November 8, and then sought a SunTzu prod on November 15 as soon as SunTzu garnered a third vote (from me) and then Netlava disappeared entirely from the thread for something like two weeks, during which time SunTzu-Scum was lynched. It looks like Netlava just never got back to the thread in time to jump off of that wagon before SunTzu was lynched.

Then, Netlava used very weak reasons to vote for and keep his vote on Pacman/Porochaz as an excuse to avoid lynching roflcopter. No wonder, knowing that his second scum partner was going down, too, and the best he could hope for was to stay under the radar yet again.

Then, on the last day, Netlava continued to vote Pacman/Porochaz even though he had been spectacularly unsuccessful in getting anyone else to come around to his poor reasoning for voting Pacman/Porochaz. I think this is because he was absolutely stuck. Since Netlava is scum, he knew with 100% certainty that militant would flip town, so the only way for Netlava to survive was to keep his vote on Porochaz, try to derail the mass claim so he could avoid having to false claim yesterday, and then try a fake claim on the final day after militant would turn up town. Heck, he even postulated in his post #37 that it would be

harder

for scum to fake claim on the final day if we didn't massclaim on the previous day, which is complete BS, of course. Then, ta dah, in his first post on the final day, he tries to fake claim mason.

Had we all claimed yesterday (as we should have), then Netlava would have had to claim doctor since Riceballtail and I would have confirmed each other, and Netlava couldn't claim anything else since Porochaz had confirmed Pacman's quack claim, which most of us believed.

Add that to Netlava being pretty lurky for much of the game, and add in his screw up/scum slip with his post in which he referred to wanting to miss the last scum instead of wanting to miss the last mason. While I realize that these kinds of screw-ups/slips are not

necessarily

scumtells, they happen often enough that they are at least worth noting. The mind is a wonderful thing - it often does cause people to make such errors when they are consciously lying. And I know with 100% certainty that Netlava is lying when he claims to be a mason, so it certainly fits in this case, since he was consciously lying when he wrote ever single post in which he tried to claim to be anything but scum.

Then, take a look at my posts. In my post #1 upon replacing, I said that roflcopter was most suspicious, followed by SunTzu as next most suspicious. I was consistent about this throughout, and voted for and helped lynch both of them, and they were indeed both scum. I asked Pacman why he targeted Datteboy in light of the plan that we had, and was initially suspicious of him for deviating from the plan, but came to accept that he was most likely indeed the quack, and that his reasons for doing what he did were probably legitimate (particularly in light of the fact that fake claiming as quack wouldn't make much sense if he was scum - see my post #18 for my analysis on this) and I was content to wait for him to return from his V/LA while going about the business of finding the scum. Which we did, with roflcopter next.

See also my post #19, in which I said that I was most suspicious of those who were voting for Pacman (that was roflcopter and Netlava) and that I thought roflcopter was the best lynch for the day, and that I wanted to see who would step up to hammer roflcopter, etc.

See also my posts during the last day. I voted militant because we (the masons) had discussed that he should be our target for the day, and I wanted to demonstrate that I was onboard with it, but then when Netlava appeared and voted Porochaz, I wanted to see what further discussion might reveal, because I had to think through the reasons for Netlava not hammering Porochaz when he had the chance. I revoted militant after a re-read because of his ties to roflcopter and SunTzu, unvoted him after he defended himself so that I could think about the massclaim and about his defence as I was starting to think that Netlava may very well be the remaining scum rather than militant, and ultimately hammered him because (a) we were deadlocked on the massclaim, (b) that was the plan that we masons had agreed to during the previous night, and (c) because Porochaz's plan made sense to me, as it had to be either militant or Netlava as the remaining scum, so it really wouldn't matter which one we lynched first. One of them had to be a doctor and one of them had to be scum, so militant's death would not be in vain, if he flipped town.

So, Porochaz, on your re-read, please pay particular attention to the posts of the confirmed masons, raider and Riceballtail, and the confirmed scum, SunTzu and roflcopter, and you will see that what I've said above is accurate, and that Netlava is the remaining scum.

If you have any questions, I am happy to answer them.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Almost none of what Netlava claims in his post above is true, as reviewing the thread, the voting patterns, and the interaction between the masons (raider, Riceballtail and sotty7/me) shows. I won't bother going into a play by play of Netlava's post since most of it is obvious nonsense, and I've already addressed most of it in my prior post above. But I will address a couple of specific points, as follows:

I also don't like how Jazz immediately votes me on Lylo.

I voted you immediately because it was apparent to me that either you or militant were the remaining scum, and since he flipped town, that left you. There was absolutely no reason to delay my vote on you.

Most people didn't want to out the masons period, but I wanted to join the game to try something new.

Uh huh, you "wanted to join the game to try something new" by suggesting a plan that would out the masons on Day 1 and have the quacks target each other or be lynched, leaving only scum and doctors unrevealed, and you expect anyone to now believe that you are a mason? Unreal.

And I have to address the last of Netlava's blatant lies in that post:

Heck, he even postulated in his post #37 that it would be harder for scum to fake claim on the final day if we didn't massclaim on the previous day, which is complete BS, of course. Then, ta dah, in his first post on the final day, he tries to fake claim mason

I never said that, but nice try.

I said that the benefits of a non massclaim (scum still not knowing who the masons are) outweigh the benefits of a massclaim, since I didn't think the scum would claim mason.

You most certainly

DID

say that, in the same post where you slipped up about wanting to miss the last scum, and I quote:

Hmm... I like the idea of scum not knowing who the masons are and missing the last scum if a mislynch occurs.

Scum pulling a fake claim on the final day is harder.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Game, set, match.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Ahem, Porochaz, the rest of us are waiting for you. Are you reading this thread?

Nowhere did I mention that's it's harder to fake claim on the final day...

Lie.

(Game)

Again, this is a lie.

Lie.

(Set)

For me to make such a claim would make no sense in the first place, and suddenly out of nowhere you are accusing me of such.

Lie.

(Match)

Additional attempted lie by Netlava for good measure:

When did I say pulling a fake claim is harder...

I previously pointed out Netlava's lies about this, along with numerous other posts and facts that identify him as the scum partner to roflcopter and SunTzu (see my post #529 and my post #534) prior to his latest trifecta of lies in the quoted post above (his post #535) and I previously pointed out where he said exactly what I quoted him as saying. He denied it and then denied it again three more times above, before he finally realized that he had paid so little attention to the game that he hadn't even realized that I had already specifically cited this specific lie, and he just compounded it three times over in that post of his above.

He belatedly realized this, of course, thus his lame,

EDBWOP: Ignore the "When did I say pulling a fake claim is harder..." bit.

in which he doesn't even acknowledge that he had just accused me several times of lying while it was clearly him who was lying all along.

I don't know what more you need, Porochaz, and you should just hammer him already. It should be blatantly obvious that he's the remaining scum.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

Now to get this game alive again I am prodding every player.

Sorry about that, muffinhead. I have been posting but there is nothing more for me to say in light of Netlava's blatantly obvious, clearly documented and specifically cited lies, unless Porochaz still has doubts and questions (which I will gladly answer if that's the case). I've just been waiting for Porochaz to return and either cast his vote to lynch Netlava (as he should do) or ask further questions and seek further input from me (which he shouldn't require, but if he does, I'm perfectly content to provide further answers and input).

As an aside, I didn't know it was your birthday somewhere in there, Porochaz, but happy belated birthday.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

...drum roll...

[Jazzmyn]

What? And give away the dramatic finale?

[Jazzmyn]

Hey, seriously, I would tell you but it would take all the fun out of it for the moderator, wouldn't it?

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

It's a darned shame that you ruined the mod's fun, then. But better you than me.

[Jazzmyn]

Wooooooot! Way to go, town! And that was wonderful endgame flavour there, muffinhead, with raider quietly leaving the hospital with the consent of the scum in order to attend to his new son's birth and all.

Re: mod's questions:
1) I enjoyed it a lot. I had never been a mason before, so it was really neat for me to know for sure that certain other players were townies, but I think it also would have been a real blast to be a doctor and not know for sure whether you were a quack or not. And it also would have been a blast to be scum. So, yeah, I really like the setup in which everyone has a role besides vanilla townie as there are so many possibilities for how things can go.

2)- Yes!

3)- Yes.

4)- I think the only way it could have been improved was with more activity but that has nothing at all to do with your moderating, and was instead purely player-driven.

5)- Definitely! If you do decide to host another one, I too would love to /pre in.

Regards,
Jazz

[Jazzmyn]

net, why didn't you fucking tell us sotty was a mason when you tracked her? you gave me the impression she was NOT a mason.

Doesn't a tracker only get told if/whether the person he tracks actually targets someone (i.e., either sotty targeted X or sotty targeted nobody)? Since masons couldn't target anyone at night, how could Netlava be expected to know that sotty/I was a mason as a result of tracking him/me?

Regards,
Jazz