Mini #597 - Swift speed: Werewolves (Game over)

[Korts]

Vote: Chaosweaver

Chaos is just what we need. Obvscum. I suspect you get this vote often.

[Korts]

donkeyz, by voting killa with the reason of stopping the killing, you yourself have fallen into a contradiction, since lynching killa will be an act of killing in itself. Minor plothole in logic.

[Korts]

Hey, no problem. Glad to help.

Unvote, Vote: donkeyz

[Korts]

For a random pick,

Vote: Phoebus

With that out of the way, and with the little time we have, my hope is that people will step up and participate in discussions.

And Korts; no, that was actually the first obvscum-vote my nick has earned me.

Glad to hear you want a real discussion. May I point you to donkeyz' posts?

[Korts]

Phoebus: would you like to give a randomvote reason to your randomvote?

[Korts]

Well, if it's not a random vote, then you surely have a reason.

[Korts]

Not giving reasons doesn't spark discussion. Since we have only 3 RL days for a game-day, I think we should switch to a pseudo-serious discussion from the randomvote-stage as soon as we can. If you give your reasons, it will be so much easier for us to do that.

[Korts]

Sidestep what, Phoebus?

Shy Guy, it was hardly a "chitchat". I gave a reason for my random vote, Chaosweaver replied to it.

[Korts]

I didn't gather Jenter wanted a No Lynch. I had the feeling he was against a No Lynch, and against a quicklynch, too.

[Korts]

I asked you why so jumpy?

You thought it well enough to question both the supposed randomness and admitted non randomness of my vote.

You're looking for things to talk about.

When someone actually asks you a direct question...you ignore it?

I thought the "why so jumpy" part was rhetorical. Why jumpy? Because we only started and I feel the deadline looming.

[Korts]

Why is it not random?

Fos Phoebus

QFT please give your reason, Phoebus.

[Korts]

So you'd rather off someone with your OMGUS vote...than have someone vote you?

Deadline looming...there are very few people who really fear that and a quicklynch.

I don't fear a quicklynch, because I don't see bandwagons building up.

I'm fine with you voting me, as long as you give me something to defend myself against.

[Korts]

Fucking Jesters...

What jesters?

[Korts]

with your OMGUS vote.

Also, what OMGUS vote of mine?

[Korts]

OMGUS

BS. Where's the vote on donkeyz OMGUS?

we just started started AND deadline is looming

With 72 hour deadlines, this isn't a real big contradiction.

Now you claim you're not worried about quicklynch but felt deadline looming previously?

I'm not worried about quicklynch, because I don't see any bandwagons building up. However, deadline is pretty close, so yeah, I don't see where this is a contradiction, either.

Taken as a whole...those things don't make sense.

Your points against me, yeah. They don't make much sense.

unvote, vote: Phoebus

[Korts]

Now THAT's OMGUS.

[Korts]

Voting donkeyz on flimsy reasons.

Flimsier than any other reason used to get closer to a serious discussion? No.

[Korts]

Korts?

Why you voted Phoebus?

I voted because what he states are good reasons are nothing more than BS.

[Korts]

I'm sorry. By "not a real big contradiction" I meant that it wasn't, in fact, a contradiction at all. I get these sarcastic spasms sometimes. My point was that we only started, yet we have only 3 days left. Capisce?

My vote on you is because your whole argument against me was flawed. My vote on donkeyz wasn't OMGUS, since he didn't FoS me, didn't vote me, didn't even mention me at all other than replying to my accusation. My anxiety over the looming deadline is, I think, also explained by the fact that, compared to games where days may last for weeks, here, a day lasts for 3 days. And also, I don't remember actually taking sides in the quicklynch topic, yet you stated it like I did. Please, if you're reaching, at least have some borderline valid points.

[Korts]

confirming a vote means that he seriously wants to lynch me.

[Korts]

meaning that it's just a useless formality.

[Korts]

korts - you make me laugh.

nice one. I almost voted myself.

[Korts]

Clammy, two things.

1) I wasn't anywhere near a lynch.

2) making sure I'm not quicklynched isn't a reason to vote Phoebus. Plus, I feel you're trying to connect to me. Strange. You've just jumped up on my scumlist to second place.

[Korts]

I feel clammy is, indeed, trying to connect to me.

Phoebus, I'll adress only the points that include my own actions, if that's fine with you. In relation to the Korts-clammy connection, I can only say that there isn't one. Clammy is trying to buddy up to me, perhaps. I can't prove that I'm not connected to clammy, so there. Otherwise, it's my opinion that you shouldn't start pairing people up until you have at least one confirmed scum.

3. korts ignores clammy in his first post ( 8 ) and goes on to say something about Chaos...which has no basis as I see it... I treat it as random on his part.

My first post (where I voted Chaosweaver) I ignored clammy because his vote was random and nothing to address.

No reason given for switch.
The only interaction was the one about contradiction.
So...we have korts voting for this apparent contradiction. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The only interaction of any kind between players was the one about contradiction. The reason for the switch, I think, is obvious. I fail to see your point on this one.

korts reacted with:

--> asking a reason for my random vote
random? reason? don't compute together.

From my experience, it is customary to provide a reason of some kind (good/bad, logic/gut, etc.) to votes. Failure to do this will naturally arouse suspicion.

When I mention vote is now random (and now you know why)
--> asks for reason for not random vote.

Same as above, only this time the reason is presumably serious compared to a random vote.

Next, he mentions the day starting and feeling the deadline looming.
I am aware that we have a 72 hour deadline but even the first 24 are not up.
How is it looming? Many people have not even weighed in with their thoughts.
Why the looming?

Looming, as in much closer than to be expected at the beginning of a game. I wish you'd stop barking up this particular tree, this point's a dead end. Also, I didn't say we should lynch someone before everyone's checked in, I tried to start a discussion. Don't misrepresent me.

Then the sarcasm and name calling goes on.

I don't remember any name calling. I didn't say you're an idiot, a loser, a microphone-abuser, or any such thing. And I won't. Don't put words into my mouth that don't belong there.

Talking about confirming being a useless formality.

Isn't it? Technically a confirmed vote isn't any better than, or any different from a normal vote.

Yet, you refuse to rebut my arguments. Call names and generally not engage in discussion with me.

Let me quote myself.

Post 57:

My vote on you is because your whole argument against me was flawed. My vote on donkeyz wasn't OMGUS, since he didn't FoS me, didn't vote me, didn't even mention me at all other than replying to my accusation. My anxiety over the looming deadline is, I think, also explained by the fact that, compared to games where days may last for weeks, here, a day lasts for 3 days. And also, I don't remember actually taking sides in the quicklynch topic, yet you stated it like I did. Please, if you're reaching, at least have some borderline valid points.

I think that's called an argument, refuting your points, namely the "OMGUS" on donkeyz, the deadline thing, and the quicklynch topic.

Please. Don't misrepresent me, or try to paint a picture of me that is obviously false.[/quote]

[Korts]

Dammit. Ignore the quote tag at the end, I wasn't quoting anything there.

[Korts]

Like said earlier, unvoting korts for "making sure he isn't quick-lynched" makes sense, but why then vote Phoebus? clammy, Would you like to see Phoebus quicklynched?

That, and why did clammy feel the need to unvote when I was at L-5. Did he feel the points against me were justified? If so, why didn't he leave his vote on me?

[Korts]

Also, forgot.

Mod: please include in the vote count how many votes we need for a lynch. Thanks

Vote count

(3) Phoebus – Chaosweaver, Korts, clammy
(1) Korts – Phoebus
(1) Xanatos Roulette - SleepyPanda
(1) killa seven – donkeyz12212
(1) Shy Guy – Xanatos Roulette
(1) Jenter Brolincani – Mr. Blonde
(1) Clammy - Shy Guy

(1) No Lynch – W!nt3r

Not voting:

Jenter Brolincani, killa seven

(12 players alive = 7 to lynch before deadline)

Deadline:

Tuesday 20 May 11:40 PM

[Korts]

korts, post 74:
L-5??

The way I counted, it's 7 votes to lynch. With two votes on me, it would be five votes from lynch, thus L-5 (meaning Lynch -5)

[Korts]

I woldn't not like to see anyone quick-lynched, but i saw danger in the korts wagon as phoebus was, and still is, being incessant in null-tells. Need i mention this applies directly to his case against me and that it's a royal OMGUS to boot? Kinda surprised none of you picked up on that but perhaps you were leaving me to mention it.

I don't see what you mean by OMGUS, but the case made by Phoebus wasn't "in revenge" as you later clarify. Kinda surprised that you would try to imply that. Anyway, his case against you isn't nulltells, it's theories that can't really be argued with. The case on me wasn't nulltells, either, it was broken logic. NOT the same.

I did not feel the points were justified, your pushing on the random vote issue made me raise my eyebrows, but the push back of all the deadline talk and worry over a quick-lynch, i fully endorse your position here as it actually works.

If you didn't feel the points against me were justified, why did you think it possible for a quicklynch of me to happen without scum outing themselves?

The fact that Phoebus was still pushing (and is still pushing) on those buttons is the reason my vote went whee it is.

I see your reasoning, it's just that by voting Phoebus and taking your vote off me, you've come into a direct contradiction with yourself, and while when your vote was on me, I was only at L-5, with your vote placed on Phoebus he's at L-4, so in fact we're one step closer to a premature lynch than we were while you were voting for me.

"OMG - i knew clammy was scum when he was the first post, and now he's defended the person i had my vote one - obv-scum!"

What the hell? That's not OMGUS. Get your facts straight. You yourself explain it in post 84.

All in all,

unvote: Phoebus, vote: clammy

[Korts]

Alright, guys, just slow down here. I'd like some more discussion before we quicklynch clammy. He's at L-3 now, and I don't want to go any further before other people put in their two cents worth.

[Korts]

clammy backed off on his random vote before what he saw as a growing wagon

In fact, that

is

obvscum, considering that you backed straight onto the other wagon.

[Korts]

As a sidenote; Two players stand for more than half of the postcount

/agree

I just have way too much time on my hands right now. We need everyone to post their thoughts.

[Korts]

First off to Korts, I found it extremely surprising that you ended up voting for me right after pointing out the contradiction to me. You found the flaw in my argument and then when I agreed with you, you simply decided to vote me

The vote was because you agreed with me. I found that strange, that you would give up your opinion (even though it was a joke) so easily.

[Korts]

Nonono, you got it wrong. The fish smells clammy. And badly.

[Korts]

Korts, you didn't state that you were voting me based on me giving up easily at the beginning. When people questioned you about it, I thought you just were wishy washy and stated it was a random vote for me?

And I didn't really give up that easily. I made a counterargument but I did agree that you were right because what you said made sense.

I think this argument is irrelevant now, since I only wanted to use it in order to get the discussion from RVS (random vote stage) to pseudo-serious discussion.

[Korts]

Clammy will probably be the lynch, yeah. But we still have a day. For instance, Xanatos Roulette hasn't said much at all. I'd like him to post his thoughts.

[Korts]

Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:26 am Post subject: 3
/first!

vote: korts

No, the first game post was Saturday.

[Korts]

Nah, I'm fine with Clammy at L-2.

[Korts]

This applies to everyone: saying you are too busy with other games or other prior commitments is a rather weak excuse for not participating in this game. The town should be suspicious of lurkers in this game, just as the town should in any game. We signed up less than a week ago for a game that was advertised as having 3 in real life day deadlines. If you can't keep up, you shouldn't have signed up, and thankfully we have 4 replacements just waiting so if you cannot keep up please step aside for someone who can.

I'm keeping up rather fine, thank you.

Not pointed at you, I feel.

[Korts]

Oh, that. Yeah. I was thinking more XR while reading.

[Korts]

EST. TIME REMAINING 24 HOURS

[Korts]

Hey, water_four.

I am getting mainly Town Vibes from
Phoebus

How that happen?

[Korts]

EST. TIME REMAINING 24 HOURS

Wait God I'm an idiot. I just had said we have two days. Obviously, 48 hours.

[Korts]

Kudos to the guy who denied him the chance to claim. Smart.

On the other hand, we have a nightless?

[Korts]

I missed that "argument changing".

I'm out the door in a sec, gotta run, short post. but I seem to remember you yourself pointing out that first clammy's argument was to prevent a quicklynch, and later he added that he thought that Phoebus' wagon was better.

[Korts]

So, if donkey is scum, and knew he was about to hammer, he'd have sent in a night kill so he could make the hammer and make a night kill. Since he did not do so, I am pretty sure he is town. (this assumes that the scum didn't send in a kill that got blocked somehow; I think that is a very fair assumption). So, I am saying that donkeyz is very likely NOT scum.

Mild WIFOM, but I see what you're saying.

Oh and also, as far as I'm concerned, this outcome doesn't absolve Korts in my book. I'm just waiting to see what Donkeyz has to say.

I agree with you that had clammy come up scum, I'd deserve at least mild suspicion, but other than the implied connection between us, I don't remember you having any valid points against me.

Also, what do you think of donkeyz now that he's replied?

[Korts]

I'm here, currently waiting on Phoebus to answer my question regarding his stance on donkeyz after his reply.

[Korts]

unvote, vote: grimmy

FoSing just for the sake of FoSing (as in, with nothing to have warranted the FoS) is a strong scumtell.

[Korts]

i find it funny phoebus has let up on korts today after heavily attacking him yesterday.

Actually, I'm thinking he hasn't let up, just hasn't posted.

[Korts]

Granted, I will have a better clue as to peoples guilt/innocence as the days go on, which is why I did not vote outright, but simply pointed a finger.

I will withhold my vote until clearer signs of guilt/innocence reveal themselves.

E. Grimmy B.

To let go, or not to let go, that is the question.

unvote

But just because of the plus points and you get by having replaced.

[Korts]

Oh, hey, Skruffs. For a long moment I thought this was justice justice. I really ought to get some sleep.

[Korts]

start voting everyone..we have

X

hours to go!!

Blonde: I had a reason, but its too early inthe AM for me toremember it.

I most liekly wont be online again until after the deadline, so

vote: phoebus

Everyone else's reasons seem to support this, so Ill go with it for now.

Ill look into the Blonde issue tomorrow.

Maybe something will come to me overnight.

Grimmy

Vote: grimmy

The reply to Mr Blonde bugs me. If you had a reason, why would it being early morning prevent you from remembering? This, however, is a very weak argument by itself, of course. I'm looking forward to you clarifying the Blonde issue.

Jumping on Phoebus, however, by saying "everyone's reasons support this, so I'll go with it" is what makes me cast my vote. You yourself don't mention these reasons, nor the validity of them, only that everyone has reasons (good or bad) to vote Phoebus. Opportunistic much?

[Korts]

I'm pretty much content with either a Phoebus or a grimmy lynch.

Please don't tell me to explain all of my reasons against korts again.

Please, do. Are these the reasons:

1. contradiction: day just started vs. deadline looming
2. voting donkeyz with flimsy reason

Please, clarify. I don't feel any of these listed are damning at all.

Jenter feels like someone who's riding the wave of anti Phoebus sentiment. The sentiment is not particularly questionable. Riding along with it, without pulling your weight on it, is.

This I agree with completely.

Grimmy's reason for voting Phoebus was very much that of a follower...

However, in this game, don't we need followers? We have three day deadlines. Every single player trying to give original ideas would lead to no consensus. I don't see the sudden rush on Grimmy for his vote.

Nonono. Two things. 1) we still don't need followers. People should make up their own minds regardless. 2) my vote on grimmy isn't because he's a follower. It's because he didn't show any sign of agreeing with the reasons against Phoebus, he says only that there are reasons (he doesn't even comment on whether they're good or bad reasons) that other players brought up. I hope you're seeing where I'm coming from.

[Korts]

If the consequence is my death, my wishes have been expressed.
If the consequence is either of those two being hanged, I will reflect upon whatever information comes up...in new light.

Come on, don't be so fatalistic. But please, clarify the points against me, gut feeling is something I can't argue against.

Vote count

(11 players alive = 6 to lynch before deadline)
(4) Phoebus – Shy Guy, Jenter Brolincani, Grimmy, Xanatos Roulette
(2) Grimmy – Korts, donkeyz12212
(1) Xanatos Roulette – SleepyPanda
(1) killa seven – Mr. Blonde
(1) Korts – Phoebus

Not voting:

killa seven, water_foul

Deadline:

Thursday 22 May 6:00 AM (GMT -5 according to forum clock)

[Korts]

Whoa. Hey there. That's an interesting turnout.

The thing is, I'd rather not lynch Phoebus in this gamestate. He's been actively contributing and making sense most of the time Day 2. I mean, other than the reasons against me that he brought from Day 1, his observations are reasonable and pro-town.

Grimmy, on the other hand, has freshly replaced. He may have been a bit too reliant on others' arguments, but maybe he just skimmed the thread. The whole point of mine against him was based on, well, grammar, and who knows, maybe he's just bad at grammar.

I know it's too late to start a new wagon, but what I really don't like is Mr. Blonde trying to direct my vote. In this gamestate, with no guarantee of a new wagon happening before deadline, he's not going to earn my vote with this, however, I think we've got a lynch candidate for Day 3.

However, since I don't want the lynch to be random, I really have no choice but to do this.

Unvote, Vote: Phoebus

[Korts]

Damn. Looks like my post was a waste of letters.

[Korts]

And I just realized. Possibly Mr. Blonde is trying to connect to me.

[Korts]

Again, lack of claim... This time, though, I blame Phoebus more, since he obviously realized he was nearing a lynch. Dammit.

I need some time to ponder.

[Korts]

Shy Guy's uncertainty may be a ploy for brownie points, as in he knew beforehand that Phoebus would be town, and he wanted to be able to claim that he was against his lynch, shame on us.

Random thought: I think I've been fairly intent on hunting scum, so a possible reason for someone else other than me being the NK could be that I was on the wrong track. Therefore I'm dropping the case on Grimmy for now.

Time to look at Jenter. PBPA to follow soon.

[Korts]

Random thought: I think I've been fairly intent on hunting scum, so a possible reason for someone else other than me being the NK could be that I was on the wrong track. Therefore I'm dropping the case on Grimmy for now.

Reading back, I guess I'm a bit egocentric. But still, the world

does

revolve around me, after all.

[Korts]

Grimmy
just a planet in Korts' solar system

Mind if I sig this?

Also, thanks for the heads up.

[Korts]

As I said yesterday, I thought Phoebus was less likely to be scum than Grimmy; I don't really think Grimmy is that likely to be scum. I find Korts fairly suspicious, both for his ill founded reasons for finding me suspicious just now, and his play as a whole; in part I unvoted Phoebus because I agreed with him about Korts.

Actually, I wasn't accusing you just now, I was just going through with a hypothetical situation, as in what would your motives as scum be for unvoting Phoebus. It was meant only as a counterargument against your uncertainty being a towntell.

Anyway, what is it with my play that makes me suspicious?

In a few hours, I'll re-read closely on these players, and post my thoughts. I think one of them [Jenter/killa/XR] is likely the best bet for lynching today.

I'm doing an analysis of Jenter. You do one of the others.

[Korts]

Shit, I don't have time or energy to thoroughly analyze Jenter. More tomorrow.

[Korts]

We should review Mr. Blonde's suspects, in order to find out who would have had a motive to kill him.

Going and checking....

He has attacked Jenter basically for being on clammy's wagon without any more reason than him (clammy) being "textbook scum" according to Jenter, XR for lurking, k7 for lurking also. Of this, I think his accusation of Jenter's was the most serious.

Add to this the forthcoming analysis of Jenter I promised, I think it's enough for me to

Vote: Jenter Bronlincani

I know this isn't enough for Jenter to defend himself against, I promise that later today I'll do the analysis.

[Korts]

The analysis of Jenter isn't going to be a long one, seeing his post count and the fact that his posts are usually one-liners.

Post 1: Game theory. States the obvious:

I agree with SG about proper wagons - we can't afford scumrushes close to dealine... we have only really 3 days (considering we want to stay clear of deadline) to get today done - not long at all, we can't afford to mess around or get stuck in random voting.

Some hint of a connection between SG and Jenter, maybe.

Post 2: apology for lack of posting;

Clammy's play is textbook scumbuddying, and he's not clever enough to get away with it either... Korts I think could still easily be town, but clammy is really, really bad...

Jenter could be buddying up to me, here.

Other points;
- Changes his argument form 'stopping Korts being lynched' to, when pressured, 'I'm far happier with my vote on Phoebus'.
- Keeps saying the case against him is OMGUS without any mention of the points in it.

This is fairly valid.

Post 3:

Stop strawmanning clammy, it does your case no good.

I realize clammy's defense was a bit weak, but instead of pointing out holes in logic, Jenter rejects the defense completely. Vaguely scummy.

Post 4:

Clammy, you have not even touched on your buddying of Korts once in your defence apart from sarcastically taking the piss out of it, blatantly ignoring the main point of the case against you.

What I find strange is that Jenter never even considers me being clammy's partner in the event of clammy turning scum. The implied connection should be enough for me to get a FoS regardless of anything else. Buddying up. Scummy.

Post 5:

The buddying of Korts included in this is a textbook n00b scum move, hence my comment.

See comments to post 4.

However, I find Phoebus' attack on Donkey worryingly daft, for the reasons given by Shy Guy. Scum will want to hold everyone to deadline to give themselves the maximum chance of getting a night action in. They won't want the day ended early.

Deflects suspicion to the most suspected player. From the perspective of Jenter being scum, this could either be buddying, or protecting his partner.

You attack donkey and Korts, but fail to mention anyone else on the wagon, notably M.B. who advocated a fast lynch just before Donkey did one.

Again, deflects suspicion.

Post 6:

Ok, so I've been attakced by 2 people, one had 'something he couldn't put his finger on' - in other words, **** all, and the other was pretty blatant OMGUS - definitely keeping my vote steady at least until we get why my reasons seem 'off' or 'opportunistic'.

I can't find the OMGUS in the isolated posts, since Jenter only accused Phoebus, and Phoebus didn't vote Jenter at all.

Post 7: PBPA of k7. I agree with the points here. k7 is Suspect No. 2 with me. However, it's clear to me, having played with him before, that this is killa's playstyle.

Post 8: corrects vote on k7 (messed up the bold tag in previous post)

Post 9: asks killa to conribute or ask for replacement.

[Korts]

However, I find Phoebus' attack on Donkey worryingly daft, for the reasons given by Shy Guy.

Also, this could be another hint at a SG-Jenter connection.

[Korts]

I have pushed for people's lynches and I have given evidence when I have voted. I may not have been aggressive enough previously, but I think my case on Killa Seven is good.

The only problem with the case against killa is that most of the points can be countered by bringing meta into the picture, because I have seen killa act this way before. This doesn't rule out the possibility of him being scum, but I can give you a link to a game where he was lynched for a similar attitude. Concentrate on Day 3.

[Korts]

As for Shy Guy, I hardly think agreeing with someone counts as buddying - I haven't defended him, just said his points make sense...

I only said it might be indicative of a connection. However, this is the weakest point in my case.

I never thought you were clammy's partner becuase as far as I could make out the linking of you and clammy was him linking to you, it was one-way, he was making a scummy move and you were not.

This supposition excludes the possibility of me being smart scum and realizing clammy's clumsy way of defending me, thus pointing it out before anyone else can. If you were wary town, just the possibility, however remote, of a connection should have been enough to FoS me. I know it looks like I'm arguing against myself, but the point is, if you didn't have a personal agenda differing from the town's, you would have had no reason not to FoS me.

I answered Mr Blonde's points when he posted them, and her replied as follows;
Okay, I realize that we both were meaning the same thing, and I got stuck in the word "change". This is fine. and unvoted me. He found my counter argument was fine and did not press me any further, so you can't really say he was suspicious of me close to his death.

Agreed. But still, the most serious of Mr Blonde's suspicions was still you, compared to the other two which were basically only for lurking. This is also a pretty weak point, though.

[Korts]

post 10: says followers are needed. i don't agree. people should make up their own minds regardless. don't mindlessly follow unless you agree with that person's argument yourself. continues to go on he doesn't see the reason for grimmy votes. points out reasons why he finds phoebus suspicious. combined with earlier statements for need of followers, possibly trying to start lynch wagon? his statement for need of followers contradicts his statement in his first post, to not let wagons of 3 lynch at deadline. now you're saying followers are good? says he encourages phoebus to be lynched today.

It's a bit of a reach, calling this a contradiction. After all, wanting of big wagons and wanting followers aren't directly connected. After all, to have big wagons, it might be justified to agree to having followers.

asks if he supports grimmy wagon. why does he ask this when he suspects phoebus? if he thinks phoebus is scum, then why would he ask for his support on another wagon?

This is a strong point against SG.

says he re-read grimmy, doesn't think agreeing once is scum-tell. says grimmy avoids responsibility by following, which is suspicious. but in your previous post, you said followers are necessary. contradiction.

This is a reasonable point, too.

phoebus finds jenter suspicious, sg says jenter's playstyle=grimmy's playstyle, jenter vote=grimmy vote?

I don't understand this. Could you clarify?

post 13: now i think this is the most suspicious post he has made, and assuming he is scum, his connection to donkey, and phoebus' consequently saying he finds donkey in the clear, he takes his vote off phoebus and places it on grimmy. phoebus saying he no longer finds donkey suspicious means that they both him and his scum partner, donkey, are in the clear. this would explain why he unvotes phoebus, then goes on to vote grimmy. as many has found this move to have been HIGHLY suspicious and his reasons for doing so to be very weak. but if assuming he is scum and donkey is his partner, it would make a very GOOD reason to vote grimmy as he has a townie on his side now.

Again, a bit of reaching.

I agree with you that post 16 contains a lot of contradictions with his earlier posts, the most damning of which is his change of opinion (and trying to change history) regarding Phoebus' case on me.

While I'm not 100% in agreement with your whole case, you make fair observations and have some pretty damning points against SG. All in all a much stronger case than the one against Jenter.

Vote: Shy Guy

[Korts]

Gah.

unvote, vote: Shy Guy

[Korts]

Actually, if it stays this way, SG will be lynched, since he has two votes.

[Korts]

K. It's not like I could've made a case out of it.

[Korts]

1) Do you support a Grimmy wagon? How is Grimmy's play similar or different from Jenter's?

Is this what you're referencing, SP? Cos I don't really think SG was comparing grimmy's play to Jenter's, he was asking Phoebus to do that. Though now you mention it, I don't see how this comparison would have been anywhere near relevant in that debate.

[Korts]

12 HOURS REMAINING

I may be able to check in an hour before deadline, but I'm content with my vote.

[Korts]

Wait, no. 13 hours. Damn. Got it wrong again. Fsckin' GMT -5.

[Korts]

unvote, vote: Jenter

Shy Guy, I really don't like how you're flailing. And I really don't like how you claimed your partner. That's not how it should've gone, in my opinion. But since it's a confirmable role, I want to wait for water_foul to say something.

Oh yeah, what I REALLY really don't like is how you tell the town who to lynch, as if you knew any better than us. I mean, yeah. You sound scummy. But let's give you a chance.

[Korts]

Whoooa, I'm sorry, but how is mason a 100% confirmable role?

Even if water were to say anything, how are you sure he isn't his scum partner? Why go for Jenter when he is as likely to be townie as others? Why not let Jenter claim, perhaps he could have a power role as well.

What did you think about SG giving up the name of partner? Do you agree with SG and find that this was the right move? If so, how?

Just bear with me, for now. I don't want to say too much.

[Korts]

Even if you were to assume Jenter is a vanilla townie, then that is what SG basically is right now. There's no reason to have preference over SG just because he's a power role. And when considering them both as vanilla townies, SG has done much, MUCH more suspicious things than Jenter has.

SG=glorified vanilla townie currently

Bear with me. SG's not a vanilla townie yet, he still has the connection to water_foul. Please, if you're town, shut up now.

[Korts]

Even if you were to assume Jenter is a vanilla townie, then that is what SG basically is right now. There's no reason to have preference over SG just because he's a power role. And when considering them both as vanilla townies, SG has done much, MUCH more suspicious things than Jenter has.

SG=glorified vanilla townie currently

Anyway, whut? You yourself believe that he's basically vanilla, yet you're willing to lynch him? Geez.

[Korts]

Jenter, I already made a case against you. This is a hard choice for me, but I think there's a way to pseudo-confirm w_f and SG. Only the point is, I'm not going to talk about it, cos that would blow the whole plan.

[Korts]

You cannot deny that there seems to be preference to donkey on SG's part. What about water? There is much to consider whether or not he is SG's partner. So you'd have to decide between donkey or water in a lylo situation.

If SG is scum, the two of them would be his partners, I think. But first, I want SG's claim to be confirmed to some extent.

[Korts]

Anyway, whut? You yourself believe that he's basically vanilla, yet you're willing to lynch him? Geez.

Are you kidding me? That was to explain your "reasoining" for changing your vote to Jenter, because you think SG is a townie. But the reason why you're sparing him is because he's a power role, am I wrong? He doesn't have any power left once he claimed AND NAMED HIS PARTNER AS WATER. What can he do as a mason now? Nothing.

As long as they both live, they can still communicate with each other. Please don't discuss this point any further. It'll blow the whole point of not lynching him.

[Korts]

In fact, I'd be content with a No Lynch if I knew you guys would follow me.

[Korts]

unvote, vote: No Lynch

It's now a tie between No Lynch, Jenter, and SG. A No Lynch would mean we'd have a chance to pseudo-confirm SG's claim and the town:scum ratio would be somewhat higher compared to a mislynch today.

Vote count

(9 players alive = 5 to lynch before deadline)
(2) Jenter Brolincani – Shy Guy, donkeyz12212
(2) Shy Guy – SleepyPanda, Jenter Brolincani

(2) No lynch – Grimmy, Korts

Not voting:

killa seven, water_foul, Xanatos Roulette

Deadline:

Sunday 25 May 6:00 AM (GMT -5 according to forum clock)

[Korts]

On the other hand... Now that SG has outed the whole masonship, or w/e, I don't know. Possibly the information gained would make even a mislynch worthwhile.

unvote, vote: Shy Guy

This is my last post before deadline. Gotta run.

[Korts]

This is why I thought it better not to lynch SG... His claim would probably be confirmed by the NK. However, I think that with the reaches and the way he pushed SG's wagon after his claim (however badly he claimed) I am fairly convinced that SleepyPanda's scum. I'll do an analysis of him later today.

[Korts]

If he was town, there was no reason he should not have revealed. When he did so, it only strengthened my position that he was indeed scum.

Freudian slip? A contradiction, that's for sure.

I am a regular Townie.

Predictable claim.

This is why I thought it better not to lynch SG... His claim would probably be confirmed by the NK. However, I think that with the reaches and the way he pushed SG's wagon after his claim (however badly he claimed) I am fairly convinced that SleepyPanda's scum. I'll do an analysis of him later today.

Unless Jenter did turn up scum, SG would still have been the top suspect. If that's the case, I don't see why SG would be NK'ed.

You don't understand. I expected one of the claimed mason pair to get NK'ed, which would have confirmed SG almost a hundred percent. I tried to get a No-Lynch together at the end because that way both SG would have survived to be confirmed and Jenter to defend himself.

By the way, my scumlist today looks like this: 1. SleepyPanda, 2. Jenter, because other than SG and me, you were the only two to log in after SG claimed water_foul as his partner, and since w_f was the NK, one of you most probably sent in the kill. Of course, it may have been a lurker, I'm not dismissing that possibility, but most likely it was either SP or Jenter.

About his roleclaim and my continuous push to lynch. For the moment, just assume he was scum. What could he have done to save himself? From what I can see, 3 people had already placed their vote on him, and he was 2 away from lynch. There were no other votes on anyone else. I felt his claim was nothing more than being backed into a corner and saying what ever he could to buy time.

Yeah, that may have been what you felt. But if a power role is claimed, especially a confirmable role, you don't lynch them.

I thought there was only two werewolves for most of the game, but if there are 3, then mislynching me now would be game over. If you look at the posts just prior to SG's lynch, my conversation with Korts shows that I was mainly thinking of the well-being of town. I was trying to find the best course of action to take. Try and ask me all the questions you have and I will respond as quickly as I can. I also have to start from scratch as I stopped looking at other people when I focused in on SG, so I basically have no idea where to go from here. I will also try to get this done as quick as I can.

This just reeks of scum.

edit: If he was town, there was no reason he should have revealed (in first paragraph)

Yeah, I saw that. Freudian slip, perhaps? (Question is directed at others)

I'll do a proper analysis of you later. However, the Vote of Doom you get now.

Vote: SleepyPanda

Also, town. Careful with bandwagons now. It's four to lynch.

[Korts]

- When I am scum and sending in a NK, I always log out and log in on the setting that takes me off the active users list. Assuming I am not the only one to have worked out that this plays havoc with that particular tell, it could have been more people than you think.

There's a setting for that, really? That I didn't know.

[Korts]

That is incredibly stupid. Why would scum bother to NK one of them when all the suspicious is on them in the first place? This was the plan you wanted to try? What if scum didn't NK either of them? It all falls apart, am I correct?

Tell me, was a mason NK'ed? Yer. So? Doesn't look like having fallen apart from where I'm standing.

Tell me how mason is 100% confirmable, without a doubt. If water was actually here and had supported him, would you take his word like that?

Not 100% without a doubt, but taken the gamestate, it wouldn't hurt town to believe him as long as the claim matched history.

As for the vote, you're right, of course. Damn, I'm supposed to be the one who's right.

unvote

For now, I'd like to ask Jenter to unvote, too.

[Korts]

you were the only two to log in after SG claimed water_foul as his partner, and since w_f was the NK, one of you most probably sent in the kill. Of course, it may have been a lurker, I'm not dismissing that possibility, but most likely it was either SP or Jenter.

That's quite easy to say without having actual proof to back it up. And since you were on at the same time, you must be considered too, yeah?

You mean I should suspect myself, because I may secretly be scum without me knowing? Gosh, you convinced me.

FoS: Korts

[Korts]

you were the only two to log in after SG claimed water_foul as his partner, and since w_f was the NK, one of you most probably sent in the kill. Of course, it may have been a lurker, I'm not dismissing that possibility, but most likely it was either SP or Jenter.

That's quite easy to say without having actual proof to back it up. And since you were on at the same time, you must be considered too, yeah?

Oh yeah, I see where you're confused. When I said "log in" I actually meant post in-thread.

[Korts]

Gonna try and collect everything you asked of me in one post.

Tell me, was a mason NK'ed? Yer. So? Doesn't look like having fallen apart from where I'm standing.

You wanted to lynch Jenter, or for god knows why, no lynch. If either of those occurred, what logical reason would scum have to kill SG or water?

Say Jenter was lynched. Then you're saying scum would kill SG or water? Then we would KNOW FOR A FACT, that he was mason and was telling the truth. Then we'd have a completely safe, innocent townie left. That makes a lot of sense.

Yeah. I was counting on the scum to have sent their kill in.

On day 3, SG said he will do an analysis on 3 people; Jenter, Xanatos and Killa. But the post immediately after, Korts chimes in and he says he'll do the analysis on Jenter himself. Why?

Because Jenter was at the top of my scumlist, which I seem to remember saying. And I seem to remember saying I want to do a PBPA of Jenter

before

SG declared the subjects of his analyses.

What GOOD reason did you have for doing that? I don't think you ever seriously considered taking your vote off SG. You only wanted to seem like you did. After you finally settle back on SG, you said you won't be back before deadline. However, immediately after deadline, you were so quick to post a reply. Guess you didn't have anywhere to go, just wanted to let time take its course.

I seriously wanted a No Lynch, because now we wouldn't be in or near LYLO. As for the deadline thing. Time to hear a true story. I was to have a date this afternoon, but something interfered. And what's a sad boyfriend to do but play mafia?

Grimmy- During day 2, he decides to hop on the Grimmy wagon against Phoebus' wagon. However, he later takes off his vote on Grimmy, and places it on Phoebus. What reason does he gives for leaving and voting Phoebus? Nothing. He says he can't decide whether or not to stay on, and since Grimmy was a replacement, he'll take his vote off. When SG calls Grimmy a follower, Korts responds and defends him:

Nonono. Two things. 1) we still don't need followers. People should make up their own minds regardless. 2) my vote on grimmy isn't because he's a follower. It's because he didn't show any sign of agreeing with the reasons against Phoebus, he says only that there are reasons (he doesn't even comment on whether they're good or bad reasons) that other players brought up. I hope you're seeing where I'm coming from.

To me, that sounds like you're trying to convince SG that Grimmy isn't scum.

Whoa. Either you're completely misinterpreting the situation, or you're trying to heavily misrepresent me. You've shown intelligence so far, therefore I rule out the first possibility. SG wasn't accusing Grimmy of being a follower, he clearly stated that a game so fast needs followers. And I stated that 1) the game doesn't need followers, it needs active thinkers and 2) my case wasn't for Grimmy being a follower. However, if you notice, my vote was on Grimmy at the time, so I don't follow how you think the part you quote from me is supposed to defend Grimmy. In fact it restates the case on Grimmy.

Both Jenter and Korts have been on every lynch wagon; clammy's, Phoebus', and SG's. However so have I. But the thing that differs between me and them is that I lead the SG wagon. Every wagon they have been on, they have hopped onto. They have never led any strong case against anyone. Maybe I'm reaching, I don't know.

I'm not going to reply to this. I don't have anything to prove by leading more wagons than you.

Look at it from my side. I not only led, but have also pushed HARD for SG's lynch. Would I be willing to stand out that much if I were scum? Seeing as how Killa and Xanatos are almost the lowest on everyone's radar with their lurking, was it not risky for me to stand out so much? If I were scum, I could have easily blended in. Look back before my case on SG, was I under anyone's suspicions? No. No one has even considered me to be scum. Retort about WIFOM all you want. Pushing for SG's lynch is the only thing that makes me stand out. I could've been better off if I said nothing. But since I felt SG was scum, I went with it.

You say it yourself. WIFOMWIFOMWIFOM. Tip: if you're town, don't EVER use WIFOM. It seriously doesn't help. Regardless of your intentions.

Hope I got everything.

[Korts]

I don't see anything to address, since this is basically only a summary.

but we have 2 days I think..

Probably only one. We need to catch scum from here on.

[Korts]

SP, you're making it extremely obvious you're scum. At least, to me.

Because Jenter was at the top of my scumlist, which I seem to remember saying. And I seem to remember saying I want to do a PBPA of Jenter before SG declared the subjects of his analyses.

It really doesn't seem like you're interested at Jenter at all. You have no additional questions for him? How about him voting along with the SG bandwagon? If he was suspicious before, why isn't he suspicious to you now even though he was on the bandwagon? You're entirely focused on me without bothering to look at Jenter at all since Day 4.

Pushing multiple bandwagons is a trait of scum. I am convinced of your guilt, and I see no connection as of now between you and Jenter, therefore I don't have any questions directed at him. Him voting along with the SG wagon is scummy, yes, but remember, you were on it, too. I know, I was there with you. Why are you trying to direct my suspicion?

I quoted the wrong thing. The idea is there though. Re-read through SG's post. He was FOR a Grimmy lynch. Look back at his voting, he initially votes for Phoebus but changed his vote, and kept it there until Phoebus was lynched.

He may have been for a Grimmy lynch later, however the quote from me you took was in reply to his defense of Grimmy as follower. Gross and badly done misrepresentation. This is, in fact, damning for you as hell, getting caught in tampering with evidence.

Granted, Killa did hammer Phoebus at the end, however eight minutes after his post, you try to change your vote as well.

Whoa. Hey there. That's an interesting turnout.

The thing is, I'd rather not lynch Phoebus in this gamestate. He's been actively contributing and making sense most of the time Day 2. I mean, other than the reasons against me that he brought from Day 1, his observations are reasonable and pro-town.

Grimmy, on the other hand, has freshly replaced. He may have been a bit too reliant on others' arguments, but maybe he just skimmed the thread. The whole point of mine against him was based on, well, grammar, and who knows, maybe he's just bad at grammar.

I know it's too late to start a new wagon, but what I really don't like is Mr. Blonde trying to direct my vote. In this gamestate, with no guarantee of a new wagon happening before deadline, he's not going to earn my vote with this, however, I think we've got a lynch candidate for Day 3.

However, since

I don't want the lynch to be random

, I really have no choice but to do this.

Unvote, Vote: Phoebus

So if Killa had not changed his vote at that point in time, YOU would've been the one to hammer Phoebus. The intention was definitely there. Just that Killa happened to beat you to it.

The intention was there. I gladly take responsibility for the hammer, though technically it wasn't me. I have a good reason to have voted Phoebus, which I clearly state in the quoted post (see bolded).

You keep saying you find Jenter suspicious, and sure, you do vote him. But you never KEEP your vote on him is what makes me suspicious. You always seem to change it near deadline. The same thing happens in Day 3. Your vote isn't where your mouth is.

I did find Jenter suspicious, and I still do, however my priorities can change, and they did. What you mean by never I can't figure out, though, since I only voted Jenter once. But again, you go for misrepresentation by saying my vote isn't where my mouth is. Let us review late D2 and late D3.

Late D2, there are two competing wagons, both of which I support. I make points against Grimmy; I make points against Phoebus, and ask him to clarify his case, which he doesn't. Nearing deadline, the two wagons are equal in size, and my support for them is also equal. Should I have left the choice in the mod's hands?

Late D3, I make a case against Jenter which he responds well to. You make a case against SG which he doesn't respond well to. Tell me, what would you do in a situation like this? It's no shame not to lead every wagon.

Donkey:

I think it was me who said earlier that I feel that if Grimmy turned scum, it would make SG and water town.

Look at my post 9 as well. I also advocated a lynch for Grimmy for the sole purpose of clearing SG and water. I don't know if it makes a difference, but my post was before yours. I came to the conclusion that since Grimmy was never lynched and was proven scum, I couldn't rule out if SG and water were clear or not.

What have you got to prove by saying "me first"?

I also wanted to bring up another point.

FACT:

Both Korts and Jenter voted me only hours after day 4 starts, especially when no one even had a chance to voice their opinion. They didn't even bother looking into others, only voicing their suspicions on me. Korts had been "considering" Jenter the entire game. Did he factor Jenter as a possibility at all before placing his vote on me? In LYLO, we should be looking at and considering everyone, and from there, determine who is the most reasonable person to lynch. The only people who would be so rash and vote that quick would be scum. Both of you seem experienced. I find it hard to believe a newbie understands LYLO more than experienced players.

FACT:

LYLO is the same in every game. When you reach this point, when just ONE townie misplaces his vote on another townie, the game is lost. I don't understand why I have to point it out to you for both of you to unvote. So blatently voting me seems like obvious and hard to refute scumtells.

I voted you then cautioned everyone else because with a single vote on you, you're not in any danger, but if any more votes are placed on you, you could easily be lynched before we have time to discuss.

Also, I don't see the point of making two posts around the same single point in a case.

With all the power roles we've lynched, I still believe my first assumption that killa is a regular townie. Of course this is mostly based on feeling as I don't have much to go on, but he really does seem to play like this in all his games so I can't say much.

The only person I really trust at this moment would be donkey. Now, about my 3 suspects: Korts, Jenter and grimmy. I am in favor of lynching Korts, however I'm more comfortable lynching Jenter first as his voting history has shown he likes to add his vote onto others. With him placing his last vote on me, With him being so uncertain, but STILL placing his vote makes me suspect him more. He showed doubt in his decision yet still placed a vote. So my vote would be for either Korts or Jenter at this moment, but more in favor of Jenter.

Before I vote, I'd like to wait for donkey to respond on whether he feels Korts is a better lynch. If he thinks so, I stand by his decision.

What I don't see is why you suppose donkeyz will choose either the Korts wagon or the Jenter wagon. There's a substantial case on you, as well.

Xanatos,

what did you think about Korts and Jenter voting for me so quickly as soon as Day 4 began? You're saying it's possible all 3 of us might be scum, but why would Korts and Jenter be voting me right at the start? I'm accusing Korts and Jenter. They are accusing me. Even if you believe this is a scum tactic to fool town, assuming all of us are scum, which ever person gets lynched, you'll be able to move on to Day 5 at least.

I've brought up most of my points against Korts and Jenter on pages 14 and 15, so read those two pages specifically if you still are not sure of my stance on Korts and Jenter.

I'm also repeatedly mentioning LYLO because of the fact that they were so quick to place votes on me. Even you are hestitant to place your vote. But they placed their votes on me extremely quick.

Just so we're clear this is WIFOM.

I think they are the first to vote me now is because this is the last chance we have as town. Perhaps, they got a little impatient, I don't know. They still placed their vote with little thought and without waiting for others to have a say.

Waving the "I'm town, guys" flag is supposed to help how?

Guys, just lynch this fella here.[/area]

[Korts]

The point was that SG found Grimmy suspicious. You did not.

I did. As you may notice, my vote was on Grimmy, and I was arguing

against

Grimmy.

Tampering with evidence would be if I edited quotes. As I have said, I misquoted.

Taking a quote out of context and explaining it as something else is, as far as I'm concerned, tampering with evidence.

That was the point I was trying to make both times.

I know that was the point. However, that point has no basis whatsoever, since I was suspicious of Grimmy as well, and in fact SG was defending Grimmy by saying "we need followers". Do get your facts straight.

...That is not a reason at all. It is no where NEAR a good reason. For the sole purpose of not wanting [the lynch] to be random, you decide to vote Phoebus. If the exact same post you quoted yourself, you showed that you could not decide on who to vote. What you are essentially doing is VOTING RANDOMLY. I don't see how you can even come close to say that's logical thinking.

What I'm doing essentially is not letting the mod choose instead of us. I don't see how you can't see the logical thinking in there.

From the way you are proceeding on this day, you still have not once directed questions towards Jenter.

That's because my suspicion of him has no connection to my suspicion of you, and I'm not one to push multiple lynches. I don't think it's my call to set Day 5 lynches on the town's agenda. When/if you convince me of your innocence, I will go after my next suspicion.

You're viewing me as the only possible scum candidate. If you are so sure I am scum, obviously, there are two others.

My opinion is that connections between players should only be thoroughly sought for once we have at least one scum pegged.

Is it because you're so focused JUST on me, that you are ignoring every other person's post? Read donkey's post. He said you, Jenter, and Grimmy are his top suspects. YOU think there's a substantial case on me. It doesn't look like donkey agrees.

This is what donkeyz said:

Second, this puts SleepyPanda, Jenter, Grimmy, and Korts all in bad spots.

In all, Sleepy Panda, Jenter, Grimmy, Korts should be the targets this round.

I don't see where you're left out from his list of suspicions.

Real nice. Shows your determination to scum-hunt. We have lynched no scum so far. There is more than one scum. Your determination to lynch only me at this point is downright scum-play.

How's not having lynched scum so far in direct connection with my determination to lynch you? Nice try, no points. This deduction is based on nothing more than kraplogick.

[Korts]

Scum only need to kill one more person for the win.

How do you know? Town don't know how many scum there are...

Point, but it's not that much of a reach to assume three scum. I do, too.

[Korts]

Also, I'd like to kindly ask killa and donkeyz to unvote. Now.

[Korts]

Yeah, I assumed.

[Korts]

I don't understand how this does not conflict with your quote of arguing sides for both Grimmy and Phoebus. Look back at all the other days, you have voiced suspicion on more than one person each time. What makes this day any different? You should be considering people more, as I have said many times already, since it's LYLO. Day 1, you advocated mutliple lynches on both Phoebus and clammy. Day 2, Pheobus and Grimmy. Day 3, Jenter and SG. Day 4, only me? That looks like pushing multiple lynches every other day besides today.

I never pushed two wagons at the same time. Day one, I

first

pushed a Phoebus wagon, then

when clammy exhibited scummy behavior

I pushed his wagon. You setting me up as a wagonhopper is baseless. Day 2, I admit to having suspected both Grimmy and Phoebus, but it was only Grimmy's wagon I pushed. Day 3 I pushed a Jenter wagon until you made a case against SG and I agreed that it was stronger. I try never to push more than one case at the same time unless there's a connection that can't or shouldn't be ignored.

I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself. If you are indeed town, why are you so insistent that I am scum? You are acting as if you are completely positive that I am. You aren't even considering for a second that I could be town. Even the possibility, no matter how small YOU might think it is, it is worth considering, as this is LYLO.

I give you a 5% chance of being town. That chance I'm willing to take.

[Korts]

Also, donkey, killa and Xanatos. I'm not going to try and convince you, I'm just asking you to take sides.

[Korts]

I never pushed two wagons at the same time. Day one, I first pushed a Phoebus wagon, then when clammy exhibited scummy behavior I pushed his wagon. You setting me up as a wagonhopper is baseless. Day 2, I admit to having suspected both Grimmy and Phoebus, but it was only Grimmy's wagon I pushed. Day 3 I pushed a Jenter wagon until you made a case against SG and I agreed that it was stronger. I try never to push more than one case at the same time unless there's a connection that can't or shouldn't be ignored.

What you're basically admitting is that you're not willing to consider anyone else at this moment unless SOMEONE ELSE brings up case that you feel is stronger than a case against me.

You're saying that it's scummy that I find your case strong enough not to analyse someone else? It's my opinion that when you find someone scummy, you should push their lynch and not someone else's.

[Korts]

Dammit. I shouldn't have left Jenter at that.

Kudos, guys. donkeyz especially, although Jenter buddied up to me perfectly too. It was impossible to get a read on Xanatos, though. Anyway... I screwed up, I guess. Sorry, SP.

[Korts]

Jeez Grimmy was the cop? Totally could have won.

How, though? He could've pegged Jenter, maybe.

[Korts]

Well, it's nice to know the mafia thought me more important than I actually was, at least.

[Korts]

It's also nice that D2 the two competing wagons were the Cop and the Doc...

Oh yeah, kudos to the mod, to. On top of things, very much.

I liked this game, although my suspects were all the wrong ones.

[Korts]

too*

[Korts]

1. 72 hours was short, but I liked it this way. Much more active game.
2. The night choice mechanic seems strange from my perspective, but I didn't have a night choice, so I don't know.
3. The secret society I can agree with, but the werewolves had a bit unfair advantage over us, I think.
4. the roles were pretty much balanced, yeah.
5. Sure, if I can be mafia I liked it because of the faster pace.

About the plans: I think 72 hours was better than a week. Maybe 98 hours (four days) but a week is too long. The no night phase thing I probably missed because I didn't read the rules thoroughly enough, but it doesn't hurt if you stress it. Quicktopic is a fair idea. Maybe about the lurking: modkill everyone who doesn't post at least every 24-48 hours. That may be a little strict, though.

[Korts]

Cool.