Good Omens Mafia! Game Over.

[mith]

(It's solar-terrestrial, which is not quite the same thing. But anyway.)

[Seol]

This is amusing. The first day lasted two months and resulted in no lynch, and now some of you can't wait a day or two? Rushing into things is horrible play, and quite suspicious.

Well, we do have a claimed cop result which has been verified as not insane, paranoid or naive on you. That's often enough for a lynch. Plus the last thing we want now is

another

day that lasts two months and ends in a no-lynch. I'm not saying I approve of lynching you before you get the chance to respond - I don't - but to hold up yesterday as an example doesn't really hold.

I'm not sure what part of my previous post wasn't clear, but to elaborate, I was at a solar physics conference at Cambridge, the computers they had available for internet access were pathetic, and when I posted I only had a couple minutes before the next session. I wanted to read the rules to make sure of how much I could say, and I hate rushing posts.

It seems perfectly reasonable, to me, that a player who posts the level of detail that mith does would want the opportunity to compose a proper response to such an accusation.

FOS: Olio

for that.

On the other hand, the whole "give me [time] to put up a proper defence" is often a way for scum to buy time to cool a wagon and fabricate a roleclaim. You've got a good alternative explanation... but then, I think a player of your calibre always would do.

My role is essentially a vigilante type. If I'm reading the rules correctly, I'm not allowed to say exactly what the details of me using my ability are (i.e., how often I can use it, and so on). However, I will say that I haven't used it yet, and I *can* show that to you, simply by making a kill tonight (or whenever the town decides it would be useful) and you noting that it is a different type of kill. It's also possible you will be able to get an idea of what my role might be and why I might appear as scum to certain investigators; I can't say that for certain, but it seems likely.

You are claiming a role which you cannot substantiate until we go to night, and can only substantiate by killing someone. The trouble here is that if you

are

telling the truth, the only way you can do that is by taking a pot-shot into the town - you'd be trading the life of one player for your own.

This is worth considering if we can take out someone who looks scummier than you - but to date, the only real information we have points at you. So we'd be trading down - agreeing to kill someone who's less scummy-looking than you. I don't like the sound of that plan.

Furthermore, what we'd get tomorrow is a different type of kill - but I can't think of any killing method that is unambiguously town. The best we can do is verify you're capable of killing and

might

be pro-town - I don't see how you'd

prove

yourself.

I find it rather incredible that so many people have voted already, considering the type of game we're in. Do you honestly think that things will be so clear as that in this large a game with this many groups? We're going to have some guilties that can't be found by every investigator, and we're going to have some innocents appear guilty to some.

Translation - We can't trust cops.

Now, that might be true - it might be that Pooky's result is inaccurate for flavour reasons, rather than the simple Sane/Paranoid/Naive/Insane scheme. But if we approach the game with this mindset, bearing in mind we can't claim names or even describe our roles in sufficient detail to properly explain results, then the cops are useless. I'd rather not disregard such a potentially powerful role, at least not before getting some indication of how reliable (or not) the cops can be. The best way of finding that out now is lynching you. Of course, if you come up as having a clearly pro-town role, then we'll need to take a good long look at Pooky.

Pre-empting that: Pooky, can you think of any flavour reasons why someone might show up as scum to you despite being pro-town? Can you give any examples of characters where that might happen? After all, if mith has a role that's pro-town, and then tomorrow you can explain it away - well, that's easy after the fact. If you tell us how you might miss now and that does come to pass, we're far more likely to believe you. Not that I want you to say too much here, with our rather stringent roleclaiming rules, but can you give us anything?

Furthermore, it's not as if vig is even a particularly powerful role - it's at its best when we can use it as a way of mopping up known scum, but if we can't trust our cops - which seems to be the position you're advocating - then your value to the town is much decreased. It'd be different if you had a really powerful pro-town role - then verification gambits are worth considering - but you don't, so you're not worth the effort and risk.

Stop acting like a bunch of mindless sheep and think, please.

OK, I can think of a few reasons why in this situation, bearing in mind the cop

might

be wrong, it's still better to lynch you than have you try to prove yourself.

I also think it interesting that you conceded that Pooky investigated you straight away - that indicates that you

know

your role is potentially scummy-looking. That might be true of a townie, but it's (almost) always true of scum.

Basically, it boils down to - Trust Your Cop unless you've got a damn good reason not to. Can you give me a damn good reason?

vote: mith

pending a damn good reason.

[Seol]

Obviously I can't prove 100% that I am innocent. That's just the way things go in Theme games. It's simply bad play though to lynch straight away when there's a good chance at getting more information.

Well, if we've got a result on you

and

you can't prove you're innocent, then what's your defence?

And of course I disagree that I am the best you have to go on. olio's posts are just insane, for instance. I question the motives of anyone that advocates pushing through a lynch before plenty of information is milked out of things.

OK, then, how's about this for a compromise - we talk for a few days, milk the information for a bit,

then

lynch you?

Seol: http://www.mist.ac.uk/mistsr05.html (not much up yet, but anyway)

Thanks, but it's gibberish to me - my ex-girlfriend's doing a solar magnetohydrodynamics PhD and came to visit this weekend. Just thought it was a bit of a coincidence... but then, these conferences always happen in the holidays, don't they?

[Polotet]

I count 11 votes so far, with 14 to lynch.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

I haven't read the book so I wouldn't know what characters might seem especially guilty to me.

A few questions for ya mith,

Does your character possess a horse? Maybe with Glowing Red eyes?

Does your character breathe or play with fire in any way?

Does your character easily unnerve others/give bad vibes?

Does your character have wings?

Is your character evil?

Please answer as many of the above as possible truthfully without getting modkill(check with mods to see which of the above you can answer)

My results are not guilty/innocent, they however do point very much so in one direction as to his probable alignment.

[PitBull]

Hi ppl , looks like I replaced PBug in the game.
Just wanted to say Hi to everyone.

[mith]

Basically, it boils down to - Trust Your Cop unless you've got a damn good reason not to. Can you give me a damn good reason?

Here's one:

My results are not guilty/innocent, they however do point very much so in one direction as to his probable alignment.

This is the problem with quick lynching on cop claims. As I said before, usually the information you get in games like this is incomplete, and when the "cop" hasn't even read the book, it's easy to jump to the wrong conclusion.

The confusion is where I suspected it would be. I am confident someone who has read the book will figure it out. Meanwhile, I will check with the mod about these questions.

I'll address the rest of Seol's post later, but I find this interesting:

On the other hand, the whole "give me [time] to put up a proper defence" is often a way for scum to buy time to cool a wagon and fabricate a roleclaim. You've got a good alternative explanation... but then, I think a player of your calibre always would do.

I haven't played a lot recently, and I'm pretty sure I've never played with you before. If I had, you would know that I don't stall for time, even when I'm scum. Having good excuses is not a sign of a good player... a good player doesn't *need* to stall for time. But anyway, it's a bit silly to suggest that I arranged the conference as an excuse to buy some time, and I know you're not suggesting I'm just making it up (you could easily verify that I was there anyway).

Anyway, I am three away, and even our claimed cop is suggesting that there is at least something worth talking about; don't be a moron and add a vote to "put more pressure" on me.

[Seol]

Basically, it boils down to - Trust Your Cop unless you've got a damn good reason not to. Can you give me a damn good reason?

Here's one:

My results are not guilty/innocent, they however do point very much so in one direction as to his probable alignment.

This is the problem with quick lynching on cop claims. As I said before, usually the information you get in games like this is incomplete, and when the "cop" hasn't even read the book, it's easy to jump to the wrong conclusion.

That's a good point, and is a change in position on Pooky's behalf - we've gone from "investigation says guilty" to "results are not guilty/innocent". I still suspect that you are the correct lynch, but Pooky's going to have to back his position up somewhat.

unvote: mith

for now.

On the other hand, the whole "give me [time] to put up a proper defence" is often a way for scum to buy time to cool a wagon and fabricate a roleclaim. You've got a good alternative explanation... but then, I think a player of your calibre always would do.

I haven't played a lot recently, and I'm pretty sure I've never played with you before. If I had, you would know that I don't stall for time, even when I'm scum. Having good excuses is not a sign of a good player... a good player doesn't *need* to stall for time.

You're correct in that I've never played with you before and therefore don't know your style that well. And "having good excuses" is not the way I'd put it - a good scum player always builds plausible deniability into everything by anticipating an alternative explanation for their actions. I'm not saying that's necessarily what happened - I'm just cautious to take anything at face value, especially from fingered scum (and I'll concede that you're slightly less than "fingered scum" now, but you're still not far off) - and that also applies to your assertions of what a good player would do.

Similarly, you haven't played much with me yet, so you probably don't know how cynical I can be - I rarely take anyone's stated reasons for their behaviour at face value. For what it's worth, that quoted paragraph wasn't part of the substance of my argument to lynch you, it's just acknowledging that Olio

may

have a point. I'm largely on your side in this issue.

But anyway, it's a bit silly to suggest that I arranged the conference as an excuse to buy some time, and I know you're not suggesting I'm just making it up (you could easily verify that I was there anyway).

I'm not suggesting either of those things. I was suggesting that possibly seeing as you had "cover" you might have taken the opportunity to try and cool the game whilst sleeping on possible approaches - if there's anything you're lying about/exaggerating, I'd suspect it's the quality and availability of internet access. But I'm not saying you did - I'm just bearing in mind that's a possibility.

In any case, that's pretty much both an irrelevance and probably the most spurious aspect of my post. I look forward to your responses to the rest of my arguments.

don't be a moron and add a vote to "put more pressure" on me.

I don't think most of these votes were to pressure you - I think they were to lynch you. The information we had was we had a guilty verdict on you, and under those circumstances - even given some doubt - you should be lynched. It's now transpired the situation isn't so clear-cut, so some discussion is definitely in order.

[Locus Cosecant]

All right, we've heard what he has to say.

vote: mith

Yes, it's possible that our cop is wrong, or even scum, but sometimes those are the risks you gotta take.

[mith]

Some of this is a bit irrelevant after Pooky's post, but anyway:

Well, we do have a claimed cop result which has been verified as not insane, paranoid or naive on you. That's often enough for a lynch. Plus the last thing we want now is another day that lasts two months and ends in a no-lynch. I'm not saying I approve of lynching you before you get the chance to respond - I don't - but to hold up yesterday as an example doesn't really hold.

Which is why I called it "amusing"... that wasn't intended as a defense, though IMO super-fast lynches tend to hurt the town more than help.

You are claiming a role which you cannot substantiate until we go to night, and can only substantiate by killing someone.

That's not strictly true. I am already confident a careful reader can get some idea of my role, if they have knowledge of the books. Using my ability would simply make it clearer.

The trouble here is that if you are telling the truth, the only way you can do that is by taking a pot-shot into the town - you'd be trading the life of one player for your own.

~shrug~ I know I'm innocent, so that's a perfectly reasonable proposition from my point of view.

This is worth considering if we can take out someone who looks scummier than you - but to date, the only real information we have points at you. So we'd be trading down - agreeing to kill someone who's less scummy-looking than you. I don't like the sound of that plan.

And you don't, so that is perfectly reasonable from yours.

Furthermore, what we'd get tomorrow is a different type of kill - but I can't think of any killing method that is unambiguously town. The best we can do is verify you're capable of killing and might be pro-town - I don't see how you'd prove yourself.

I didn't say I could prove I'm innocent. There is always doubt in these things. However, I think my role will be guessable after I use my ability, so my *role* will be proven. And you can then decide for yourself if that role would be evil or not.

Translation - We can't trust cops.

Now, that might be true - it might be that Pooky's result is inaccurate for flavour reasons, rather than the simple Sane/Paranoid/Naive/Insane scheme.

Addressed by Pooky, obviously. However, I'll point out that *I* know I'm innocent, so it was a reasonable for me to make the assumption that Pooky is not an ordinary sane cop, even if there weren't thematic considerations.

But if we approach the game with this mindset, bearing in mind we can't claim names or even describe our roles in sufficient detail to properly explain results, then the cops are useless.

I disagree with this, actually. Pooky's role is most likely quite useful; I just happen to know he missed on me. Whether I can convince you of that, but I think I have a pretty good chance of doing so, and I don't think any scum he might catch will be as able to defend themselves.

In addition, we'll be able to get a clearer picture from our information when we have more of it. This is only day 2, after all.

I'd rather not disregard such a potentially powerful role, at least not before getting some indication of how reliable (or not) the cops can be. The best way of finding that out now is lynching you. Of course, if you come up as having a clearly pro-town role, then we'll need to take a good long look at Pooky.

In case I didn't make it clear enough, I think it is very unlikely that Pooky is completely making up that he checked me. That doesn't make him a confirmed innocent, but it doesn't mean he should be lynched, or even a top suspect, if I am lynched.

Furthermore, it's not as if vig is even a particularly powerful role - it's at its best when we can use it as a way of mopping up known scum, but if we can't trust our cops - which seems to be the position you're advocating - then your value to the town is much decreased. It'd be different if you had a really powerful pro-town role - then verification gambits are worth considering - but you don't, so you're not worth the effort and risk.

Well, one, I'll point out that you don't actually *know* for sure how powerful my role is; I can't make a completely claim, after all (this is not to suggest that I *do* have a powerful role, but it's worth pointing out). Two, I didn't suggest we don't trust our cops. Three, what's the risk here, exactly? If I'm screwing with you, I get lynched either way, and no later than tomorrow if the town chooses to have me kill tonight. That might be risking later in the game, but not on day 2. More importantly, if I can successfully show you I'm innocent, we don't waste a lynch.

I also think it interesting that you conceded that Pooky investigated you straight away - that indicates that you know your role is potentially scummy-looking. That might be true of a townie, but it's (almost) always true of scum.

Actually, I did not say that Pooky investigated me straight away. It was only after his second post that I was reasonably sure. In my original post, I simply said that I wouldn't be surprised if I *did* look bad to some investigators, and hopefully prompted Pooky to think about what his actual result was (which is the same thing you later asked for explicitly). If he'd said he got a firm guilty/innocent, then I would have surely gotten lynched, but you would've had a good reason to go after him tomorrow.

The partial probability type argument doesn't hold here anyway. It may be the case that most scum look scummy, but whether they would mention it in a defense?

Well, if we've got a result on you and you can't prove you're innocent, then what's your defence?

I can't give you certainties. Neither can Pooky. All I am asking is that people consider the possibilities, and *all* the information available (it's easy to ignore posting styles and such when there's a cop claim out, but Mafia is a game of psychology more than anything; a well-designed game should only occasionally be won because of investigators).

Similarly, you haven't played much with me yet, so you probably don't know how cynical I can be - I rarely take anyone's stated reasons for their behaviour at face value.

Ah, but can I take *that* at face value?

I don't think most of these votes were to pressure you - I think they were to lynch you.

That was jab at PeaceBringer. Putting "pressure" on someone with 10/14 votes is a bit silly. It's not a *huge* deal in the grand scheme of things, but the possibility of an accidental lynch before a defense is properly considered is always there (note also Electra's accidental vote; this sort of thing does happen).

All right, we've heard what he has to say. vote: mith

Yes, it's possible that our cop is wrong, or even scum, but sometimes those are the risks you gotta take.

Huge

FOS: Locus Cosecant

You've heard some of what I had to say. You also heard the cop who is accusing me asking me questions, which he clearly thinks are worth having answers to... yet while I wait on the mods, you throw another vote on me. Why? What purpose would it possibly serve to lynch me *before* I give those answers, before you hear Pooky's opinion on them, and before the people that have read the book have a chance to think about it in light of this new information?

Now then, while I typed this, I got a response, so:

Does your character possess a horse? Maybe with Glowing Red eyes?

No. (At least, so far as the book tells us. Maybe my character owns a farm somewhere.)

Does your character breathe or play with fire in any way?

No.

Does your character easily unnerve others/give bad vibes?

Quite possibly.

Does your character have wings?

No.

Is your character evil?

Possibly a bit mean, but not in the good vs. evil sense you mean.

Any more questions?

[olio]

And of course I disagree that I am the best you have to go on. olio's posts are just insane, for instance. I question the motives of anyone that advocates pushing through a lynch before plenty of information is milked out of things.

I still find no good explanation from your posts why you didn't say you had a vig-type role in your first post of day 2. If you really are a vigilante type, why couldn't you just say so and give longer explanation later? Even if you have just few minutes to type it should be enough for everyone to give out their basic role description, if they're speaking the truth.

[rolandofthewhite]

Vote: mith

.

Let's see how this goes.

[Coron]

unvote: Mith Vote: Locus Cosecant

mith might be scum, but I'm pretty sure locus is scum by the way he is acting.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

Well that does match perfectly with the information I got about you,

that you give bad vibes and seem evil.

Ah why do you smoothtalk so well , now I have to think.

hurts head

Busy right now actually so will post more on the topic, for clarification my information said that he gave me bad vibes and seemed evil and that's why I was fairly sure he was a baddie.

[DoomCow]

unvote: Mith

For now I'm willing to believe Mith, but I'm not fully convinced about his innocense,

[Seol]

Well that does match perfectly with the information I got about you,

that you give bad vibes and seem evil.

Given what's been said, I can only think of one plausible role that mith could have if he isn't just blowing smoke - but there

is

a plausible role, it's not part of a group, it's unlikely to be antitown, and yes - the manner of the kill will point pretty unambiguously to that role. Furthermore, if that's the kind of result Pooky gets, I can't think of any other characters where there's a possibility of ambiguity.

Trouble is, for the role I'm thinking, this sets off alarm bells:

Maybe my character owns a farm somewhere.

If you're trying to say you are who I think you're tring to say you are, then there's no way you could own a farm somewhere. For that reason, I'm sort of skeptical you actually do have that role. Am I thinking of the wrong role?

All the other roles that make even slight sense as having killing abilities, we've already either seen a very likely kill (eg witchfinder burnings) or it's inconceivable they're not scum (eg Horsemen).

[PeaceBringer]

well

unvote

for now, if I haven't already. since what mith says seems believable by those familiar with material then I would hold off.

[Aelyn]

Well that does match perfectly with the information I got about you,

that you give bad vibes and seem evil.

Given what's been said, I can only think of one plausible role that mith could have if he isn't just blowing smoke - but there

is

a plausible role, it's not part of a group, it's unlikely to be antitown, and yes - the manner of the kill will point pretty unambiguously to that role. Furthermore, if that's the kind of result Pooky gets, I can't think of any other characters where there's a possibility of ambiguity.

Agreed, if we're on the same page that is! I can see it being part of a group, but find it very unlikely indeed.

Trouble is, for the role I'm thinking, this sets off alarm bells:

Maybe my character owns a farm somewhere.

If you're trying to say you are who I think you're tring to say you are, then there's no way you could own a farm somewhere. For that reason, I'm sort of skeptical you actually do have that role. Am I thinking of the wrong role?

I think Mith was kinda being facetious there. I don't think that was a serious comment.

I think we should let mith live for now, and send him to kill someone tonight. If someone else dies in an unusual way, or if that person survives, we should lynch mith as a liar. Of course, that would require all doctors to keep the nominated nightkill unprotected, which in turn kinda assumes the scum don't have doctors. I think that's a risk owrth taking.

I'll abstain from voting for now. No-one's suspicious enough to earn a vote just yet.

[mith]

Seol, as Aelyn suggests, I was joking about the farm thing. Think that type of thing would be a bit specific as far as claiming goes anyway.

olio, it may seem an obvious thing to you to say "I'm a vig-type, give me more time", but given that I had only a handful of minutes and had to check on some other things as well, I think I did pretty well to type out what I did. You'll just have to decide for yourself whether I was stalling for more time to make something up (or whether someone with my experience would even need to, if I were lying).

The important things were said in that first post; that I could appear scummy to some investigations, and that I could demonstrate my ability. The ability that I can demonstrate would be a bit useless for scum to claim anyway. If it's not convincing, I'll be lynched anyway, and what good did it do me? Buy me an extra day to kill? If I were in a scum group, my group could do that anyway, and there would be the chance that the one picked as my target was *also* in my group, so you get a two-for-one deal.

Regardless, it is completely ridiculous to *not* give me a little time to post properly, even if you think I'm making it up. The town gains *nothing* from lynching me before I post a full defense, loses some information and an innocent. I didn't even waste much of your precious time, I got back early and posted Thursday. The fact that you actually pushed people to not wait suggests that you don't want the town discussing things too much. My vote stays, though Locus is right up there with you.

Not much longer left here, and I don't know if I'll be back on today, but I'll probably drag myself out sometime tomorrow if there are any further questions. Normal routine should resume on Monday.

[olio]

olio, it may seem an obvious thing to you to say "I'm a vig-type, give me more time", but given that I had only a handful of minutes and had to check on some other things as well, I think I did pretty well to type out what I did. You'll just have to decide for yourself whether I was stalling for more time to make something up (or whether someone with my experience would even need to, if I were lying).

Yep, it seemed - and still seems - to me an obvious thing to do and I did my decision and posted my posts based on lack of that basic information. On the other hand I wasn't aware that you were away, but thought you meant your normal net access being crappy.

[Seol]

Seol, as Aelyn suggests, I was joking about the farm thing. Think that type of thing would be a bit specific as far as claiming goes anyway.

On the one hand, of course I knew it was a joke - on the other hand, it does seem contradictory - I've always been careful never to put something which, looking back later, is contradictory in my play, even when being facetious, for exactly that sort of reason. Perhaps I'm just too careful (anal?), and expecting other people to follow my lead on that is unreasonable.

If I were in a scum group, my group could do that anyway, and there would be the chance that

the one picked as my target

was *also* in my group, so you get a two-for-one deal.

Bolded for emphasis. I hadn't got as far ahead as this, but are you suggesting we nominate a target for you in the thread? There's a number of problems with that - the possibility of double-kills (as, depending on the mod, you don't always see both kill methods, meaning that it might not confirm you), the issue of protection (as it's not unheard of for scum groups to contain doctors), the possibility of choosing a more powerful town role and outing them, and of course the question of "how do we choose?".

Even bearing in mind the information you've given us so far, I'm still of the opinion you're the best lynch (because as I see it the potential for things going wrong whilst verifying you is high, I don't believe we'll suffer too badly from losing your role, and we get feedback on Pooky - and of course, there's nothing said so far that means you

can't

be an SK-type or just lying about everything), but I'd like to hear in more detail what your

exact

proposal for the verification procedure is.

[Thoth]

All right, we've heard what he has to say. vote: mith

Yes, it's possible that our cop is wrong, or even scum, but sometimes those are the risks you gotta take.

unvote: mith
vote: Locus C

As this cop did not read the book and gets interpretable results there is enough doubt for me to not blindly follow. There are many (good) characters in the book that would look evil to some other good characters. Without knowing who Pooky is and with him not having read the book I don't want to lynch based on his results yet.

[mith]

First, ~kicks site~. Really need to look into new hosting.

I hadn't got as far ahead as this, but are you suggesting we nominate a target for you in the thread?

Well, I was going off the post above mine (Aelyn's), and this is also the usual way things are done in such situations. There are other ways to go about it. The town could nominate several, and I pick one off the list. Or I just pick someone myself. I didn't have anything in particular in mind myself; I don't mind the town picking a method for choosing a target any more than I mind the town picking a target.
However,

There's a number of problems with that - the possibility of double-kills (as, depending on the mod, you don't always see both kill methods, meaning that it might not confirm you), the issue of protection (as it's not unheard of for scum groups to contain doctors), the possibility of choosing a more powerful town role and outing them, and of course the question of "how do we choose?".

For the first, this is much more likely if my target isn't known in advance, actually. If my target is known, it's would be quite foolish of the scum to target them as well. Why would they waste a kill on someone who would die anyway just to keep me from showing my kill? Simpler to just kill me if they're worried about me.

For the second, no, it's not unheard of. Consider though that scum are only likely to protect fellow scum, and so the target is likely to be under considerable suspicion anyway (they could protect someone not in their group, but again, to what purpose? Better to use their protection on someone in their group, as there are other kills out there, and putting suspicion on someone who is going to be killed anyway seems rather pointless).

More importantly, what you're missing on both of these points is that any problems that could happen are not risks to the town, they're risks to me! The town will always have the option of lynching me tomorrow, no matter the outcome. If something does go wrong, I will of course argue for another chance; I know I'm innocent, and so it would be contrary to the town's best interest for me to not argue about it. But the option is there to kill me. You'll just have more information to make a better decision tomorrow.

For the third, I think you're thinking about this the wrong way. This sort of thing is essentially a way for the town to get an extra lynch. What you're basically saying is that rather than discuss and find two lynch candidates today (lynching one and me killing the other), plus still having me as an option based on what happens tonight, you think we should give up those two chances and just lynch me now instead.

There's always the chance of outing someone powerful; that's just the nature of lynchings. Isn't that a risk worth taking, though, rather than giving the scum groups another free night? This line of thinking can quickly lead to the no-lynch/wait-for-the-cop style of play that is boring and generally worse for the town in theme games.

because as I see it the potential for things going wrong whilst verifying you is high, I don't believe we'll suffer too badly from losing your role, and we get feedback on Pooky - and of course, there's nothing said so far that means you can't be an SK-type or just lying about everything

Again, there's no real risk here for the town. If something goes wrong, I probably get lynched tomorrow anyway. I disagree about the "suffer too badly" part; that isn't to say that lynching me is going to doom the town or anything, but vigilante roles can certainly shift the balance in the favor of the town toward the end of the game. I don't think you get much feedback on Pooky either way; I think it is pretty certain that he is not lying about having information, and that he's not just getting completely random results. What he got on me makes sense for my role. What may still be in doubt is his actual alignment, but you don't learn anything about that from lynching me. And yes, there is always the possibility I am lying, but you certainly can't *lose* information about that by waiting until tomorrow. You will have the results of my attempt at verification to help you make a decision.

[olio]

I'm willing to be the target for mith's vig-kill. Me being a normal townie, it really isn't a loss to the town.

Even though I'm bit reluctant to believe in Coron's hunch , I'll neverthless

unvote
vote: Locus Cosecant

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

I think RolandOfTheWhite and Locus should be the primary suspects for the way they acted when we were still discussing things over with Mith, it seemed very much like they wanted to rush the lynch before we got everything nailed down. I think mith nightkilling one of them and us lynching the other would be the best way to proceed.

unvote

vote Locus