Thok:
Thok [102] wrote:<snip>If you didn't want me to jump on you for a random FOS, perhaps you should have included a smiley or a [/sarcasm] comment? It seemed extremely weird, especially coming in a post where you specifically tried to kill off all discussion of suspicions, except for a no lynch strategy.
Oh, I was quite interested in whether you would jump on me or not. I believe you saw an excuse to begin focusing suspicion onto me and ran with it.
Let me put this another way. Let’s say I “random vote: Thok”ed. Would that have excused your “jumping on me”? Moreover, you were in Mafia 128. You immediately recognized my reference. And you’ve been in enough other games with me to be aware of my style. Yet nevertheless you made [21]- and I cannot see any way you would make that post as an innocent.
Thok [cont.] wrote:<snip>Finally, I've said this before, but I'm not that useful of a day 1 player, especially protown. I need information to catch people, and right now there isn't that much to go on.
I played with you in the Poker mini. I *know* you are more than capable of analyzing and exploring unusual mechanics and setups on Day 1.
Mr. Flay:
Mr. Flay [103] wrote:<snip>Thok and ET certainly don't seem to be on the same side, but I'm not sure where to go with that right now<snip>
This statement jumped out at me. If, as you are implying, you’re not yet sure of either of our alignments, then why do you think that about our relative alignment? That is, if you aren’t sure which of us might be innocent or guilty, why would you think one of us had to be, instead of, say, us both being innocent? (Not that *I* think this is true, but *I* can make this conclusion because *I* know my own alignment and *I* feel confident about Thok, neither of which is seem to be true for *you*.)
inHim:
I’m not really sure what to make of your “not wanting to break the game” but having seen innocents in other games speak similarly, I’m going to draw any conclusion automatically about your alignment. Are there any other games in which you’ve expressed similar sentiments?
Astronaut:
Astronaut [114] wrote:Tell me again: Why did we move away from the no lynch plan?
The presumption was that the town had better opportunities of development at night because of our superior numbers. However, there is a possibility that antitowns get access to roleblockers, which, potentially canceling out an entire townsperson’s development regardless of the time spend on development. Thus, as with traditional setups when night is unequivocally advantageous to mafia, no-lynch is an incorrect play.
“because it was a stupid plan.”, while an oversimplification, isn’t entirely inaccurate.
Puzzle:
Prods are all well and good, but as a matter of personal preference, I’d rather we also call out specific people on lurking rather than merely relying on the mod. I’d have to reread the thread to figure out who that would be besides MoS...