Mini 1080 -- txtMafia -- Game OVER

[AurorusVox]

VT: kunkstar7

4being in anothr gme w/ me atm.

(I usually text in full speech with full punctuation and grammar anyway. Must resist urges...!)

[AurorusVox]

Whoopsie

Vote Kunkstar7

Korts, I can't promise to abide by that request but I'll try <3

[AurorusVox]

"Text walls make me sad"

This is the right game for you then amirite?

Incoming doublepost...

[AurorusVox]

Korts: why's it pro-town?

If pro-town, why ask to avoid it here?

[AurorusVox]

I'm getting at exactly what I said...that this is a good game for you if you don't like text walls (this is where I would use colon-S face if I could)

[AurorusVox]

That was #57

Dyu mean "incoming doublepost"? I just felt like saying "incoming" (if this was mobile phone videochat you'd see that I'm pulling an abashed face)

[AurorusVox]

^The above post is exactly 160 characters

[AurorusVox]

@Anti:

OIC. I wondered what made him think txtspk was more pro-town than anti-town (I thought it was pretty null) ---

[AurorusVox]

--- and if he thought it was pro-town, I don't see why he'd want to discourage it.

[AurorusVox]

OIC = oh I see.

I think it's dodgy if he

had

thought txtspk was protown, but he's explained it away with a linguistic flourish. Still, IGMEOH, just in case.

[AurorusVox]

@Antihero

He explained it away by appealing to the term "If anything" which can be interpreted either way ---

[AurorusVox]

--- Playing with interpretable phrases = linguistic flourish imo. Since it

can

be either way it's nothing solid. Had to condense into soundbyte.

[AurorusVox]

And Timezone is GMT, I'm pretty active but have a hell of a lot of work this week so we'll see.

[AurorusVox]

@Fonz: You could be onto something. All games I've been in where scum had daytalk, mod notified in OP without prompting. Anyone had experiences to the contrary?

[AurorusVox]

Tasky: do you think a wagon on someone who is V/LA will be useful?

Wagon shift --

Vote: Tasky

[AurorusVox]

You're not reading every post?

So how can you say the thread is full of spam if you've not read everything?

[AurorusVox]

@Fishy - it was a rhetorical question.

The IGMEOH was because I found the inconsistency suspect but he offered a reasonable explanation.

[AurorusVox]

@Fishy; originally for his opportunistic vote on v/la Kunk. Now this "I don't read" thing,* which could be retroactive to justify his excuse for the vote.

[AurorusVox]

*In particular I don't like the way he's using it to class all the earlier pages spam and shield himself from accusations of not contributing.

[AurorusVox]

Fishy #202:
If IGMEOH then I obviously haven't let it drop. I found it scummy at first but he had a reasonable explanation. What would you rather I had done?

[AurorusVox]

#203:
I asked 4 others' exp. w/ daytalk (still waiting 4 responses). If its standard that mods dnt announce, Hero's Q wasn't v. scummy; if it's not, then it is.

[AurorusVox]

#204:
He claimed vote was 4 wagon (=pressure?). But V/LA player can't react 2 pressure. His vote was there4 pointless; gives illusion of contributing when not

[AurorusVox]

Tasky;
Skimming thread obv. has downsides like missing V/LA. Still say it's good?
Don't buy that as an excuse btw. Think you just wanted easy place for vote.

[AurorusVox]

Those who have Tasky-meta:
Have you been in games where he was scum (as well as town)?

[AurorusVox]

Anti #236: I'm not voting him for PL reasons due to playstyle, so I wouldn't call my vote an easy parking spot (I assume this is what you're implying)

[AurorusVox]

Tasky #240: See above. Also, you would do it to --- not slip up, whilst appearing to contribute without giving people too much to read of you!

[AurorusVox]

Anti #252: If I may hold up a mirror; "what are you getting at?" In other words, what does Equi's desire to PL tell you about her alignment?

[AurorusVox]

Anti: we obviously disagree about the validity of his Kunk wagon vote as a scumtell. It's only minor at this stage, but it's the best thing I got.

[AurorusVox]

Tasky, do you have any scum games you can show us?

[AurorusVox]

FtF 265: Scum can argue out of tight spot. Just b/c sth. sounds reasonable =/= true.

Wanted

2 leave option open 2 pursue later; accept expln, but still watching

[AurorusVox]

FtF 267: Lookin @town games, likely it was innocent mistake after all. Still thinks skimming is good, despite missing V/LA = bad. Waiting on linked scumgames.

[AurorusVox]

Unvote

since entirely possible he missed V/LA (if skimming as in linked town games, likely chance), and my theory could simply be paranoia.

[AurorusVox]

Equi301:
What makes you think I wanted to hide it?

[AurorusVox]

Sorry for lack of posting. Have essay and mass reading.

Tasky: vote is gut, yes? So you have nothing more than gut on any other player atm?

[AurorusVox]

^Ray340:
You think scum are following your votes? Anyone in particular?

[AurorusVox]

What's the deal with "[redacted]" anyway? Is it like a marker for "ask me later"?

[AurorusVox]

Hero: you said you didn't want to vote/pressure Fonz til you'd heard from Kunk. What did he say that made you ready to go for the vote?

[AurorusVox]

Hero348:
If nothing changed, why did you wait til now to place the vote?

[AurorusVox]

Well I want to get answers before I give opinions on them.

[AurorusVox]

Well I've currently got unanswered questions from three players.

[AurorusVox]

Anti:

My Korts question was answered hence no "follow up"
I pressured Tasky when others were RV/PL
I have open questions atm...

Where's the active lurk?

[AurorusVox]

@Tasky #400:
That was in response to Anti saying I'd done nothing. Context plz.

[AurorusVox]

Tasky#406:
Because he keeps harking on about it. Its no good just ignoring him, prithee.

[AurorusVox]

Ray - what is your case on Mothrax other than his reaction to your vote?

[AurorusVox]

Hero: voted mothrax because he is scummier than Fonz, or because his wagon's bigger?

[AurorusVox]

Korts what caused the shift between this and this? Claimed you needed to calm down RE: Tasky v/la - but were calm in first linked post.

[AurorusVox]

On re-read:
Ray, why say "Fishy wagon" when he only had one vote on him? Dissuading future Fishy votes?

---

Tasky: we need reasons to read you. Giefploxx.

[AurorusVox]

Hero, what are your reasons for voting Tasky/wanting him lynched?

(Been away from MS for a few days, will try to respond to previous few pages as well.)

[AurorusVox]

Wee, I missed the rage-posting party.
^reactions looks townish, could be easily scumfaked though.
"THAT WAS VITAL INFORMATION FOR SCUM (ME)! HOW BAD (GOOD)!"

[AurorusVox]

Not really sure why Equi felt the need to talk about roles and crumb at that point.

Like this even less - seems like a backdoor to claim Vig later in the game.

[AurorusVox]

Bad logic - scum wouldn't know if you were lying. Only another town vigilante would know you were lying, so why would someone thinking you were a liar = scum?

[AurorusVox]

Explain this crap

What does the V/LA note have to do with anything?

[AurorusVox]

Voting pattern reveals something interesting - Hero has voted for 6/12 players in this game already. Conscious attempt to hide scumbuddies in voting trail?

[AurorusVox]

#620/#621 - reasons for my

Vote: Equinox

.

---

Gah. I'm really sorry for...what is this, the heptagonal post?

*equals underscore equals speech mark*

[AurorusVox]

I have been prodded. Sorry, was very busy, didn't get chance to mention V/LA. More posts inbound...

[AurorusVox]

Tasky's slowburn attitude is now starting to come into effect. Getting frustrated-townie vibes from his interaction with TF

[AurorusVox]

Not liking Kast's attempt to steer all discussion at one target, going out of his way to make it all he'll talk about - would feel the same even if it wasn't me

[AurorusVox]

ISOing Kunk, will respond post-that. In the mean-time - Kast, what do you make of Kunk?

[AurorusVox]

I liked Kunk at the start. But his push on Tasky smells bad.

Pertinent points: Kunk calls Tasky badtown; calls his vote for me terribad and pointless (TBC)

[AurorusVox]

Initially doesn't explain reversed read, just repeats it reversed. When he does answer, partially it's for switching votes without reasoning - hypocrisy? (TBC)

[AurorusVox]

Though he does also mention the OMGUS argument. But if he had bad town read on Tasky, isn't OMGUS and not reasoning part of bad town?

[AurorusVox]

Vote: Kunkstar7

Also: Kunk, you earlier acted as though Tasky's & Ray's reasonless votes were not scumtells. What changed there?

[AurorusVox]

RE: Equi vote
Was for unnecessary/pre-emptive crumbing; didn't pick up cop claim - thought was leaving open for vig later ("Oh yeah I killed him, I'm vig") TBC

[AurorusVox]

but also for odd reason for wanting to lynch CryWolf in #459; how would scum "know" he was lying about vig? Only person who would know would be another

town

vig

[AurorusVox]

therefore his push for lying was highly likely pushing on something that was null/plain wrong (neither town nor scum would know if he was lying).

[AurorusVox]

Made the comment RE: your discussion with Kast about potential for cop outing himself.

[AurorusVox]

Also, in that post I said I

didn't

see him claiming cop - that I thought he was preparing crumb for vig, despite saying he wouldn't. Reference: This post

[AurorusVox]

My mistake; read this as relevant to this game

Vi: "carried on" to explain reasons for earlier vote as people were unsure about why I voted Equi.

[AurorusVox]

Unprovoked softclaims with open backdoors for changing claim at a later date: Y

[AurorusVox]

But I am not looking for Equi to out his role. I find the way he went about trying to half claim it scummy.

[AurorusVox]

Outing roles is generally not a good idea. But letting something slip by that strikes me as scummy is also a not a good idea. They're not incompatible.

[AurorusVox]

@Vi
Lynching a scumbag?

But Kunk can go first. Obv no one wants to get Equi today.

[AurorusVox]

For clarity: I'm not interested in him outing any role other than vig because he specifically denied being vig already.

[AurorusVox]

And I'm not very good at picking up crumbs, and so mistakenly assumed that somewhere it had been (soft) acknowledged that he was claiming cop.

[AurorusVox]

Hero #1137
No, but he didn't fakesoftclaim vig, he set up a backdoor to fakesoftclaim vig at a later point. He doesn't

have

to go through that door.

[AurorusVox]

The back door was the "I could be lying but I'm not" WIFOM comments, as I pointed out earlier.

How can you say you weren't softclaiming when you said this?

[AurorusVox]

Equi #1152, meet Hero #1158.

How does crumbing != soft-claiming? They're both non-explicitly announcing your role.

When did I ask you to confirm not-cop?

[AurorusVox]

DRUNKPOSTING: I think there's some folks who have replaced in and seen that I had a shaky/suspicious start and thought they'd rekindle the flame. TBC

[AurorusVox]

BUT I think I fucked up by hastily reading after my prod due to time constraints and made a mistake which looked like ROLEFISHING but it wasn't. TBC!

[AurorusVox]

BUT ALSO I think if I am going to be lynched you'll see why because I can explain but only if I'm seriously going to get lynched :\

[AurorusVox]

Will go to look in detail. Gut says Equi has the most legit reason to vote me atm, but I'm naturally suspicious of him (her?) so I'm a little confused (colon/S)

[AurorusVox]

ALSO RE: 1181 whoops sorry NS for the colon slash emoticon that I used (greater than underscore less than quotation mark)

[AurorusVox]

Hero, can you wait til tomorrow for this? I'm finding it hard to keep to the char limit atm...

[AurorusVox]

Okay I'll try (some sort of face)

Kast I kinda don't like because in a few instances it's looked like he's been purposefully steering it towards me ---

[AurorusVox]

--- with full knowledge that others have found me suspicious. This is especially clear with his "willing to revote AV?" comment.

[AurorusVox]

He's also saying I've not done scumhunting which even Equi disagreed with lol. Accusing people of misrepping isn't my style, but if one of my voters says it...

[AurorusVox]

Chamber has never said WHY he finds my scummy. Reasons please, Chamber?

[AurorusVox]

Vi has voted me because no one would vote RF? Took issue with my Equi questions. Understandable but why not push RF more? What are you asking here?

[AurorusVox]

--- seems to let me slip off his/her radar up until there is already a couple votes on me. Then again this coincided with EquiGate. Difficult to judge Vi.

[AurorusVox]

I think VI is the least committed to my lynch of all five wagonners. Except maybe Tasky, but more on that later.

[AurorusVox]

Lol says Chamber who hasn't given opinions on why I'm scummy at all. Nice avoidance of the direct question scum (opinion enough for you?)

[AurorusVox]

So, where was I? Oh yeah Equi.

Equi I think has the best reasons for thinking I'm scum if she thinks I was RFing her. I don't find her vote scummily placed ---

[AurorusVox]

Brief interlude note to Chamber: You've never said why I'm scummy. State your case

[AurorusVox]

(back to Equi again) --- especially considering that her vote came onto me after the deadline extension was granted. Equi, current opinions on Kunk?

[AurorusVox]

(AH you hurt me. I thought you were being serious *sad face*)

Last is Tasky: do I even need to ISO him? Hops between me and TF, whatever looks best at the time

[AurorusVox]

--- which could be indicative of opportunism, except that his play to date has been a bit frustrating and his jittering between the two might just be playstyle.

[AurorusVox]

I'm trying to reconcile TF's case about delayed OMGUS with Tasky's obvious frustration at TF in their recent exchange. Could go either way on Tasky atm.

[AurorusVox]

TL;dr version

Kast: aware of history; opportunistic?
Cham: no reasons; looking for ML?
Vi: hard to read
Equi: reasonable vote, scummy play
Tasky: either way

[AurorusVox]

So he can't make cases (i.e. give opinions on why people are scummy)? But he can at the same time accuse me of not giving opinions? And that's acceptable?

[AurorusVox]

Yeah that was the hammer vote Anti. TF voted about half an hour after the VC.

Do

you have a good reason for that? :\

[AurorusVox]

FFFFUUUU I've done a smilie again, HFDHGFD

PreviewNinja: Oh wow...

[AurorusVox]

Chamber: why can't you say

why

you find me scummy? Is it a matter of playstyle pride? Or do you just not have a reason?

[AurorusVox]

Don't think you can judge effort v well usin your method (counting # of posts/mentions?) WRT the post restriction. Do you like rainbow vote count near deadline?

[AurorusVox]

(1) Yes, Equi wasn't getting lynched today and so I put my vote to more use after looking elsewhere.

[AurorusVox]

(2) Until EquiGate, she wasn't that bad. Thought EquiGate was v scummy. Since EquiGate #2, though, she has seemed more town. Would prob stick to Kunk today tbh.

[AurorusVox]

AH: you're assuming a Vi bus?

[AurorusVox]

I don't see why VI wouldn't have just stayed on my wagon if Kunk is his scumbuddy...?

[AurorusVox]

Tasky, what?

Vote: Chamber

Chamber: state a case. IDC if you don't like cases.

Opinions; do I answer Chamber or not?

[AurorusVox]

My problem is that I can't react to Chamber except seeing he's voting me. I want to know why so I can tell if he's scum or not.

[AurorusVox]

V/LA Saturday-Monday

Internet-light tomorrow til Saturday; Monday and Tuesday.

[AurorusVox]

V/LA mostly over! Do people want me to claim my role?

-I need to ISO RF but atm agree w/ AH that people letting him slip rather than deliberate radar-hiding

[AurorusVox]

-Kast was my 2nd pick for scum, and he's where I'd vote if not on Chamber. Question: would people be happy with "no cases" if it was anyone other than him?

[AurorusVox]

Tasky
Equi mentioned bullets + "am I lying?" wifom; plus she was in no lynch danger. I was, moreso, what with L-2 and deadline approaching. And drunk.

[AurorusVox]

Chamber makes sense but I want to clarify the motive:

Are you asking only whether I am cop, or whether I am a PR and what that PR is?

[AurorusVox]

I'll open the question to the rest too.
Do you think cop/not-cop is more useful than a full claim in the event of non-cop pr?

[AurorusVox]

Okay. Well I don't claim cop. Queue Chamber's vengeance.

Unvote

; I'm getting over Chamber's playstyle now. Looking closer at Kast.

[AurorusVox]

But I've just had three people say claim cop/not-cop. Do you think any of them are scum for wanting to out it in that form?

[AurorusVox]

Kast's D2 > his D1. He's not looking as scummy any more.

[AurorusVox]

Is this paranoid: TF defended me v. well yesterday b/c he saw I was struggling, yet

knows

I'm town; thus gaining town-cred if I get lynched or killed?

[AurorusVox]

Tas
-Full-claim for L-1 only. Softclaiming

W/O REASON

was scumtell imo (obv wrong re: Equi)
-If I'd not been drunkposting, would've been more careful with post.

[AurorusVox]

Struggling to get any good reads in this game. /sigh

Will re-read when I have more time later.

[AurorusVox]

Hero: do you think lurking is a scumtell?

[AurorusVox]

Herod: I've seen town lurk just as much as scum, so I don't treat it as a scumtell. But I can't deny your second point.

[AurorusVox]

I actually like Herod's lynchlist (not just because it has me at the bottom lol). Though I'd personally bump T up a bit.

[AurorusVox]

Vote: Chamber

Done nothing since pushing for cop/non-cop. Made sense when he said WHY he wanted to know, but the lack of anything since is bad.

[AurorusVox]

Chamber: thanks for introducing WIFOM. Now, scum can leave me alive to get you (and others) to wagon me later. (1/2)

[AurorusVox]

I believe that as scum

you

will now leave me alive for this reason.
Also: Latest vote count has Kast at 1 vote. Why so cautious about voting him? (2/2)

[AurorusVox]

Kast: who else are you suspicious of other than me?

[AurorusVox]

/embarrassed

It is very clear. Is your Vi-scumread based on me being scum?

[AurorusVox]

@Kast, gotcha. Kasts' reasoning and explanation seems to hold under pressure and questions. His D2 has definite townievibes imo.

[AurorusVox]

Why fullclaim before L-1?

Vote: RayFrost

(L-1) Lynch all claimed VTs.

[AurorusVox]

What's this business about checking your Role PM? Are you saying that you didn't check before posting/going into N1?

[AurorusVox]

Leaving claimed VTs alive helps scum because (a) VT is the easiest least risky fakeclaim and (b) claimed VTs increase the chance of scum hitting PRs with the NK

[AurorusVox]

Tasky: my reasons are right there, in the post before yours.

[AurorusVox]

My reply to Tasky was pointing to a previous post. I've not avoided answering because my answer was already there when Tasky asked the question.

[AurorusVox]

Herpa derpa, that question was asked after my last post before this set (shocker: I left to do something else for a while). Keep your knickers on I'm answering it now.

[AurorusVox]

@T: I thought saying "Lynch all claimed VTs" when I posted made it clear that that was why I voted for RF? I'm not sure if he's scum, but leaving him alive helps scum.

[AurorusVox]

That said, a scumpoint for RF is that VT is an easy, risk-free scum fakeclaim (haven't I said this already?) (TBC)

[AurorusVox]

...and in my experience (albeit mostly on another site), scum are eager to claim it (i.e. before L-1)

[AurorusVox]

I agree that it's less common when scum are at L-1, but my point is that RF wasn't. I think fakeVT is more commonly claimed prematurely than fakePRs. (TBC)

[AurorusVox]

I'm also not saying that it's a solid scumtell. But it's something to consider alongside the disadvantages of

not

lynching RF at this point.

[AurorusVox]

Vi: RF not getting NK'd is the problem with

not

lynching him. If he's town and we leave him alive, scum now know he's not a PR = smaller pool of NK targets to hit PRs.

[AurorusVox]

RF - how hard is it to understand? Leaving you alive means that scum can select from a smaller pool of NK targets in the hope of hitting a PR.

[AurorusVox]

I posited a reason behind my vote

in the event

that you are town. I've said it in this way multiple times before but you weren't listening.

[AurorusVox]

T: I don't know. My policy vote has benefits in either event. I'd revote Chamber if he was a viable lynch since scumlynch>maybe scum policy lynch. Otherwise...

[AurorusVox]

Ray: Frame it how you want. It's advocating your lynch because you could be scum, and even if you're not, there's still an upside as opposed to not lynching you

[AurorusVox]

Yes, it does. Assume 3 scum, and arbitrarily assume 3 PRs. Tonight;

-You alive: 6 townies; 3/5 PRs; 60% chance
-You dead: 6 townies; 3/6 PRs; 50% chance.

[AurorusVox]

10 - the lynched player = 9 - 3 scum = 6 townies: that's the worst case scenario but I'm being cautious (1/4)

[AurorusVox]

Obviously scumlynch > policy lynch, but I'm not really solid on anyone, except Chamber. Even that's not ultra-solid.*

*I got ninja'd about this d'oh. (2/4)

[AurorusVox]

In specific reference to your ninja question: I don't think Chamber will get lynched today based on other people's responses to him so far. (3/4)

[AurorusVox]

@Herod; no, there's 100% chance of them finding one to kill, it's whether they try to or not. I'll have to think on how that affects %s (4/4)

[AurorusVox]

Herod's Lynch EV thing sums up my thoughts (5/4...whoops)

[AurorusVox]

I have been trying, but it's not been getting anywhere. My case remains in my ISO.

[AurorusVox]

Chamber, why are you avoiding answering questions yourself?
"Latest vote count [had] Kast at 1 vote. Why so cautious about voting him?"

[AurorusVox]

Ray: I don't have any amazing case on you beyond my perhaps misguided point about the early claim (1/7)

[AurorusVox]

(to add to this there might be some wild theory about how scum feel pressured sooner than town because they know that the town are on the right tracks) (2/7)

[AurorusVox]

Alas, I'm very wordy. I build most of my cases on what people say and, more specifically, how they say it and how it relates to what else they've said; (3/7)

[AurorusVox]

but here I feel like my ability do do that is limited. To me it seems like my focus is more on other things, like claims and when they come in. (4/7)

[AurorusVox]

I don't really know if my ideas about these things are correct or not because I don't normally have to rely on them. (5/7)

[AurorusVox]

I've got maybe one town-read, one scum-read, and the rest is a big grey haze of uncertainty that ebbs and flows with these other things. (6/7)

[AurorusVox]

You're in that grey haze, but I'd rather lynch you than any of the others because of your early and VT claim. (7/7)

[AurorusVox]

Chamber: I have you as a scumread; everyone else as grey in varying degrees of fluidity, and one townread that is

not

the last person on Herod's list.

[AurorusVox]

Are we talking how likely you are to be scum or how sure I am that you're scum?

[AurorusVox]

I figured you meant "how sure" but the 25/75 threw me. "How sure" takes 50% as a base - so I'd put you at around 75%, and RF at around 55%.

[AurorusVox]

I'd rather get you lynched for that reason, but peoples' response about you so far has been that it's simply your playstyle and that I won't get anywhere.

[AurorusVox]

I'm treating 50% as in 50/50 as in "not sure" as in either way...?

[AurorusVox]

But if it's a sliding scale of my opinion, with 0% being confirmed town and 100% being confirmed scum, isn't 50% naturally the place to put the "I don't know" marker?

[AurorusVox]

25% is the place to put it if we're talking about how "likely" it is, but not for opinions, which is why I asked for clarification :S

[AurorusVox]

So in your terms, it's between 25-75% that people are placed? RF at 30%, you at 55%. I prefer my first one since that's the one I can conceptualise better.

[AurorusVox]

Fonz: I support it when it happens, which is mostly on another site (EpicMafia). It's chat based, so no history to link you to.

[AurorusVox]

On this site, I've used a claimed VT to my advantage as scum in this game; scroll down to ThePerson and you'll see me mention that.

[AurorusVox]

Followed through with it here too against someone who claimed Vengeful Townie then retracted it (focus on preventing the outing of PRs with alternative wagons).

Removed link. ~~NS

[AurorusVox]

^was town in that game. Plus it's an issue that has been raised in an on-going game (twice).

[AurorusVox]

I assumed it would be okay because I wasn't alive in it anymore? :S

[AurorusVox]

Tasky: I see where you're going with this and I'm going to stop you right there. Asking for clarification does not involve judgement.

[AurorusVox]

I simply needed to see what his motives were. In fact in the link that I posted, I made it clear that I supported LACVT purely on a VT claim basis anyway.

[AurorusVox]

As for the question: I'm voting him mostly for LACVT on the basis of the claim, and also because the claim came early (somewhat suspicious).

[AurorusVox]

FtF, what do you make of Chamber's lack of explanation of his vote?

[AurorusVox]

Actually, this addresses "why not kast with just one vote?", not "why RF to L-2?"

[AurorusVox]

You ONLY talk about kast in that post. Herod and TF's questions emphasised "why RF" rather than "why not Kast"

[AurorusVox]

So you don't accept that votes indicate suspicion? Or that Herod's list (with RF @2nd) didn't indicate suspicion?

[AurorusVox]

My point was about this post, especially the use of the word "than" which suggests that the two things (votes and suspicions) are contrasted, i.e. not the same.

[AurorusVox]

RE: the linked post, I think you're putting a lot of emphasis on the word "sinister" which at first seemed to be a throwaway comment. Makes sense

if

emphasised.

[AurorusVox]

BUT, IMO, if you think Kast is scum, the suspicion-but-lack-of-vote is likelier to indicate scum distancing themselves from their buddy.

[AurorusVox]

You'd only be worried people are preparing to switch to him as a mislynch if you think he's town. Which you didn't think before. Cause and effect look wrong.

[AurorusVox]

And so I presume "stated suspicions" is shorthand for "stated suspicion without votes", which still doesn't address 1900/1901.

[AurorusVox]

Chamber: Vi asked this but you never answered; is she scum in connection with me?

[AurorusVox]

Chamber: why does Vi look connected to me, but TF does not?

[AurorusVox]

Herod: I'm not the one you need to be asking. As it stands, it looks like the lynch is pretty much between AH and RF.

[AurorusVox]

I agree this is a bad thing. Leave AH for RF only. As it was before mod extension talk, AFAYK there was no timeframe for viable lynch.

@Mod: extension yesplz.

[AurorusVox]

^RF: isn't that always the case?
/holds breath for deadline news

[AurorusVox]

IMO TF has defended me a lot more than Vi has. I even got paranoid about it.

[AurorusVox]

Its a bit more complicated than that, but w/e, I like that you didn't let him answer first (Y)

[AurorusVox]

Vi
I was thinking long-term beyond tonight + still suspicious of Chamber's "If you're still alive you're scum" painting me as an easy mislynch if I don't die

[AurorusVox]

The frame of it was that you expect mafia to kill me if I'm town; therefore if I don't die you expect I'm scum.

[AurorusVox]

The AH wagon has pretty much disintegrated. Obviously the people on it weren't that committed to his lynch?

[AurorusVox]

Deadline is today so no one else is really viable. If you think both are town, RF lynch > WW lynch > No lynch.

[AurorusVox]

Town-read unclaimed potential PR > Town-read claimed VT?

[AurorusVox]

What's the benefit of massclaim vs no lynch? This is the first time I've been in massclaim at lylo...! And Herod - what does a vig have to do with anything?

[AurorusVox]

Sorry question was for RF. Just woken up, was posting before going out /embarassed