Mini 380: Artifacts- Game over

[Nai]

Right... And FOS and a Vote on me. Fantastic.

Vote: Coron

for an obvious scum tactic of throwing suscpicion on people for an FOS and... Well, nothing.

[Nai]

I'm enjoying my vote on Coron, to let you know. Especially with that slip.

[Nai]

I think Coron should probably start claiming right about now.

[Nai]

My main argument is that he's far too sure of himself, and I really don't see, in any way, how he can be like that. I mean, I can see how it would be a joke to begin with that he calls me and Nightfall scum buddies (me included ONLY because Nightfall voted for me), but he hasn't let it go. That suggests to me that he has some sort of outside information here. And there's no way he would have given an item so broken as to say "You have a one-shot chance to find a scum and all his buddies", or any such thing. To hold onto a belief is playing like Fritzler, and I find that Fritz is often wrong. So...

[Nai]

I hadn't paid much attention. But that's a further point against him.

[Nai]

Well, we've lost two pages of actions, reactions, and other things to fall back on.

[Nai]

Pre-crash, Jules was voting me.

[Nai]

Apparently, my not posting because I have nothing to say means I'm scum?

[Nai]

So... What you're saying is, you don't remember why you were voting for me, but you feel that a vote for me period is better than not, because 'putting on pressure' is better than voting for a good reason?

[Nai]

You could still at least say something.

[Nai]

EBWODP: At least by saying something to us, it doesn't look like you're just piling on a vote just for the hell of it. You earlier said you weren't voting for me because you couldn't remember why you were voting for me before. I assume you remembered, and, as such, you should say so. Otherwise, it's just putting a vote there.

[Nai]

Welcome back to Mafiascum, really. Glad we didn't lose anything.

[Nai]

Hey, Norinel, you've got a problem in that vote count. Jules IS voting, and he's voting for me.

I can't remember the reasons that Jules used to vote me during the first crash, but I remember it had something to do with my votes on Coron. He didn't l9ike that I was voting for him so adamantly, or something.

[Nai]

Actually, his exact wording was:

FOS Nai - I can't remember the reasons for voting you before and I think it would be unfair to vote without any evidence, but I know you looked suspicious

He says the he doesn't want to vote me without evidence. Then, without evidence, he procedes to vote me. Then he votes me, but only to put pressure on me. There is no more evidence that he gives, it's just a pressure vote.

Coron, it REALLY looks like you are trying to defend Jules right now.

[Nai]

I remember being told, several times, that you should never defend someone unless you are absolutely sure of their role. If they're scum, and you're town, you'll be lynched. If you're scum, you know they're town, and you'll probably be lynched. I can't see a reason you would defend him unless you know something we don't.

[Nai]

I'm just working off of the advice I was given a long time ago when I started playing. Whenever I have tried defending someone off a hunch, I always get votes on me. I don't see why Coron is able to pull the same stunt and doesn't get the heat. Especially when he defends Jules with craplogic.

FOS: HackerHuck

for his post right there. FOSing me after I actually give evidence that Coron defended Jules with craplogic? Amazing.

[Nai]

Mine isn't craplogic, that's the difference. The first quoted statement is me FoSing you, since you seem to find me suspicious since I find Coron's defending of Jules suspicious, which you 'note', which seems to mean in this site that "I've got my eye on you", in other words, FoS.

As well, I'm also making a statement on how I was taught to play. I don't know exactly how you can force craplogic out of that, but...

[Nai]

"Craplogic" is, by definition, "false logic". There is no false logic, to me, that defending someone implies you have information about them. Mafia is not a game of trusting others and making aliances. As I've seen since playing, you don't just trust someone to be down and get your back, and thus get their back as well. It's a perfect way of getting yourself lynched because you backed mafia.

And, Hacker, you don't seem to be 'defending' anyone. I don't think agreeing with someone is the same as defending them. DEFENDING is arguing against another person to help someone in a predicament. This is especially prevalent with how Coron was defending Jules' vote, with complete and utter lies, not only misquoting the guy but doing so in such a way that made it seem there was actually substance behind the vote. AGREEING with someone isn't defending anyone, or helping save anyone from a lynch, in most cases. Its just admitting someone has a point that makes sense. This is what you have been doing.

[Nai]

Hacker, he didn't state it as an opinion. That's the problem I have with that statement about Jules' vote. He states it as if its Jules reasoning for the vote, NOT as his own opinion why Jules placed the vote. The fact he got it COMPLETELY wrong from how Jules had ALREADY explained it is very suspicious.

You might be right. My suspicion of Coron might be affecting how I see his game. Then again, he might be scum and I'm the only one seeing it.

And when I said you were agreeing with him, that was choosing the lesser of two evils between 'agreeing' and 'defending'. If you want to go down on the record as defending the guy instead of just agreeing with him, all the more power to ya. But if he comes out scum, you'll be the first guy I vote after.

[Nai]

I'm saying both, Hacker. I'm saying that he's falsely recording what Jules' intent was to get Jules off the hook, which is both misrepresenting him AND defending him. And since he's defending Jules with a lie, it's even worse, making stuff up to save the guy. You see what I mean? I'm saying he's both misrepresenting AND defending Jules.

[Nai]

But it's not your vote. The man in question, Jules, had already explained his vote: That he had nothing else and was just putting pressure on me. Post 79, his post:

I put FOS in all my games on the person I had voted on because all the evidence was lost. We're not going to get anywhere if we don't start putting pressure on again though so I the vote went on

Whereas you, Coron, say THIS to reason his vote:

Um, it's perfectly reasonable imho. He says "I remember I was voting him, I probably had a good reason FoS" Then he comes back later does a reread to decide what the best lead is and votes

It looks like you're trying to pull stuff out of your rear end.

Your post doesn't imply anything. You specifically say that it was his best lead, whereas he says it was just to put pressure. YOU come out with a random reason. Nowhere in his post, nor in the subsequent posts (I'm dizzy and woozy off of meds, so I'm not doing a full re-read right now), does he say it was because of a re-read that he put his vote back on. It was only because he had an FoS on me and wanted to put pressure on.

I don't think it's my "prerogative" that your reasoning is wrong: It's wrong because it's not what the actual voter said.

[Nai]

I see you as scummy, and I'm finding more reasons for other people to vote you that go on with your scummyness. It may seem that I"m grasping at straws, but I'm seeing you as scummy, and trying to convince the town that you are. Unfortunately, its not working well. Also unfortunately, NOTHING else is going on in this game, and its the only lead I have.

[Nai]

If you're town and their not, and you defend them and they end up scum, chances are you'll be lynched for defending them. That's the reason I've been told not to defend someone unless you know their role. If you're a town, you shouldn't defend someone unless you know their town. If you're scum, you can defend just about anyone, since you know they WON'T be scum. That's why I tend to be on the offensive with anyone that defends another person: Either they are town that know what they are defending (unlikely on day 1), or they're scum that know they are in the clear. See the logic?

[Nai]

But, y'know, it doesn't LOOK like a dildo, and Stevie is pre-puberty, so I don't think he could enjoy it anyways. Sick pedophile!

[Nai]

And I'm here, post second crash.

[Nai]

It's funny that HE can say something like that, and he doesn't seem to get nailed. Whereas I give reasons why I think he should be lynched, and everyone gets on my butt about it.

[Nai]

Is it wrong to find it suspicious that you can't recap this? I think a lot of it was also lost in the crash, which would be nice to have again.

[Nai]

EBWODP: I mean, honestly, if you don't recap your arguments, I can't defend myself. And I can't think of any reason a townie wouldn't want to make sure his target isn't a townie.

[Nai]

I know that a lot of conversation was lost in the first crash, and much of that was between me and you. So no, I can't read the lost posts.

[Nai]

My biggest reason? Being completely overconfident in himself with absolutely no reason to be so, probably, followed by defending Jules with a made up story.

[Nai]

Well, there's also this other small thing. See, you built an entire case against me off of absolutely nothing (i.e., the reaction I made to your post in the beginning), and then have been subsequently adding things to it as if they make your argument any more valid. You made stuff up to begin with, and are adding things to it to make it seem like more than a house of cards.

I'm just voting you because you're doing that, and have been doing that, and your overconfidence about absolutely nothing is part of that.

[Nai]

First of all, I have absolutely no idea how you are counting posts here.

Second of all, you didn't even random vote ME in your first post. You built a case off of me by the reaction of mine (a humorous reaction) off of an FOS onto me.

And by post 15 of yours, or of anyones, it's probably time to stop random voting. Any vote at that point is not random.

So you based your case off of a humored reaction from me following your FOS, and have been adding crap to it ever since to make a case. And you can't even cite the correct posts.

So yeah. I see a problem with this.

I also see a problem with the fact that Coron and I are the only ones posting any content whatsoever, and the rest of the game is lurking.

[Nai]

Let me clarify, Coron, since I didn't think it was that hard to understand:

1. You attack Nightfall, FoSing me.
2. You turn the attack on me for no reason.
3. You act as if the aforementioned lack of reason HAS a reason behind it.
4. Then you start finding things that you don't like about my playstyle and add it to your nonexistent argument, making it seem valid.

Better? You built a house of cards, then you taped it up with a lot of arguments that mean nothing in and of themselves, but added to your original (lack of) framework, they seem like they build up to something.

I've just been attacking you for this. All of my arguments have been on one or more of these nothing arguments, and I've just realized (this page) exactly what you are doing.

As for Perfect and Luna... Luna was pinging me a little bit, though I'm not sure why (six posts). Perfect... I have no idea, since he's not contributed to the game at all. That sort of suggests to me that he's had real life commitments. With the search function down, and me being lazy, I can't tell if he's lurking or not. I'd assume commitments, though.

[Nai]

So wait... Let me get this straight. Let's reiterate what my original post was, in response to your 'accusation' of me being Nightfall's scum partner.

Right... And FOS and a Vote on me. Fantastic.

Vote: Coron for an obvious scum tactic of throwing suscpicion on people for an FOS and... Well, nothing.

So... This is a reaction that buries the needle on your scumdar. Right...

So my OMGUS vote against your "Nai is Nightfall's Partner" is a solid reason to vote for me? There's absolutely nothing flimsy about it? An OMGUS is a tried and tested scum tell which automatically makes someone scum? WOW! I wish I knew that! I would have caught so many scum!

Everything that has followed SINCE your vote has just been you piling on 'tells' that, alone, mean absolutely nothing and, together, STILL mean absolutely nothing. The only thing holding them together, and making them seem odd at all, is your vote with that unshakable, and utterly useless, confidence behind it.

[Nai]

My case on him has been built on the fact that he is overconfident, and his building a case off of nothing is part of that.

It's worth noting that, when Coron was defending Jules before, Jules is defending him now.

[Nai]

Well, let me continue backing it up, then. If you look at the posts between me and you, this is the gist for the first 2-3 pages.

Coron: Votes Nightfall, calls Nai scumbuddy.

Nai: OMGUS vote on Coron.

Coron: "3 scum" slip.

Nai: Confirm vote Coron. Later, at Lynch -1, ask for claim.

Coron: Refuse to claim.

Nai: Phrase argument ("Too sure of himself, must have outside info").

Coron: "Bury the needle" post, Vote: Nai.


Did I miss anything?

[Nai]

My case on him has been built on the fact that he is overconfident, and his building a case off of nothing is part of that.

It's worth noting that, when Coron was defending Jules before, Jules is defending him now.

I'm not defending him. I'm pointing out that you accuse coron of building his case against you out of absolutely nothing when you did the same yourself

You seem to be defending him. I say that because you are attacking my argument which is attacking him. It further seems like defense because he defended you a few pages ago, and it seems like scum returning the favor. Considering the way you've been playing, Jules, up to this point, I'd not hesitate to put my vote on you.

However, I still find Coron to be scummy beyond belief. It may be correct that this is town (me) vs. town, but it doesn't seem like it.

[Nai]

The only reason I say he has more information is that he acts as if he has some sort of irrefutable knowledge that I am scum. That's how he's been playing the entire game, and there's an issue with that if he doesn't have the knowledge. For all I know (since this isn't an open set-up), he could be a paranoid/crazy cop that got a wrong answer. Also for all I know, he could be scum trying to get a townie lynched and playing like that. But it LOOKED like he has outside info. Lately, it looks like he's just trying to shore up a bad argument, but it started as if he was a bad cop role/scum going too hard at it.

Well, of course. I did have something to base my reasoning off of, at that point in the game THERE WAS NOTHING BETTER TO BASE MY VOTE OFF OF. Completely random off the wall speculation.

People always are telling me to explain my vote, so I did, I walked you through my thought process.

Let me paraphrase: "I based my reasoning on a random vote." That's pretty much what that seems to be saying. It also seems to be saying that on page 9, that's the reason you still have your vote on me.

[Nai]

Interesting how Nai no longer has anything to say...

OMG! Le gasp! Nai actually has a life outside of this game! There's also been a part that I didn't have much to post on so far, though I'm catching up now. Way to jump on a two day absence as if it actually means something.

Nai - he's looking worse in his argument with Coron, IMO, but I could see his play coming from a townie as well. I'd appreciate it if he voiced his opinion on someone other than Coron.

I generally go after one person that I have a feel on until either someone else is lynched, or until that person is lynched, then either stay with them the next day or, when circumstances make need, change my vote.

However, I do tend to voice on other people when asked, and I'll do so now:

The people I think scummiest in this game are as follows:

Coron - For the aforementioned (read; entire argument against him) reasons. As well, he just keeps acting as if no argument can possibly affect him, that he'll be town even when he's scum, that sort of deal.

Jules - He's been playing for Coron most of the game. He's also shown that he's vote-hopped, as well as trying to (in the quoted post at the top of this post) throw suspicion on me for nothing. He has also deliberately defended Coron, after Coron defended him.

Hackerhuck - Not as much of a vibe from him, though he seems to be on Coron's side, and has said a few words for Coron. However, I'd believe he's just a town. I needed a third person on this list, though, since I'm assuming there's a 3 person mafia (given the game size).

Elsewise, there's not much for me to include on. The game, now that a lot of other people are involved, seems to have, against all reason, slowed down. Instead of arguments for scum, we've gone from rushing rapids of rapid accusations and defenses to a Mississippi of a discussion. Odd.

[Nai]

Yeah, I set myself up for that, and I knew he was going to do it. I said it anyways, since that seems most likely in a game this size. I don't think I've played a 12 person game yet that didn't have a 3 person mafia. I think there MIGHT have been one with 2 2-person scum groups, but I don't think that should count, given the set-up.

As for how he's been batting for your team? Really simple. He's sided with you this entire game. His vote has rarely left me. He, very early, voted for you, which might have been a newbie-style (since, I'm not sure, but I think he's a newbie) distancing tactic. After that vote, he's basically argued against me (when he posts anything but "I'm here"), argued for Coron, voted me, and that's just about it. There were a few votes, if I remember correctly, of him voting for someone that was arguing against Coron.

So, basically, he's been playing like he's your bodyguard the entire time, and you threw him a bone once or twice.

[Nai]

I call the initial bit of changing votes between me and Coron vote hopping, thank you very much. I also recall, during the crash, that you HAD changed your vote to someone else before returning to me. Can't remember who at the moment, and we can't check, unfortunately. I never said that you CONTINUED to vote hop. Just that you did, which implies at least once, which is the case.

And I'm not arguing with you at all, and that wasn't the intention. I was first asked my opinion on other players, which I gave. Then I was asked by Coron how you were playing on his team, and I gave answers to that, too. Who's arguing with you?

And no, I'm not saying only one can argue against me. But you weren't doing that. You were jumping in front of an argument against Coron and defending him. Not arguing against me, just defending Coron. There IS a difference.

And the phrase "if I remember correctly" was used because I can't get the posts anymore, due to the crash. Much of my statements against you can be found in posts you've made. The only thing I can't show is that second time you vote hopped on another person, which was pre-crash.

You seem to be trying to discredit my arguments by attacking ME, not my arguments, which is known as an 'ad hominem', which is a fallacy itself. That's nice and all, but if you can't make a good argument, just don't, hmm?

[Nai]

Just had a reread. I find it slightly ironic how you can come out with this Nai...

Well, there's also this other small thing. See, you built an entire case against me off of absolutely nothing (i.e., the reaction I made to your post in the beginning), and then have been subsequently adding things to it as if they make your argument any more valid. You made stuff up to begin with, and are adding things to it to make it seem like more than a house of cards.

I'm just voting you because you're doing that, and have been doing that, and your overconfidence about absolutely nothing is part of that.

...when you've built up your case against Coron in exactly the same way. Your biggest reason for voting for him is because he is being overconfident haha

My biggest reason? Being completely overconfident in himself with absolutely no reason to be so, probably, followed by defending Jules with a made up story.

That would be the defense in question. It would have really been an 'under the radar' thing if Coron hadn't defended you a page or so earlier in the thread. I didn't bring up the vote hopping earlier because I was busy with Coron, and wasn't sparing much of a mind for you. Really, you didn't seem much of an issue until the defenses between you and Coron, at which point it started to seem like you two were pitch hitting for each other, intercepting each other's pitches.

[Nai]

"Ad hominem" refers to attacking the person. As far as I'm aware, being me, being the person making these arguments, I've attacked your playstyle, your actions, etc. Not you. Care to continue?

[Nai]

You made this bit up aswell. I've never voted for anyone apart from you and Coron. Worrying how you claim to be townie and yet you use phrases like "if I remember correctly", when if this is the case, you obviously have the memory of a goldfish. Looks more like a contortion of facts however

It's not necessarily attacking the character of the person. It's just attacking the person to make their points seem invalid, instead of defending against the points themselves. "Why should we go to a marriage counseling with a priest; what does a priest know about marriage?" is not attacking the character of the priest, but his qualifications. That's how the ad hominem works. (I took an extended set of classes on fallacies.)

Jules was saying that, for instance, that since I can't pull up the missing posts, it must be my memory that's the problem. He also says that my arguments are just made up, for the same reason. As well, the "base your argument on fact" is not targeting the argument. It targets my ability as a debater and a player, saying that I don't base my arguments on fact.

[Nai]

I agree with the thought of new scum here. He is a new player here, with three games (that I saw) under his belt. I did not check to see if his games had him as scum or not. So I would agree with the "new scum" title applied to him in this case. That was the assumption that I was making about him, too.

[Nai]

I'm probably going to change my vote, soon, to Jules and save Coron for... Well, I think that'll depend on how Jules shows up. Coron is seeming less scummy in my eyes, since the end of our heated debate (with no one else posting), and Jules is seeming more and more like the best bet. However, I don't want to put him at lynch -1 without giving him a chance to respond and/or claim, preferably the latter.

And, Coron, it doesn't matter if he gave reason for attacking me. The "what does a priest know about marriage?" bit is an ad hominem, but it's a logical question, since a priest probably never got married. However, it's an attack on the person, trying to remove the support from their argument by making the person seem unfit to give that argument. And that's what he was doing by 'memory of a goldfish', and THEN, when I said that it was posts lost in the crash, his tune changed.

[Nai]

It seemed mostly like evasion, since he didn't really answer any of my accusations in that post, just accused me of making it up. Later on, he semi answered the accusations, though there wasn't really much of anything there.

[Nai]

Coron, you're dancing around the issue. The vote hop during the crash wasn't the ONLY thing I accused him of. But, from my posts, he only responded to one thing in his first response, passing off all others as made up. The only thing I can't quote posts from is the bit about vote hopping the second time.

It's also not that he didn't remember. He actively denied that it ever happened. Then he gave a slight nod to the fact that it COULD have happened, later.

[Nai]

That's fine. But the issue is not whether we'll take it in-game or not. The issue is that he actively denied, then said 'maybe'. It's being wishy-washy about it, in addition to trying to evade my statements about him. He's been trying to discredit the statements BEFORE responding to them.

[Nai]

I'm not trying to pull you at all. We were talking about the definition of ad hominem, I was saying how it was, and explaining, and then you said that he shouldn't have to defend something that supposedly didn't happen. You started that little bit there.

[Nai]

I'm not getting into another argument with you, though you seem to want to be in these arguments.

[Nai]

I think that, at lynch -1, you should probably be claiming right now. So yeah, I'm requesting a claim.

[Nai]

However, from that sprung the Coron Nai debate. I placed FOS's in all my games.

I'm sorry to tell you, man, since you seem to think you were all important here, but you had nothing to do with the debate between me and Coron. I completely ignored your vote or all purposes EXCEPT noting it that, for some reason, you applied your vote there.

A slight deviation, and I want everyone to keep this very important point in mind: Jules was, very easily, remembering that he had a vote on me. However, it completely slipped his mind that he voted ANYONE ELSE during that time.

If/when I get lynched, I would appeal to the town to look closely at GreenLiquid the lurker aswell as Zindaras

You look like you are grasping at straws now. All your arguments are falling through, since most of them are illogical, so now you are trying to put a legacy in to get other people lynched. Amazing.

[Nai]

Actually, no, that's not an ad hominem, kthnxbai. That's me telling you that me attacking Coron had absolutely nothing to do with you. You really aren't that important in terms of that debate. Yours was just a vote, which I didn't care about because, hey, it was vote 2 on me and we need 7 to lynch.

[Nai]

Could you tell us what it does, instead of just a name? That would help a hell of a lot. And what do you mean it can't answer directly. I can't answer YOU directly? Or it can't answer direct questions?

As well, that wasn't the start of the debate. That was well into it, when I added on Coron's defending of you using a crappy excuse that didn't hold up.

[Nai]

That's odd... We have 11 people, we should have 7 to lynch. Regardless, when his vote came on, I was lynch -4, so I wasn't particularly concerned.

[Nai]

Huh. Why does my head tell me that most games I've played in have 7 as the majority at 11? My head hurts...

[Nai]

I'm against this claim as well. There's no reason to do this on day 1. I especially would like the Mouth to stay silent. There's no guarantee the mouth is one 'use', or even how it works. It's like a cop role, and should be silent until there's something to say.

[Nai]

You mean the Ear? There's no mention of 'must be passed on' in the general rules.

[Nai]

I'm going to take it literally and say that "You may" means "You may", as in "If you want to." I don't think there is a requirement to pass the thing on after use. However, I'll wait for the mod to talk first.

[Nai]

I think the slip Jules found is absolutely fantastic.

[Nai]

He actually did say why. Because if the owner of the Mouth is killed, the Mouth is gone, and no one can use it.

[Nai]

So what you are saying is, it would be better to out the mouth and then have him subsequently probably killed, on the off chance the scum have it and are using it to their advantage? (A, what, 3-ish in 12 chance?)

[Nai]

SL: Where do you see that this isn't the case? Why do you think that either A. The item wouldn't be lost (which was confirmed by the mod) or B. The scum wouldn't kill it if it was town? It's like having a cop the scum doesn't kill. Rarely happens.

And what do you mean the role would mislead the town? Where do you get THAT?

[Nai]

And I don't think the way you are suggesting, SL, is how it works. I think you ask the ear a question, and then the mouth tells you. I don't see how it would be that the person with the mouth gets the question and then answers, because who gets that answer? We've already gone over the fact that the Ear doesn't get answers. Directly, at least.

[Nai]

So that everyone is aware, I'm moving over the next few days (yes, including Christmas) and a few days after. If truly needed, I would accept replacement. But, seeing the speed of this game, I don't expect I'll be missing for TOO long.

[Nai]

Sorry about my absence, folks. I moved into my new house the Friday before Christmas and haven't been able to get internet before last Thursday, but I wasn't sure if I was replaced or no. Just got a message back from Norinel, and I'm back. Now, reading over what I missed:

In response to Green Liquid: Nope, that post wasn't a joke. He was at lynch -1 at the time. That's about the time I expect people to claim, so that they aren't lynched without it.

On the topic of Luna: I didn't find her to be that suspicious in the beginning, but now that you throw light on it again, her actions do seem kinda off. But as I was focusing on Coron the entire time, I didn't pay much attention to it. She does seem scummy, but that might tip either way depending on today's death.

On to Green Liquid disecting my posts: Yes, it wasn't the best grounds for the argument. However, from how he was playing, he was just seeming way too sure of what's going on. To me, that either says cop that knows something, or scum that knows the other person is down. I thought the latter more than the former, obviously. No, he didn't talk about the 'connection' between me and Nightfall for more than one post. However, his entire argument was built up from that. He votes for Nightfall, calling me scumbuddy. I react with an OMGUS vote, and a few posts, then he decides that's plenty to base HIS argument on. If you're going to vivisect my post, do his too. There's no reason to respond to the rest of this.

Continuing with Green Liquid: Yes, I continue to assume that Coron has outside information. But, if I remember correctly, he's the only one I have accused of that. No one else. The reason I think that is because that's the only explanation that can possibly justify his playstyle this game. It may be true that what I was taught is wrong. I'll give you that. But it's better than working off of nothing. If someone acts beyond all possible thought, then I'll assume they know something I don't.

And to even further continue on the advice I was given: I was not referring to someone else attacking stupid logic. I was referring to actual defense of the other person. As in, not "Your argument sucks and shouldn't be bothered with", but "This argument IS valid, but here are the reasons I know it can't be true." There has to be a reason for the latter one. And on day 1, at the very least, the logic I put forth holds true. How can you deny that?

Appeal to Emotion: Not really. Appeal to intelligent thinking is what I was going for. If you attack one person for a specific type of statement, there's no reason not to do the same to another person if they make the same type of statement.

Random Vote: Wow, I'm making a lot of responses to your posts. In any case, yes, his initial vote there was a random vote. However, my following vote (that he calls my 'reaction' to him) was an OMGUS vote. "Oh-my-god-you-suck". How is that a reaction to build a case off of? Again, if you want to make a case on me, do the same to the other guy when he does the same type of things.

Post Numbers: Coron was, apparently, referring to his own posts at this point, not total posts. I had thought he was referring to actual posts here, and couldn't figure out where he was getting his post numbers from. Way to pay attention to the posts.

Classic Scumtells and CrapLogic: Well, I think that, a few posts before this big PBPA of yours, people were actually saying that X attacking Y, and Z attacking X, isn't exactly right. And no, I wouldn't hesitate to put my vote on him. But, amazingly enough, I had my vote on someone else at the time (who I still have my vote on) that I thought was scummier. Right, classic scumtell. Do me a favor and actually pay attention to the posts and the situations when you go back.

Outside Info Revisited: You keep on having this complete and utter vehemence against anyone thinking Coron has outside information. Why is that? Every time someone brings up the point, you attack it. Is there some reason you find someone being a cop, or scum, completely impossible?

Coron's "Guilty Conscience" Argument: Or it might be that I'm town thinking that you're scum trying to frame me. Amazing.

"Wise Strategy": Let me rephrase that, though this is way later, and probbly would have been best called out when it actually happened. Rephrasing: "I tend to go after one person the entire day, after I decide they are scummy. I watch for what other people do, and make notes. Then, the next day, depending on what the lynch brought, I'll either continue my case on the first person, or go onto the next scummiest person." In other words, I watch just one person, because I find that changing my vote back and forth like some people do makes me forget why I was voting for someone in the first place.

Coron and Jules: Am I correct in thinking that you think this is an actual possibility at this point? I thought you were bashing me, earlier, for making the same statements.

Jules, and his ad hominems: Actually, you did it multiple times. You attacked the person, not the argument, many times. Not just once.

"Haha" argument: He can use it as much as he wants, Jules, adding new thoughts, and using new evidence, each time. Showing it multiple times also helps other people remember it in the future. What's your issue with him showing his hand more than once?

"Cards he isn't showing": This is EXACTLY what I was saying with outside information. But, funnily enough, when I say it I'm using craplogic. When you say it, it seems, it's intelligent?

Artifact Roleclaim: Coron, I'd consider what artifacts you've had, and when, to be a big point of this game. When someone roleclaims, I think that powers they have had (which artifacts fall under) would be part of it. If you are a one shot vig, who used his shot, you are not suddenly a towny with no powers. You are a one shot vig that used it. One is VERY different from the other. As such, Jules' claim is way too out there.

As for suspicions? I'm thinking that Coron is scum, Jules is probably scum. I'm not sure who goes with them, assuming a three person scum. I'm also partly suspicious of Green Liquid for contradicting himself a few times in the PBPA.

[Nai]

Opening Slip: You're right, it wasn't a reason to lynch him. That bandwagon grew way too fast. However, if he's about to be lynched, I'd rather get information on role from him beforehand and know that the guy that put the hammer on KNEW what he was doing, then have a mislynch and no information until the next day.

Implied Vote: What would you rather me do? I mean, really. I had my vote on Coron, a person I prefer my vote on. If I continue to attack Jules, I get asked why I don't put my vote on him. I say I would, and people like you call it a scumtell. I DO vote, and I get attacked for votehopping. I'd rather do it my way.

[Nai]

My argument was that Coron's behavior made no sense UNLESS he had outside information, such as some that scum would have. I highly doubt he's a cop. However, Green Liquid constantly debunked the theory that Coron has any information other than what a normal townie would have, which is why I wrote those two statements.

As for the Jules role claim, "is" should be "was". I was saying how it was scummy when he first claimed without anything attached to the claim, as if he had no artifact.

I also don't want to play guessing games against the mod.

[Nai]

No, I have no restrictions in any aspect of the game. I just haven't been posting/voting, because I'm happy with my vote, and I don't want to make a post with nothing to say. I've basically said all that I can say on the matters.

However, now there's something I CAN contribute: If you guys lynch me, why does suspicion automatically go to Zindaras, and not Coron? Coron is the guy that has been arguing with me, voting for me, etc. He and I are the ones at odds, not me and Zindaras. So how does Zindaras figure in here?

[Nai]

Fake stupidity? How about show my innocence? It's assumed I'm scum, and I want to make sure that you don't stop the town from having a contingency plan for when I show up town. As-is, tomorrow comes, and you can just go "Whoops! My mistake. Now... Let's lynch Zindaras."

[Nai]

I'm currently not sold on Kelly or Zindaras being scum. As far as I can see, there's absolutely jack in the way of lynch-making evidence against either of them.

[Nai]

Well, it seems I'm on the lynching block, and no one is posting. Should I just claim and get it over with?

[Nai]

I'm just a little iffy at the moment, since it was 24 hours between Norinel's post and mine, and there were no posts, and then another hour before yours. I'd like at least a chance here, though, with how people are acting, that doesn't seem likely.

[Nai]

I'll claim now, since it seems like otherwise the game will coast to deadline, since no one else seems willing to actually do anything at this point.

My actual role is a vanilla townie. I have an item called the "Chest of Winds" (since we seem to be able to quote at least that) that is unable to be transfered. Once in the game I can use it. It seems that it's a selective role-block that affects anyone who needs to leave their home/tent/whatever to act. I'm not sure if this means that artifacts need to be close to their targets to work, or if there are actually roles like Cop that get artifacts too.

I had no yet used the Chest of Winds, and I was planning on trying to use it in, say, a Lynch or Lose situation, then night previous, to see if I could block the mafia kill.

[Nai]

EBWODP: I also wasn't using it in case it blocked Cop or Doc roles, if there are any, because the town needs that in a game like this.

[Nai]

It's not a 'block everybody'. The pm basically says that it's a role-block that works globally. But it doesn't work on EVERYONE, supposedly. I guess if you have to leave your tent, it works. Otherwise, nada.

[Nai]

I'm not entirely sure, to be completely truthful. I haven't used it, and it doesn't explain. It just says that it will block some people, but not others. My guess is that it'll block ROLES (which, traditionally, leave the house, thus the 'tracker' role), and that artifacts are probably immune. I can't really think of why an artifact would need to leave the 'house' for its use. Though, I might be wrong on the latter.

[Nai]

I'll paraphrase as closely as I can without being modkilled:

The artifact creates a wicked powerful storm that forces people to stay inside their homes for a single night. This acts as a role-block, though it doesn't affect everyone. And it is too heavy to be transfered.

[Nai]

I really can't understand Coron in that post. Why the hell would I, if I was scum, come up with a claim like this? It would be easier to just claim vanilla or, if I wanted, claim cop/doc and try to out one of them. I don't see the logic in his statement.

[Nai]

Erm... Guys? All artifacts are one-time use for each person. Post 1 says this.

I also don't see why you'd think a mass-role-block would be passable. If it was, either scum or town could put the other side into a complete standstill over and over, if the passes were done right.

[Nai]

I don't think there'd be any point of an artifact that, once used, can't ever be used again, but can be passed around.

[Nai]

I specifically said "For each person". There's also one use wonders. Mine specifically says it's too heavy to pass, since it's supposedly a huge chest.

[Nai]

And that's why I said "for each person". The rules state each person can only use an artifact once. I was responding to something Coron said in the post before, about "Multiuse item he doesn't want to pass".

[Nai]

So, in other words, Coron, there's no possibly scenario in which I could be town with an item that I say I have? Bravo. Trying to shut off any discussion of me possibly being town.

It SHOULDN'T be passable, from a design perspective, because it's a powerful ability. It's a global, yet selective, role-block. Can you see that ability being used more than once in a game that wouldn't unbalance it?

[Nai]

It sure seems like that's what you're trying to say. You continue to post scenarios which only end up in me being scum, and won't seem to recognize any chance of my being town. What would you call that?

[Nai]

Actually, what I SAID was that the role says it 'stops people from going outside'. It doesn't say anything else about who gets blocked. That's all I got.

There is no more to say. That's all the info I have unless I use it, then I can't use it again.

[Nai]

I can put in to use it tonight, if I'm not lynched by then. I'm kinda running out of time here, being on the lynching block. I"m still tied with Hacker, if I recall, and I've been up there the longest.

The only reason I didn't want to use it basically stems from not wanting to interrupt cop investigations/doc protects, if we have those roles.

[Nai]

Ah! You're right, he was. Since Jules was voting for me.

At this point, there's good reasonf rom both sides, to use it or not. I can't really confirm my innocence with it, I'm afraid. I'm not sure who it blocks and, for all I know, it could block only town (which would damn me). However, there's no better time than early, in case of SK or such roles.

[Nai]

I hope you're right about that. I just hope that, if Im' targetted with anything, the roleblock gets off first.

[Nai]

Well, that does mean that I will be blocking a lot of things, then. There's several disadvantages to using it on a predetermined night. It's also quite the WIFOM situation... I'm uneasy being in this particular situation, because it's a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' type of deal here.

[Nai]

Wait... You'd call CTD/SL/Kelly as a scum team, yet you're wanting to lynch me? Very intelligent. Very.

Well, it looks like I'm going to be on the block tomorrow. I'm not sure if I'll be on between now and then to post. So, if I do end up lynched, one message for the town:

Congratulations; you lynched a townie.

[Nai]

There's always the option of 'no lynch', instead of "I don't think either of them are really scum, and I have other people I assume are scum, but I'd rather kill someone I'm not sure about than leave everyone alive."

[Nai]

Wait... Why would we be using the invulnerability item AND my item on the same night? If what the general consensus seems to be is correct, my action would block the mafia kills... So the current owner of HH's item would have just wasted it. What the hell type of suggestion is that?

[Nai]

I DID use my artifact last night. I suppose we now know how it works, though the information is fairly useless at this point.

And now we know of an Eye of the Diviner, which I would assume is something like a rolecop.

[Nai]

Didn't Stewie use a different artifact night 1? I assumed the Ear does standard questions, or perhaps questions about artifacts, while the Eye gives alignment.

And I didn't get any artifacts last night.

[Nai]

I don't see the intelligence in possibility 2. They know I have only one shot, and that it can't be passed. So there was no point in them not trying to get through it. I think we can safely say either I blocked it, or they targetted an unkillable.

[Nai]

And yay, we're back to this. Is there any reason you're still voting for me, Coron? If there is, could you elaborate instead of just voting?

[Nai]

Except for me using the artifact I said I had that stopped all actions?

Speaking of, I might be able to prove something here. Since you would have to pass your artifact anyways: If you had an ability that would warrent a response (cop, roleblock, etc.), did your ability work last night? I'm only looking for a yes or no, no other information.

[Nai]

You somehow, Coron, think that the mafia would get an ability like that?

I'm trying to decide who I find scummy right now. HackerHuck going down as an SK caught me completely by surprise. I hadn't suspected him at all. Right now, I'm in a bit of a null zone.

[Nai]

I started with my Chest, and that's the only item I have had.

[Nai]

I'm still here. I'm just having a hard time figuring out what to do with just lack of info.

[Nai]

Yes, and the majority of it is between you and me, and I don't really have a read on anyone else. Thanks though.

[Nai]

I'm going to reread sometime between tomorrow and Wednesday and see what I can say. I"m really busy with schoolwork lately.

[Nai]

Sorry guys, I'm being pounded by school work right now which all popped up around the last three or four days. I'll get good posts going as soon as I can.

[Nai]

Hrm. I thought it was because he was being prodded, but apparently not. I wonder why...

My guess is that he has some sort of artifact that does something to himself (i.e. double votes) that doesn't require him going outside. Remember, my sandstorm doesn't stop you from using anything that doesn't require leaving the tent.

[Nai]

I have a question, which is rather important. If we have a claimed member (me, Apeiron) who has already claimed what they have done in the past, should we be claiming what artifacts we have recieved since our claim, and what we have done with them?

This one doesn't apply to me today, since I didn't recieve anything, but I think it's something important to note.

[Nai]

Hmm. Maybe... That seems a little less useful for Town to know, especially if you die soon after.

[Nai]

Had a feeling it was a double vote. Do you have to use both votes on the same person?

[Nai]

As far as I'm concerned, a majority of that 35 pages is, more or less, useless filler to this game. At least for the time being, since it concerns people who are, to me, leaning towards town and/or are still alive. I'd only call about 10 of it usefull for this game at this point.

Nightfall didn't actually say anything about the "X of the diviner" yet, did he? I don't recall reading any fabulous revelation.

[Nai]

Right now, I'm really working off gut feelings, since I haven't found any real data that pushes people one way or another. This is my best list.

Town:
Nai
Nightfall

Town-ish:
Kelly Chen
Machiavellian-Mafia

Neutral:
Coron

Scummy:
Shadowlurker
Zindaras
Apeiron

No read:
Bogre
Green Liquid

Really, these are no more than gut feelings here. As for Bogre and Green Liquid, they've been lurking so much and such that I can't really get any read on them whatsoever.

Unfortunately, I also have nothing to really build a case from, nor a real good reason to vote any of the 'scummy' people, other than gut feelings. And I don't want to put a vote on someone just because of that.

[Nai]

I don't random vote day 1 most of the time, unless I feel really odd. "Random vote" should be just that, a random vote. A vote for someone for no reason, based off dice roll or you just liking their name. Random vote off a gut feeling isn't random. And there's no way you can have a gut feeling during a random voting stage.

I don't feel comfortable voting off a gut feeling, because I can't put anything behind it. And we really should have reasons behind our votes on day 2. But we have such a lack of information right now, even with all the posts we have.

[Nai]

I totally expect new incites from you, Coron, but I'd prefer new insights.

[Nai]

Remember kids, use the wrong homophone and I take the liberty of making fun of you.

[Nai]

Grr. I hate deadlines. We need to decide on a person to lynch at the moment. I'm, unfortunately, not sold on any particular person right now.

[Nai]

Most of the scummy action from Apeiron is really just from Jules before him. Lots of stupid comments, defending Coron without any evidence, twisting words, etc. Generally being a bad player.

And I think lynching the SK was a good thing.

I'm going to need a rehash on Zind's issues, again.

[Nai]

Ooh, I like the new skin. My avatar rocks, too.

Why am I still on your list, Coron?

[Nai]

Claimed townie != townie.

[Nai]

I think that puts the hammer on Zindaras's claim for me. I'm fairly sure the mod said (post 2, wasn't it?) that:

If the description starts with "You may" means each player may use that artifact once. If it starts with "Once in the game, you may", that's once for the artifact for the entire game; once it's been used, the artifact either becomes useless or disappears.

There is no evidence of any artifact able to be used more than once by the same person. So either Zindaras is lying, methinks, or it's a role and Zindaras is STILL lying.

Unvote, Vote Zindaras

[Nai]

It wasn't an intentional misinterpretation. I just didn't see the possibility of that meaning of those words. I guess I'm not in the mindset of this game right now, where "One-use" means "One use ever for everyone" and not just "One use for you".

Unvote.

[Nai]

Those posts are 24 posts and 6 days apart. I think I'm allowed to change my mind, considering things change. Also between those posts was Zindaras' claim, which was a big deal. No, I didn't particularly suspect him. But since I misread his claim, it made him jump higher than anyone else on my list.

[Nai]

I can't remember if I posted it in this thread, but I've been away because of bad computer problems. I think we've already hit deadline, but our mod hasn't showed up yet. I'll read back over, but I don't think the mod will count anything I post at this point.

[Nai]

I'm trying to figure out how I'm the most scummy right now, with Apeiron. I'm wary of Coron right now, with his claim that he killed Kelly Chen.

[Nai]

I've been wary of him. He hasn't acted like someone with a vig ability, and I don't remember anyone claiming vig that would pass it on to him. And yes, I actually think he might try to pull that.

[Nai]

Name, flavor, why you didn't say anything before you just decided to kill her...

[Nai]

Why did you attempt to kill her? I don't remember you saying she was your main target.

Ok, I will try to fully explain now. I started with The Feather of Pegamel.
It summons a flying camel that shoots lasers out it's ass to pass judgement on the person that it targets. The night after I target the person they will die if they are scum.

I figured that I was already pretty sure Nai was scum and that we should be able to lynch Nai, and I found it more likely that we would lynch Nai day 2 making the ability essentially worthless, so I found a target that was scummy but not super scummy to target, that I felt would provide information as well as a potential scum deaths.

Note: if this were just a vig there is no doubt I would have targeted Nai night 1.

I find this amusing. It basically says "I don't want to use the ability that kills ONLY SCUM on Nai, but if I had an ability that would kill EVERYONE, I would do use it on Nai."

You SHOULD have used it on me. There are only two results:

One: I'm scum, I die, the town has one less scum to deal with.

Two: I don't die, I'm cleared, and you just gave the town a confirmed townie.

I find it amusing that you didn't do it. The second would have happened, and we'd be much better off right now.

[Nai]

... So to reiterate, you didn't want to use the ability on me that could confirm me, you'd rather wait until the town has to waste a lynch on me? Kelly Chen wasn't an issue yet, so you could have let someone else target her, or something. But you want to leave an unconfirmed, in either direction, player to be LYNCHED, which ALWAYS ends in a kill?

[Nai]

Those numbers are completely made up, as far as I can tell. They're also numbers biased in your view that I'm scum. Yes, town wasting a lynch is bad. But if you were sure enough that Kelly Chen was scum that you'd waste your artifact TESTING it, you could have done the same for me. What ends up happening is that we have one scum dead, no idea about YOUR alignment, and no confirmed townies, as opposed to one confirmed townie, a guess that you are probably town for checking, and a good lynch for today.

[Nai]

Well, it's either that, or we have a scum group which go the ability to make a second kill. We have already stated you had a vig ability which only kills scum, and we know an SK is dead. So there's very few choices in the matter. Personally, I think the scum had a second kill, or got an artifact that did such. The amount of NK abilities flying around amazes me.

Which is one of the reasons your ability confuses me. There are so many NK abilities flying about, I don't think a 'safety kill' would be another one.

And we'd have a good target today if you confirmed me. We'd have Kelly Chen, who you found suspicious, who could be looked at. We'd also have a confirmed townie, me, so we'd have 1/6 people confirmed and a good target for today's lynch.

The way I figure it, we have 2 mafia today. We also have at least one NK ability flying around. In other words, we are currently sitting one day away from Lynch or Lose.

[Nai]

If you are town, I consider your ability to be a vig-like ability, so no, I don't think there's another pro-town killing role. That doesn't seem particularly feasable. I think that the mafia had a second kill last night, which would explain why there WAS a kill. Somehow, I don't think the town would be that risky.

... But if you killed Kelly, since you said you thought she was scum, we don't have anyone confirmed. Yes, we have one less scum, but why wouldn't you target the guy you said is scum the entire game? Why would you go after someone completely different, and without saying anything to the town?

And yes, you're right. IF the mafia controls the second NK ability (which I think is true), we ARE at LoL.

So, damnit, post people!

[Nai]

True, artifacts are neither pro-town nor pro-mafia. However, I think they fit the alignment that they start with. I doubt the mafia would have started with my artifact, and I doubt they'd have started with a doc ability.

And yes, you explained it, but it still seems really scummy.

[Nai]

I already explained how it's wrong. You decided to go off on a whim instead of testing someone you already clearly think is scum. You didn't bother to let the town know anything, just striking off on your own.

[Nai]

But now there's no way to prove you are town, or that you did what you said you did.

And yes, I have explained, several times, why you made the wrong move. It means that you did not clear anyone. Because you did not announce, or even hint, at what you were doing, that means that there's no way to clear YOU. If you are scum, which I'm still in favor of, it's a decent plan to pin the lynch today on me. It'd be a good way to make sure that you, one of the last two (or so I believe) scum are cleared for a Lynch or Lose situation.

[Nai]

Okay, what about three kills last night did you not understand? One would have been mafia, one would have been Coron, and there's a final kill not accounted for. I'm not willing to let Coron off the hook just yet. I'm not liking his answers to the questions I'm providing.

And Coron, your bit about the Doctor artifact is nuts. We had already LOST the doctor day 2. There's no reason to believe there was another doctor. So there's no reason to believe the mafia could stop you. Try again.

[Nai]

EBWODP: Right now, I'm really tempted to say Coron/Shadowlurker as the scum group. Shadowlurker is going after the two people against Coron, and I find that suspicious.

[Nai]

If I'm understanding this correctly, you targetted Kelly Chen TWO nights ago, not this just passed night?

[Nai]

I don't know, that sounds a bit too convenient for me. That you don't use it on me because you feel that I'd die before it resolves, and that you use it BEFORE the Doc dies, and that it's one use ever so you can't pass it so we can confirm. Lots of ways to cover your ass.

[Nai]

They're also all answers given AFTER the fact, and none of them are confirmable.

[Nai]

Erm... Where, exactly, are you getting these numbers, exactly? Coron admitted all of his were made up. You're doing baseless calculations here.

And how, exactly, are we interacting? He thinks Coron is scum. I think Coron is scum. Does that mean you and Coron are a team because you both thing me and Apeiron are scum?

[Nai]

To put it like Lemony Snicket:

"Sample here meaning totally made up and actually meaning nothing."

[Nai]

But they mean nothing. The numbers are biased, they aren't equivalent to anything, and they can prove absolutely anything. I could use the exact same numbers for you two and prove the exact same thing.

[Nai]

But the numbers are MADE UP. They could prove ANYTHING from ANYONE'S perspective. Therefore, they are MEANINGLESS.

[Nai]

And that's where my issue lies. It's the optimal move for HIM, not necessarily for the town. The optimal move for the TOWN would be to have at least one confirmed townie in the game, giving you someone to base assumptions off. If I come up confirmed town, there's one less person for the town to have to worry about, and they can come up with scum faster. Right now, we have NO ONE confirmed. One person who did exactly what was asked of him, who used his artifact when the town is asked, is the one under the gun. There's something very wrong with this picture.

[Nai]

No, that's not what I"m saying. I'm saying that you've been gunning for me as mafia pretty much the entire game. But you get a chance to take me out, and you don't take it. That's fishy to me.

[Nai]

I've already stated, REPEATEDLY, that the item would have no affect on me. That's the point of the entire argument. I was saying that Coron had the chance to use it on me, a person he's stated is scum the entire game, and didn't use it. I made no admissions, made no slip. Quoting that like that is taking it out of context, and it's fishy that Apeiron jumped on that. Anyone actually READING the thread would know what I was saying.

I'm in favor of a mass claim at this point. We're in LyLo, we need all the info we can get.

[Nai]

In other words, we're at Lynch or Lose, the person you voted for already claimed two days ago, and you decided to add a vote?

[Nai]

You don't think we're at Lynch or Lose? It can be assumed we have two mafia left (since 3 would mean we'd lose already), there's a chance of two nightkills again tonight, and if we don't lynch correctly today, even without the two NKs, we LOSE tomorrow.

How, exactly, do you not think this is the truth? And why should your eagerness mean the town loses?

[Nai]

Thinking, discussing things, trying to win, not acting as scummy as you are now...

[Nai]

The mod already said that GL has been picking up the prods, responding, but not posting. That means he's lurking.

[Nai]

A no-lynch puts us in Lynch or Lose tomorrow, we gain absolutely nothing, we lose a townie, and it potentially gives you the chance to win, anyways, if you used your ability two nights ago, or if you passed it on after that and someone else used it. So a no-lynch is a really bad idea at this point.

I'm not sure how much I believe DogMom's claim. It looks legit, but it could have been given to scum, and it also could be an activated 'assassinate' ability, like a sort of gassy molotov cocktail.

I"d like to hear more from DogMom before anything else is decided.

[Nai]

Yes, maybe a no-lynch will end in us having one less person to dig through. But there's still a chance of two kills tonight, and that means we could end up losing before we even HIT another day. I'd much rather discuss things and find a good lynch. We have a 1/3rd chance today of hitting scum today if we vote randomly. I'd hope we're intelligent enough to increase those odds. Tomorrow, yes, we have 2/5, but there's a significant chance of us not MAKING it to tomorrow.

Right now, I think there's a good chance of DogMom being scum and faking the details of that bottle in order to throw us into confusion. The bottle can't be denied, but the actual conditions on which it kills could be very different.

[Nai]

Why on earth would you be killed tonight? As you said, You've revealed you have no artifacts. You are not a threat tonight; you already said it's a complete reveal, said nothing about any other artifacts. That means you have nothing tonight. You could GET one tonight, but wouldn't be able to use it until tomorrow night, so you would be able to be killed tomorrow night with no risk.

Coron's ability WOULDN'T be wasted on town. If he uses it and the person doesn't die, they're confirmed. I've always found that confirmed town are really helpful. When it's a decision between someone you find most scummy and someone you don't, why, exactly, do you target the least scummy player? If they're town, you get the same thing as I proposed. Then you've wasted your one-shot. But on a confirmed (or so Coron acts) scum, you get them out of the way, and help the town win faster.

As for my artifact, for all we knew, there were artifacts that killed without leaving the tent.

Such as yours and Coron's.

A doc could have helped that night. And

why on earth would you say that a cop investigation is EVER not helpful?

[Nai]

Granted, this is still Day 1, and you didn't want to use it right away on Night 1, but I just found the wording curious, because it rather looks like you still thought it would block an unnecessary protect or an investigation.

If you are really good at grammar, you notice the 'an'. But most people wouldn't, and they'd miss the fact of what the 'unnecessary' modifies, so the sentence looks odd. It can be misread to my detriment.

No, I didn't want to use my chest night 1. I didn't have much of a choice. Either use it or be killed the next day. And, notice, nothing seemed to happen that night.

The 'flying camel of doom' doesn't really say much either way. No, I probably wouldn't believe him, if he suddenly came out and said it like that. However, I would have believed him if he had, day 1 or day 2, said, "I have/am going to use/d an ability on (name). It will either kill them tomorrow night/tonight if they are scum, or it will keep them alive if they are townie. You'll know the result as well as I." It at least gives a buildup, a chance for the town to know what he's doing. That way the town isn't in the dark about it. Now, he says he did it night 1, we know we had a death night 2, but nothing can really be proved.

I'll point this out, however. If we assume Coron is telling the truth, Dogmom is telling the truth, and I am telling the truth, three people that have used one-shot artifacts and claim to have no others, there are only three people excluded. Apeiron, who seems to be on just about everyone's list, Shadowlurker, and Zindaras, both of whom have been questioned at one time or another.

[Nai]

Yes, I always consider N1 to be after day 1, because that makes sense. I consider opening night to be n0, since no day has happened yet.

Somehow, I consider this 'flying camel' bit to be more like a nuke than a man with a knife. Kill the man, the knife can't do it himself. But Coron just presses the button and, even if he dies, his target dies too.

Zindaras and Shadowlurker have been scummy to many people throughout the game. Take Apeiron out of the 'scummy' list, and you, potentially, have two people that may or may not be scum. However, you're right. None of us really are cleared in this game, at all. I'm having trouble thinking of a case for anyone right now to be the death for today.

[Nai]

On a side note, I'm going to go on vacation in two days for a period of 9 days, and I may or may not have internet and the ability to post. I'll post every chance I get.

[Nai]

I'm on vacation and can't really provide information. I'm barely online.

[Nai]

Sorry, apparently it was an 11 day vacation. I got back last night. 4 days there and back, and 7 days in New Orleans. And I was posting on one thread to close it, since I'm moderating it. I was a day late in that, anyways.

As for this thread, I think it would be best to do a No-Lynch and hope for only one, or zero, night kills tonight.

Currently, I'm having trouble deciding on a scum pair. Apeiron has been largely uncooperative in the game, posting a lot of 'I'm here' and not a lot of content. Coron is doing the exact same thing, repeatedly. Were at lynch or lose and these two don't feel there's anything for them to say. So we're getting absolutely nothing out of them when we NEED information.

Right now, everyone's sort of missing. I think part of it has to do with the actual length of this game. I have to admit, I'm losing interest. Luckily, we're nearing the end.

I'd place my bets on Apeiron, definitely, with Coron being scum partner. He just constantly seems to ping my radar. The other three in this game... DogMom has at least tried to be part of the game. ShadowLurker is just... Not doing anything, same with Zindaras. I can't get a good read on them lately.

Unvote, Vote: No Lynch

[Nai]

We have one day, folks. This is the last minute, here.

[Nai]

Don't forget the one that keeps promising to say something.

[Nai]

Then you're forgetting Apeiron or Shadowlurker :p

[Nai]

I'm hoping for 0 kills because even that gives us information. We can then go back over today and see what we can deduce.

[Nai]

EBWODP: Let's not forget, that'd also give us a free night for any helpful night actions.

[Nai]

Are you intentionally misrepresenting me?

NOTHING has happened today, other than DogMom coming in. There's been a lot of milling about, a little talk about what we're doing, and a hell of a lot of lurking. There's very little to go over. However, now that we're under final deadline and working off of nothing, seeing how people act is very important. How they choose to deal with the situation of a potential Lynch or Lose.

For instance, your reaction right now is very interesting. You're intentionally mis-understanding me, and, when we're at Lynch or Lose, you're prepared to lynch another player without very much information. Your final line in your post is very telling. "This probably won't get anywhere but I like Nai more than NL now." You're aware that this isn't going to go anywhere. You know that 2/6 people are prepared for No Lynch in order to have better chances tomorrow. You know we're at Lynch or Lose, yet you are prepared to lynch someone, knowing that not many other people are going to agree with you. You say as much in your post.

As for night actions, there's a chance that someone didn't tell the whole truth about their artifacts (three people, that I remember, said they had one-time-ever artifacts. The other three weren't as far as I recall, and could help). I'd like to give those a chance, even if nothing good comes of it. What people say about their night actions tonight can help tomorrow.

In other words, we can gain a lot of information between now, end of day, and the morning tomorrow. We NEED information. We have NO time right now to make cases, refute cases, and generally act like good mafia players.

[Nai]

Well, there's a way to clear me, but I don't know if anyone at this point could help.

Was there anyone that used an ability that night that didn't get a response?

[Nai]

So it seems the argument between me and Coron, at least on my side, was unfounded. We have 5 people alive, are definitely at Lynch or Lose, and have to make a decision today.

Can anyone answer my question? Was there anyone that had an artifact use the night I used mine that wasn't able to use it?

I also want to point out ShadowLurker's post at end of yesterday.

[Nai]

How can you say we're not at LyLo?

We probably started with 3 mafia. We've gotten rid of one. 2 mafia left. We have 5 people. One mislynch means it's 2 on 2, and we lose. We ARE at Lynch or Lose.

[Nai]

And now the town loses. Congratulations.

[Nai]

You've got to be kidding me... I was right.

[Nai]

Zindaras, I meant about ShadowLurker. I didn't really suspect you save in passing.

[Nai]

You were suspicious, I argued against you. Isn't that what Mafia's all about?

This is actually how I normally play. I'll think about the game and change my opinion, but not outline my entire theory in the thread because, hey, that's just wasting time.

It's funny, many people use the 'this is my normal playstyle' defense, and get nailed for it, but no one ever actually checks when someone doesn't use it.