Mini Normal 1873 (Game Over)

[mastina]

Thirty-fifth Votecount

:

(Fifth Votecount D4)

Lexa - 2 (ThinkBig, Garmr)

Not Voting - 5 (TheRealGin-N-Tonic, Pepchoninga, Lexa, PranaDevil, shannon)

With

7

alive, it takes

4

to lynch.

Lexa is at L-2.

Day 4's deadline is Tuesday, February 28th, @ 9:00 PM PST--(expired on 2017-03-01 01:00:14).

V/LA Notices/Mod Notes:

• mastina, the moderator, is V/LA over weekends.
  

[PranaDevil]

I also really do not like how she tried to make out Gin and TB were scum considering I even went over why that's not possible (BBT flipped vanilla, and being as Gin used his gunsmith on him, it would be way too risky to claim that as scum if it turned out BBT was a vig or something).

No shannon, this, or more specifically, the bit in brackets.

<<< Fixed quote tag...I think. >>>

[PranaDevil]

Gah, stupid phone.

[shannon]

Could ScumGin not have had a role cop power that he used to give an accurate result on BBT?

[shannon]

Just letting you know: I might be about to lose power.

It's been on and off all day here too. I am also in WA, though Western Australia not Washington x

[PranaDevil]

It's plausible, but why risk taking a buddy with him? Also, considering how confirmed town Gin and TB should be, is it not plausible that, should either of them not be tonight's scum target they will be obvious lynch targets tomorrow (I hate how now I've mentioned it, it will become WIFOM if they don't die, but I need to mention it in regards to the possibility of them lying about the claim, ergo it would have been a completely awful plan).

Plus as said before, neither were in danger of being a target, so Gin had no reason to reveal, especially as if someone had another role that could check if he was lying he'd be caught out in an instant. Add in that he THEN was able to deduce Lexa was not vanilla prior to her revealing as such... there's way too many things that point to Gin-town than Gin-scum. If he had been backed into a corner I could see him reaching suddenly, but there was no pressure at all, just the feeling that if he didn't announce findings he might not get a chance to. Seems town to me.

On the flip side, your claim came after I made my VCA post that pretty much solidifies yourself or Garmr as scum, and solidifies myself or Lexa as scum. Yet all your claim brings to the table is "I looked after these guys, honest", especially as you used your protective shots on the guy who, as I say, should be confirmed town for everyone, only to then make out he should be the lynch... it really, really doesn't smell right.

Also, in keeping with my "not voting until Pep gets here" stuff, my non-existent vote is still on Lexa, but at this point I would be happy to see a shannon lynch as well, though I still favour Lexa. Thus when Pep gets here my vote will go there (unless it would be a hammer... bollocks to a rushed day again, Pep needs to answer questions and such as well, just showing up wont help, and I won't count it as a done deal to allow a hammer).

[shannon]

I don't think there's anything I can say to convince anyone that my claim is real, so I'm going to prodge from here on in, until someone decides to take it seriously and look at the other options.

((Additional crackpot theory: Prana knows that G+T's results and the VCA do exactly what she says, and points to her or lexa vs. me and garmr. But actually both she and lexa are scum. She's going to use lexa's flip to get town cred, then go after either of pep, gamr or me for the win. I've seen a similar strategy before))

[shannon]

Also VOTE: Lexa

L-1

If G+T is town then this is the right choice for today and partner is Prana or the guy who never posts.

If G+T is scum then we have lost anyway.

[TheRealGin-N-Tonic]

I'm going to prodge from here on in

Looks to me an admission of guilt

[TheRealGin-N-Tonic]

Shannon take off that vote, we can't prod/replace Pep without playing the waiting game.

<<< Actually, I can replace Pepchoninga if there's strong evidence to suggest that Pepchoninga is not playing the game. The most CONVENTIONAL way for me to do this is to wait for three days, prod him, and if he doesn't respond within two days, I have proof. That is not the only way, but it is the way that I as the moderator must default to. If you can present strong evidence that Pepchoninga is not playing the game, then I will replace the slot early. >>>

[shannon]

Oh for the love of god. UNVOTE:

I think this replacement thing might be adhering to the letter of the law, but not the spirit of it.

<<< I cannot replace a slot unless I have been given strong reason to know that slot is not in the game. If you can give me this strong reason, then I can replace Pepchoninga. "Pepchoninga hasn't posted in this many days" is not strong reason, given that Days 2 and 3 did not last long and the nights are 3-4 days long. If you can provide strong reason to me that Pepchoninga is not in the game, I can replace Pepchoninga. If you cannot provide me this reason, then I am forced to assume Pepchoninga is in the game until I am given said strong reason. A failure to respond to a prod is a strong reason. It is not the ONLY strong reason. But I, as the moderator, must use that as my method, unless I am presented a better one. >>>

Also the reason I said prodge is because I"ve said all I have to say. Me yelling MY CLAIM IS REAL is not going to go any further to anyone believing it. And there's nothing else I can say - you either trust me or you don't.

[TheRealGin-N-Tonic]

Oh no, if I'm scum, you go back into the game and investigate to see if my actions line up with your theory, not some ultimatum saying "lynch this because it's not me"

[PranaDevil]

I don't think there's anything I can say to convince anyone that my claim is real, so I'm going to prodge from here on in, until someone decides to take it seriously and look at the other options.

((Additional crackpot theory: Prana knows that G+T's results and the VCA do exactly what she says, and points to her or lexa vs. me and garmr. But actually both she and lexa are scum. She's going to use lexa's flip to get town cred, then go after either of pep, gamr or me for the win. I've seen a similar strategy before))

For a start, you can't claim people aren't "taking it seriously" by not instantly believing your claim, as nobody has any reason to believe it, it's blatant AtE. Just because people have pointed out legitimate reasoning as to why you could easily be scum fake claiming, and essentially claiming that because people aren't listening to you and taking everything you say at face value is people not taking it seriously.

Secondly, I'm a he, male all up in here.

Thirdly... are you honestly suggesting LQ's quick lynch where even HE didn't get a chance to respond, or even claim, had no scum on it? At least with Alisae's there was time for him to respond, but LQ was strung up without him even knowing it. I didn't even know what had happened, I woke up and the thread was locked and LQ done in. There is no chance that was a total town wagon not a chance in hell. Because if me and Lexa are scum together, as you suggest, Day 2 had no scum on that wagon.

So my very blunt question is "do you believe Day 2's wagon had no scum on it?"

Oh no, if I'm scum, you go back into the game and investigate to see if my actions line up with your theory, not some ultimatum saying "lynch this because it's not me"

This, so much this, you don't make a crappy theory, ignore any and all points that it's obvious Gin is town because there are too many leaps of logic and crossed fingers for it to be anything else, and then go "welp done what I can"... no, either start looking at things to prove your case, or accept you were wrong and start looking for other stuff. Town should always be looking for scum, scum on the other hand can quite happily attempt to get by without actually hunting, and your Gin theory is very much on the second, and not the first, as you've given up hunting.

Also not a fan of shannon's vote on Lexa, to me it smells like a bus, as if it's obvious where the lynch is going to be, and so buses her partner while trying to stitch someone else up. Reason being, if Lexa is lynched and flips scum, the logical direction is to focus on shannon and Garmr, at that point we lynch them in succession and win. However if shannon can make a third player seem a possible lynch (namely me), there's a chance we'll lynch Garmr and myself instead of her, and thus game won for scum.

I'm pretty confident the VCA stuff covers all probabilities, and if not for the fact that it would be a risk for town because it would put us in LyLo two days running, I'd be happy to have me lynched to show that Lexa has to be scum from the D3 wagon, which leaves shannon/Garmr as the third scum.

[ThinkBig]

I don't think there's anything I can say to convince anyone that my claim is real, so I'm going to prodge from here on in, until someone decides to take it seriously and look at the other options.

((Additional crackpot theory: Prana knows that G+T's results and the VCA do exactly what she says, and points to her or lexa vs. me and garmr. But actually both she and lexa are scum. She's going to use lexa's flip to get town cred, then go after either of pep, gamr or me for the win. I've seen a similar strategy before))

Now you are throwing shades at Devil. Give me a break.

[ThinkBig]

Anyone here?

[Lexa]

While we wait for Pep, any arguements against me people want to ask that I haven't responded to? I recall TB asking things and seemingly being fine with my responses but also still seems fine with my lynch.

At work atm so can respond to things in depth after midnight or small things on periodic breaks.

[ThinkBig]

Spoiler:

@MOD: Hypothetically in a Jailkeeper scenario, would a jailkeeper render its target untargetable by all other actions during that Night (i.e. cop, tracker, etc)?

No. That is not a jailkeeper.

The role which functions the way you describe is called an 'Alien', a hybrid of a Roleblocker and a Rolestopper: stops the target player from acting, and stops ALL actions targeting that player from working.

A Jailkeeper is a hybrid of a Roleblocker and a Doctor: stops the target player from acting, and stops NIGHTKILLS targeting that player from going through.

Or if you prefer, as per the wiki:

Variations

Some Jailkeepers not only protect their target from all kills, but also render its target untargetable by all other actions during that Night. This variant is also known as

Alien

.

Normal Guidelines

A Jailkeeper that simultaneously blocks and protects their target is considered Normal on mafiascum.net, provided that any mutual blocking scenarios are planned for during review. Any role that receives results (such as Tracker or Watcher) but is blocked should receive a "no result" message, rather than told their target didn't go anywhere or nobody visited their target. A Jailkeeper cannot stop a Strongman from committing a kill.

It should be noted that the clause "Any role that receives results but is blocked" is referring to the player TARGETED by the jailkeeper, NOT a player targeting the TARGET of the jailkeeper. (I'll raise the issue to Nexus about the unclear wording of that section.)

Thanks for clarifying. The wiki page is a big vague with the terms.

[shannon]

I am getting frustrated when you are calling my claim ATE because it's not, it's my actual role and actual night actions. There's nothing I can say to you that will show you that what I am saying is true, you are going to have to flip me to be sure. Even then, you've achieved nothing except killing a townie because I don't have investigative results.

You are talking about flipping me, gamr, and Lexa, and you if people don't trust you. That's a lot of flips to get through and I don't think we have that many lynches available. Certainly I can see no reason why scum would help us out by NKing any of those people now. (Why would scum not take out someone like TB or G+T instead if they are both town?) So I am asking you to take my claim at face value.

I jailkept TB because I thought something was up with him. But I couldn't tell whether it was a 'good' up or a 'bad' one, so I jailkept figuring it would either save him or stop him doing a NK.
In my Doc on G+T I told the mod that I had no idea what was going on any more. It was a gut decision after I found LQ lynched before getting to vote. I think my message to the mod even said something like 'Poor Lickety'
I bodyguarded G+T because at that point he had claimed results and had a shot left. I figured he would be targeted for the kill, but I would die instead. I thought my role would help people to guess what had happened. Obviously there were some flaws in my reasoning but saving what might have been conf town G+T was a good move still I think.

When G+T claimed I took his role seriously because it fits with my role. I can see how three JOATs in a game makes a theme, and also how his and my roles go together. Him investigating, me protecting him. But! Yes, I always look at whether people are fake claiming. I probably need to have a document where I work out the details and then abandon the theory if it's rubbish, instead of posting it in the thread and working it out on the fly. Nonetheless, posting in the thread is what I always do. If I'm right - and occasionally one of my crackpot ideas is actually not so crackpot - I want town to be able to consider it when I'm gone.

So. I think we've pretty much established that G+T is town, and therefore TB too. My next guess is Prana. He (sorry about She before) has this whole thing mapped out, and it looks a bit too convenient for me. He has positioned himself as an either/or choice with Lexa, who looks terrible based on G+T's result. If Lexa flips scum, town is going to look at either me or Gamr. If that's the choice then obviously I think Gamr. But I don't know that it *is* the choice. What about Prana himself? He hasn't claimed a role. What about Pep the Lurker?

Holy shit what if G+T is using his scum powers but claiming the results as town, and then Prana is interpreting those in a way that works for scum?

Also I want to point out that there have been two consecutive days of quick lynches where I haven't even got to post. Look at those wagons...

[TheRealGin-N-Tonic]

Considering how I could have powerlynched Lexa and ended the day but wanted Pep to talk in case he was scum should be your biggest clue that I'm not pushing a scum agenda...

[ThinkBig]

Just a thought: Does it make sense for town to have both a 1-shot JK and a full RB? A JK functions essentially as a roleblocker. If Lexa flips scum, I think Shannon might be town.

I disagree with Shannon's reasoning regarding Devil. I have a hard time seeing any scum motivation behind his post so.

[ThinkBig]

I don't see a world in which Gin is scum. Claiming a clear as a gunsmith is very risky. If he flipped with any role with a gun, Gin would have been lynched. I've read Gin's scum play and this isn't it.

[mastina]

Since the issue has been raised by multiple people across multiple venues:
I cannot replace a player on hearsay. "I think player X is no longer playing the game" is not grounds for me to replace player X.
For me to replace a player, there needs to be a justified ground for me to replace that player: a reason to believe that player is unfit to play in the game or already isn't playing the game.

If player X explicitly requests replacement, that is grounds for me to replace them, as I have them explicitly saying that they are not playing the game anymore.
If player X fails to respond to a prod, that is grounds for me to replace them, as their failure to respond is an indication they are no longer playing the game anymore.
If player X requires forced replacement for any reason, that is obviously grounds for me to replace them, as the cause of the force-replace makes them unfit to play the game anymore.

These are established, universal guidelines on replacements.

If I can be given grounds to replace a slot, then I will replace the slot. The above three are universal moderator methods. They are not the only possible methods.

In this case, for the purpose of this game: if it can be shown that a player is no longer playing the game, then I will replace that player. Replacement requests or failure to respond to prods are the given universal methods of detecting this as a moderator. They are not the only possible methods, simply the methods I will default to as a moderator. Give me an alternative, and I will pursue it.

If you have doubts about the legality of the alternative, that's what asking me is for.

[mastina]

<<< I have been informed with strong evidence that Pepchoninga has in fact siteflaked.
As a result, there is no need to wait for a prod; I can start seeking a replacement. >>>

[TheRealGin-N-Tonic]

So I'm happy with a Lexa lynch now

[ThinkBig]

Why is that? Would you rather wait for a replacement to come in?