I’m thinking that it is in the town’s best interest for Romanic to take a walk post haste. As he himself said, his role may have had a use at endgame. But, not anymore. If he lasts til endgame, there’ll still be an air of suspicion around him from the town. And the scum will be playing like he is confirmed since they known what is going to happen when it needs to.
That’s assuming Romanic is town. I just don’t believe it. And, I’m pretty sure that if he types his green sentence, nothing will happen. Well, nothing but him swinging at the end of the dAy.
The way I see it, if he is town he can’t prove it and will be a distraction the rest of the game. The sooner he “takes a hike” the better off we are.
I broke your spoiler tags here just for what I consider to be clarity’s sake…
I agree that ‘cultural differences’ are not a scum tell. And your “boohoo” was not in and of itself a scum tell. But when you put everything together, the end result was greater than the sum of the parts. What I was trying to get across was that your overall demeanor came across as “not pro-Town”
I’ll be the first to admit that the case against you is fairly weak. But any Day 1 case is going to be weak, and it’s better than the case against anyone else.
Not trying to single out brewha because I know he’s not along, but that’s a perspective that I just don’t get, that Romatic should walk if he’s town. People saying this seem to imply that they have a bead on Scum such that we don’t end up with minus 2 townies today. If that’s the case, let’s talk about the Scum you think you have the bead on.
No way. It can’t be this easy. Bleh, hmm, arg, ehh, darnation, hmph, well fuck. Okay, I am about forty percent sure that this isn’t scummy, which is a freaking lot considering. I’m substantially less sure whether there is anything remotely true about your role claim, but regardless of whether it’s true I don’t think there’s any harm in waiting and seeing.
So for the moment I haven’t picked up a scum vibe from anyone else, but since voting is not compulsory I’m not voting for you right now.
I was attempting to lead you to a really obvious answer, and then I was going to demonstrate how the situations were equivalent. But I wanted you to answer the question first without you being biased due to your feelings on the suicide scenario.
I think that you are unabashedly out of your mind.
First of all, you are neglecting the wealth of information that is gleaned from the discussion that leads to the Day One. The information gained from that discussion is huge. That is your first real piece of data. And that is the most critical data you have. The night kills are a very noisy channel of information, and that’s without considering the fact that the scum will often choose kills to muddy the waters. The cop’s data is nice but is only available to the cop.
Now, you might respond that we’re not going to generate much data from Romanic’s death. The bandwagon has been too quick and too unanimous. The thing is, that is true whether he commits suicide or gets lynched. It doesn’t make a difference. The only difference is whether we choose to allow the scum to get a kill in before we lynch again.
You’re missing the point. We are not going to be in a significantly better position in terms of information on Day Two than we are right now. So why let the scum get a kill in when we don’t have to.
Can you explain why it’s considered a bad thing to claim on Day 1 where you usually play? Is there a Day when it’s OK? Is Day 2 or 3 the Day where people under the knife start claiming? What if you’re the Doc? You just go to the gallows without a peep?
Also, in what context are you using the word ‘sick’? I know it is used to mean ‘good’ in the sense of “Did you see Shawn White at the Olympics? That trick he did was sick!” and in the sense of “ill”, but I can’t quite understand exactly what the usage is here. Maybe I’m just too old…
I don’t really have any time right now, but I just have to take exception to this: it wouldn’t be day one all over again, minus one townie. Because we’d have Romanic’s alignment to work with in making sense of all these discussions we’ve been having. We might not have great odds, but we’d have better odds than we do right now. It’d be closer to day two after a no-kill night one. I have no problem with the concept of encouraging Romanic to take a hike even conceding that he might be telling the truth.
However, if he is, it would be nice if he would show it by giving his thoughts on the other players in a serious fashion before he goes. I know he’s capable of it.
Its my understanding that the entire discussion assumes that Romanic is telling the truth, so his alignment, and his power, are already known. The argument being that if he’s Scum he’s not likely to kill himself here on Day 1.
My argument is simply this. I think that Romanics death, at his own hand, in the middle of Day 1, helps the Town not one bit. Any parallels between this scenario and any others (such as those posed by Rysto) are interesting intellectual explorations, but don’t actually reflect what is happening here Today.
I’m totally missing the point of all of this discussion.
If Romanic is town and telling the truth, why do we want him dead? Dead townies can’t be good things.
If Romanic is not town, he’s not going to kill himself. We’ll have to lynch him.
If he’s telling the truth and is a town hitchhiker, I don’t think he should kill himself. If he’s scum and lying, I think he should kill himself, but of course he won’t.
I just don’t understand at all where you’re coming from. You seem to be giving significantly more weight to the amount of information we gain from the scum’s kill than we do from a lynch. Does it not strike you how incredibly backwards that is?
You’re looking at it backwards.
Assume we lynch him:
He’s Town. We’ve mislynched
Night ensues with all it’s actions. Likely multiple deaths
Day 2 begins.
Assume he walks:
We lynch someone else. Maybe we mislynch, maybe we don’t.
Night ensues with all it’s actions.
Day 2 begins.
Now, let’s look at the 2nd scenario again, but change it a little.
We shorten Day 1 slightly and lynch Romanic
Town uses a cancel the Night action and prevents all Night Kills and other actions. (sound familiar?)
Day 2 begins and it’s shorter than most… Maybe we mislynch, maybe we don’t.
Night 2 ensues with all it’s actions.
Day 3 begins.
I contend that there is no real difference aside from DayLength to these last 2 situations.
Which of these is the ideal situation?
Which of these would a Town Romanic pick?
Because those of you who keep arguing that he’s Town he shouldn’t die at all are missing the point: If he doesn’t walk, we are more than likely going to lynch him because we can’t tell the difference between a Townie Romanic who didn’t walk and a Scum Romanic.
Ed just went over this again, but having Romanic suicide and then lynching another player is equivalent to lynching Romanic tonight, having all night actions blocked and then lynching another player tomorrow, except that we get a bit more time to decide who to lynch in the second case.
You’re reading more into what I’m saying than is intended.
If Romanic uses his ability to essentially commit suicide now, in the middle of the Day, then we go into Dusk already down one Townsperson. We will get no information from his death, other than confirmation that he is in fact Town. I think this is not good for the Town. It would not be a pro-Town play for Romanic to make. That is the crux of my argument.
Do you disagree?