Mafia Reunion Day 4

[GuiriEnEspana]

@sachertorte

Is that true? It could be true, I’m not sure, but my impression is more in line with Johnny Bravo’s.

Ok, quick count and I see 37 players posted with 39 alive. So two missing.

Well, now everyone’s posted but that wasn’t the point, it was the suggestion that lack of participation was killing the game, and I think it’s no longer an issue.

@paulwhoisaghost

If you are town, I’m sorry but there is way more pointing to you being scum than you being town.

It’s almost like you don’t want to vote him and are trying to find any reason not to - but quite transparently and publicly.

@MHaye, hope all turns out well, lucky you’re in the UK.

@DiggitCamara

Concerning the slip: it’s only remotely a freudian slip. I shouldn’t have used that term. What I meant to say is that during these games very often scum will feebly disparage a lynch which they know to be of townsfolk, and that Boozy did that in the post I quoted.

But does that apply to this game? Would a mafia so feebly disparage a lynch of a potential wolf or vice-versa?

@raventhief

I have been wondering about snfaulkner for a few (small d) days. I figure it is mostly due to the smaller cozier, fluffier games I usually play on GB. I am not ready to vote for anyone, but SNF does seem a bit different than he usually does.

I’d love to see SNF respond to this cutting case!

@raventhief

Bit it feels like there is something more to the role. I dont know what, so it rattles.

I agree, but I’m somehow comfortable knowing that we’ll get there eventually, through lynch or kill, there’ll be a reveal.

@paulwhoisaghost

Or did you think that the number of power roles being offed and the lack of cross killing was unrelated?

I suspect you give more credit than due, lucky breaks?

@LightFoot

iF you consider the Town Vig as non hostile. then a cultists with a killing power (if they are indeed non hostile) is no difference>?

Lightfoot? How have you managed to fly completely under my radar? Seriously. Town vig is not “non-hostile”, s/he’s an ally and shares our wincon, who knows how a cultist wins.

@nesta

How exactly do you think town should change strategies?

Well, we have some players who are explicitly attempting to find packmates of jsgoddess and ThingFish.

@Khameleon

My post would have been irrelevant if I was night killed because it was defending against a possible lynch. That was the purpose of the post so the information simply wouldn’t have mattered if I was night killed. To me that appears quite logical. I would also think that it’s not unreasonable to stay relatively quiet at night so that any would-be killers might forget about me while they’re deciding who to off.

If your accuser was the vig, for example, defending yourself against that vote could have saved your life. If your response brought additional attention to yourself, you may have moved off the scum radar as having lynch potential. Really depends on whether you’re happy to play the game or just try to glide along unnoticed.

[BillMC]

Writing from my phone - not going to attempt to quote anything.

The rules state that we could have up to three lynched per day - so that implies that three townies could be killed in one night. Wolf NK, Batman, A.N.Other. The other could be the Mafia Hitman, tho that would be a one off. The opinion seems to be that Batman has been neutered by the scum holding the switch - if that is true, then Mr Other is an SK.

In a normal sized game, it is very hard for a SK or Survivor to actually win - in a game of 55, a sole SK or sole Survivor to actually make it to the end would be nigh on impossible. If the SK were killed off early, the duration of the game could be dramatically extended.

The cult claims to be a team of 5 - if anyone of them makes it to the end they win. The problem I have with that is that it makes it very easy for them to win - just claim and sit back and watch the world go by. Likewise, the “single shot investigation” doesn’t seem to serve any purpose. Why would Crys not have immediately used her investigation to confirm sach?

Texcat and Raventhief do raise an interesting possibility - that the cult leader is a killer - if the leader is killed someone else takes up the batton. Either way, the will need to resolve the status of the cult at some point, and if we have a single lynch available, it would be a good use of that lynch to clarify whether they are being truthful.

I disagree with Paul’s comments in D4#403/412 and the assertion that wolves need to focus on the mafia. We’re still a long way from the end game, and with two wolves down, the odds that the lynch/batman/nk’s will hit mafia is higher than it hit wolves. Take the scenario where the wolves are exterminated and the mafia still have all 7 left - suddenly voting analysis becomes much more important as the mafia are now the sole enemy. While the wolves would not want the mafia to get much further ahead, the basic scum strategy of taking out town powers/leaders still applies. Both scum teams lack and real investigation powers - just a one off use each - that means they are pretty much shooting in the dark - much more so than town which does have multiple investigative roles. Likewise, paul seems to think that A.N.Other will mor e likely hit scum than town - the odds are still three times more likely to hit town than scum.

boozy’s meltdown post seems indicative of cornered scum, tho quite a few folk were quick to hop on that train with not a lot of thought.
pepperwinkle still pings me for his content free “analysis”
diggit seems the most scummy to me at the moment, total’s wow didn’t paint him in a good light.
khameleon’s weird “i have the power” response to thing yesterday doesn’t sit well with me.

i’ve no objection to a boozy lynch, but will vote diggit for the 2nd lynch. will move my vote to boozy if necessary

vote: diggitcamara

[Mahaloth]

@MHaye

Evening all.

Apologies for the silence so far Today. I had some news, possibly bad. last Monday.

RL spoiler[spoiler]My kidneys may be showing signs of failure.

Alternatively, I may not have drunk enough water before blood was drawn.

You can guess which one I want it to be, and which one kept me up into the early morning three nights in a row this week. No prizes guessing which is which.

Retest is next Friday.[/spoiler]I’m going to reread so I can place an informed vote. (Ha!) I should have some time as it’s 46 hours to Dusk (unless the mods have moved Nightfall, in which case a link would be appreciated.)

Hope your kidney’s are OK. I have had two friends get transplants in the last 2 years and both were totally successful. Here is hoping you do not need that, though.

[MHaye]

Again, thanks for all the well-wishes.

Prof, I am not happy that you’ve voted for a claimed nonhostile third party without evidence that they are winstealing. The only third party that needs killing is an SK, as they are winstealers.

Your anti-Cult stance is one of the things I (and Pleonast) have against you. Angel may have a bee in her bonnet about 3P, but that doesn’t make her right. 3p problems are always singular cases that need to be decided on their merits (again, except SKs). Your vote simply makes me believe I was right in my vote.

Also, Paul may have asked you to create D04.148. But I don’t understand why you created it and didn’t think to consider the ramifications of what you were reading. That you didn’t is one of the things that bothered me.

[NAF1138]

DAILY VOTE COUNT
As a quick reminder - there are no powers, hidden or open, that can affect the vote count. If you see an apparent discrepancy, it’s the result of moderator error

Boozahol Squid (9)
Captain Klutz (45), EnderW24 (102), Biotop (180), snfaulkner (192), Hooker Chemical (262), DiggitCamera (288), Meeko (302), Hawkeyeop (320), Inner Stickler (346)

Prof. Pepperwinkle (5)
Pleonast (121), Nanook (152), bufftabby (197), Zeriel (353), MHaye (417)

DiggitCamara (5)
Paulwhoisaghost (20), Totallost (172), GuiriEnEspana (263), Koldanar (376), BillMC (422)

**Hal Briston (2) **
Plumpudding (298), Hockey Monkey (305)

Khameleon (1)
Johnny Bravo (26)

Hooker Chemical (1)
Lakai (46)

Meeko(1)
Boozy (314)

TexCat(1)
Hoopy Frood (315)

Sachertorte(1)
Prof. Pepperwinkle (419)

---

"This vote count brought to you by Angel- because even the scum queen is town 3/4 of the time!

**ToDay, the top vote getter will die of course. The second vote getter will die if he/she reaches 14 votes. I believe in you guys, you can do it!

The Day will end on Sunday at 3:00 Eastern.

Here is a countdown to that time.**

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

@MHaye

Again, thanks for all the well-wishes.

Prof, I am not happy that you’ve voted for a claimed nonhostile third party without evidence that they are winstealing. The only third party that needs killing is an SK, as they are winstealers.

Your anti-Cult stance is one of the things I (and Pleonast) have against you. Angel may have a bee in her bonnet about 3P, but that doesn’t make her right. 3p problems are always singular cases that need to be decided on their merits (again, except SKs). Your vote simply makes me believe I was right in my vote.

Also, Paul may have asked you to create D04.148. But I don’t understand why you created it and didn’t think to consider the ramifications of what you were reading. That you didn’t is one of the things that bothered me.

Spoken like a true believer in LUTHA.

I will probably move my vote towards EoD, probably for self-preservation purposes.

[Hawkeyeop]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

It occurred to me this morning that maybe, just maybe, Angel was not killed because she was protecting me. Why would she be? I’m just another Townie. One with unpopular ideas, but just another Townie.

So, if that’s not the reason, then it would be:

Angel has a long-standing proviso that 3P are always bad for Town.

She didn’t vote for sachertorte or Crys yesterday because Idle came around waving his arms and shouting “Look at me, I’m a target” and we obliged him.

I trust Angel’s advice better’n anybody else’s toDay.
.

Wait, so you are voting for someone, because someone else doesn’t like 3Ps? I understand looking at someone who is confirmed town and taking a closer look at who was pinging them, but I don’t why you would put any greater weight in their strategic stances. This seems very much an avoid looking for scum vote, and you know who would like that…

For the record, I also think that thinking is dead wrong. 3P on average hurt scum more than they hurt town. I doubt Lutha has a killer in their group, but I don’t think it would be bad for town if they do. Any SK is going to try to kill scum, so they claim they are pro-town/town friendly later on.

[HookerChemical]

@storyteller0910

Day’s not ending early. I just multiplied 24 by 3 and came up with 48. So that’s what you’re dealing with here, folks.

Thank goodness vote counting only requires addition.

@sinjin

What the heck does this mean?

This is a recent meta/meme. In a recent game, SNF said that Biotop’s flavor was wrong and that Biotop was scummy (or somehitng similar). When SNF was asked what scummy Biotop tasted like, he answered “blueberries.” Thus, a meme was born.

I completely agree that scummy Biotop has a specific flavor but only under certain circumstances. Those circumstances haven’t arisen and I can offer no opinion on his scummyness at this stage. He’s one of the players that really worry me if he’s scum because he is very convincing as town and very good at building cases on townies. Angel is the same way. I’m adding Thing Fish to that list as well.

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

It occurred to me this morning that maybe, just maybe, Angel was not killed because she was protecting me. Why would she be? I’m just another Townie. One with unpopular ideas, but just another Townie.

So, if that’s not the reason, then it would be:

Angel has a long-standing proviso that 3P are always bad for Town.

She didn’t vote for sachertorte or Crys yesterday because Idle came around waving his arms and shouting “Look at me, I’m a target” and we obliged him.

I trust Angel’s advice better’n anybody else’s toDay.

[COLOR=“Red”]unvote Khameleon[COLOR]

[COLOR=“Blue”]
vote sachertorte[COLOR]

Because the more we discuss the possibilities of the known 3P, the more dangerous they become. IF they even are 3P’s.

My take on Angel is that she was killed because she was a very active poster and has a reputation as a good scum hunter. Any defense/accusation on her part beyond that is just gravy for the scum team while town spends effort on WIFOMing it into oblivion.

This post by Prof is bad. YesterDay, I was leaning town on him, but this post just swung me the other way. I’m fairly happy with the three lynch leaders at this point (Booze, Diggit, Prof). My preference is Booze and Diggit at this stage, but Prof isn’t a bad second lynch if we get it.

On serial killers/third parties: How does one hunt a serial killer differently than scum? There will be less coordination and they’ll act more like an uninformed scum player, but I don’t see how you’d target them differently from scum. If LUTHA is a win stealing killer cult, maybe we find out when we kill one. I think that if there are five, we have a decent chance if finding one on a non-LUTHA targeting kill. If they are a killing, non-win-stealing faction, I’m okay with them having a kill unless they become obviously hostile. Given the recent wolf blood, I’m inclined to think they’re still town-aligned.

Finally, on targeting a specific scum faction. I don’t think it’s feasible. We have enough trouble finding scum. At this stage, Wolves need to be hunting Mafia because wolves cannot win when Mafia have more members and killing Mafia advances their win condition as much as killing town. Mafia have a little more flexibility, but killing wolves still advances their win condition, so I encourage the Mafia to hunt Wolves as well.

[TexCat]

@nesta

Oh man. I hope it doesn’t come across as flippant to wish you good luck MHaye. I’ve had life changing medical test results turn out to be incorrect, and it’s rough, but better than the alternative.

[bolding mine]

I had to follow the quote trail to figure out where you were coming from (and it goes back even further). How exactly do you think town should change strategies? Sure, the wolves can start trying to hunt mafia specifically, but they know who is on their team. They can hunt amongst the rest of the pool for true scummy behavior and vote or kill for it instead of just taking the expedient option. Town, on the other hand, has a much harder time differentiating between just overall scummy behavior and specific wolf or mafia behavior.

As Pleo pointed out, are you talking about endgame or now? Endgame can come later, and I don’t see a reason to do anything other than hunting “scum” now. We can use patterns and interactions that point to one team or the other for clues, but to concentrate on one scum team in particular might exclude a player more likely to be scum because they don’t match the pattern.

It’s a numbers game, and all scum count against us.

[bolding mine]

This seems contradictory. If a dead body is a dead body, why put much effort into hunting mafia? This post pings me. It is accusatory, but I don’t understand how TexCat is getting from point a to b. I have issues with paul’s post, but the fact that the wolves might change strategy based on two of their team getting killed seems obvious, so I think you are reading his post very differently than I am. I read it and thought, “how are you saying town should change their game?” It looks like you read it and thought, “how are you saying scum should change?” See the difference?

FOS TexCat. Something doesn’t feel right with you. I want to review the lynch leaders, but I think you just jumped in front of them.

I think what you are seeing is me hitting my head against the wall in frustration. It started way back when Paul jumped in front of my questions for Koldanar back in 321. And has devolved into this ridiculous strategy discussion about whether it’s better to kill wolves or mafia or 3P, like we know who is who, like we haven’t lynched 3 townies in a row. Everybody’s strategy is pretty much the same, keep your team alive and kill everybody else.

But to your point about my pointing to the wolves first, that was due to Paul saying that the wolves have certainly changed strategy, shouldn’t town do the same. I was trying to argue that his entire premise was wrong. The wolves might want to kill mafia, but I don’t see how they could have a strategy to do so, when they don’t know anymore than we do who the mafia is.

[LightFoot]

@Khameleon

My post would have been irrelevant if I was night killed because it was defending against a possible lynch. That was the purpose of the post so the information simply wouldn’t have mattered if I was night killed. To me that appears quite logical. I would also think that it’s not unreasonable to stay relatively quiet at night so that any would-be killers might forget about me while they’re deciding who to off.

Didn’t we go through this . ( was it you?) There are Dkillers and NKIllers- * in this game * you need to talk when/where you can

[LightFoot]

@GuiriEnEspana

~
Lightfoot? How have you managed to fly completely under my radar? Seriously. Town vig is not “non-hostile”, s/he’s an ally and shares our wincon, who knows how a cultist wins.

I have been here. If you read my comment and the posts before it you may see that I was responding to. Yes, Town Vig is an ally. and IF the cultists are telling true then them having a killing power would not automatically make them “bad”.

Probably no clearer han previous…

[LightFoot]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

It occurred to me this morning that maybe, just maybe, Angel was not killed because she was protecting me. Why would she be? I’m just another Townie. One with unpopular ideas, but just another Townie.

So, if that’s not the reason, then it would be:

Angel has a long-standing proviso that 3P are always bad for Town.

She didn’t vote for sachertorte or Crys yesterday because Idle came around waving his arms and shouting “Look at me, I’m a target” and we obliged him.

I trust Angel’s advice better’n anybody else’s toDay.
Because the more we discuss the possibilities of the known 3P, the more dangerous they become. IF they even are 3P’s.

I think that exchange deserves a re-read …** Angel ** is against 3P * in general.

I need to find/read what was said about this particular game and LUTHA specifically, by your sainted Angel.

• This unique case with LUTHA deserves more than a policy vote.

and hanging your hat on ** Angel’s ** blue tombstone is not helping your survival

[Lakai]

@Biotop

I thought the other switch holder might flip theirs. It was just a guess. It’s the same reason I didn’t flip Night 2. By Night 3 it seemed better not to flip because the other switch holder might be dead, so the odds seemed slightly better not to flip.

@GuiriEnEspana

What odds? 41 out of 55 players were alive.

I kind of want an answer to this from Biotop. By Night 3 we had mostly dead town, but Biotop thought the switch holder was dead? Did he think the other switch holder was town, and both switches were given to town? Would that make any sense?

Also, let me know if this makes any sense. Biotop flipped the switch on Night One, which means that the Doc’s powers would be turned off unless someone else also flipped the switch. And Biotop kept the switch off for the next three nights, which means he kept the Doc’s powers off for three nights, unless someone else flipped the switch. And then when he thought the other switch holder was dead, he didn’t flip back the switch. Is this a logical assumption to make? To turn the Doc’s power off and think someone probably flipped the other switch on Night One and the Doc’s powers now work?

[LightFoot]

NETA it was quite well discussed that this is also a numbers game. I am in favour of keeping a known LUTHA ( who may well be an ally to Town) alive and removing the unknowns in an effort to take down a Scum.

[sinjin]

I can never seem to keep up with this game. Something has been bothering me about the Angel/Prof. thing and I went back (another reason I can’t keep up) and reread that discussion. Re-reading the following two posts crystallized my unease:

@AngeloftheNorth

You’re right that contradictions never stopped me. But let me be clear.

**Every time he’s been scum prior to this he’s fooled me.
**
He’s never made an apology like this.

My unshakeable faith stems from the apology.

Re shenanigans, I’m happy with my vote on Boozahol Squid but I’m not letting Prof go down without a fight. So if he becomes the front runner I’m switching my vote again to Idle.

Bolding mine, red text Angel’s

@AngeloftheNorth

I don’t know how to explain it to you. I respect you greatly but we’re on different planets with playstyle. You won’t be able to judge this until you see his reveal, and mine.

Keep in mind what Biotop said, though. Unless you think Prof P and I are both members of the same scum team (and if you do, I understand that, but upon reveals it will be shown to be untrue), I can’t know (for sure) what he is.

If I’m scum from the other team what would my motive be for fighting so hard to save him? It’s not to make me look townie because I could very well be on the other scum team under these circumstances. There’s no benefit to me (as scum from another team). My benefit would be to just let him hang.

If you think we’re scum from the same team, this is contrary to every element of my scum playstyle, what I’m doing now. But you have no way of knowing that. You’ll see when I’m revealed.

I’m fighting my ass off for him because I’m virtually certain he’s a mislynch and I don’t want to see any more mislynches. I’m not fighting my ass off for Idle because I could see Idle flip either way, and because I share your assessment of his play crossing the line into abusive here.

There’s a possibility I’m wrong about Prof. P. I know that and if I’m wrong I’m going to have a real problem because people will jump to the conclusion I’m his scum teammate.

When I say unshakeable faith, I am confident enough in my abilities to know when town is telling the truth that I’ve put myself on the line for him. I can’t know it objectively but I know it subjectively enough to make a big inconvenient fuss about it.

Bolding mine again.

At the time these two posts appeared to me to be a soft claim by **Angel **that she was in the cult and had investigated the Prof. and found him to be a cult member too. Then **Angel **turned up dead and VT. I didn’t originally twig to the contradiction between her reveal and my prior assumptions about them until I went back and reread.

Given my feelings about the Lutha: Leave them alone and let scum sort them out. I have been giving the Prof. a buy, but not anymore. Especially after his driveby smear of my voting record. I did not join a townie bandwagon three days in a row. I was one of the first to voice my suspicions of **ToeJam **Night Zero, and voted him for three days straight. I unvoted him when he claimed although I thought his reasoning for his actions was extremely questionable. And yes I voted for **Idle **during his melt down. I was on the verge of resigning from the game at that point.

Prof. Pepperwinkle

[LightFoot]

@Lakai

I kind of want an answer to this from Biotop. By Night 3 we had mostly dead town, but Biotop thought the switch holder was dead? Did he think the other switch holder was town, and both switches were given to town? Would that make any sense?

Also, let me know if this makes any sense. Biotop flipped the switch on Night One, which means that the Doc’s powers would be turned off unless someone else also flipped the switch. And Biotop kept the switch off for the next three nights, which means he kept the Doc’s powers off for three nights, unless someone else flipped the switch. And then when he thought the other switch holder was dead, he didn’t flip back the switch. Is this a logical assumption to make? To turn the Doc’s power off and think someone probably flipped the other switch on Night One and the Doc’s powers now work?

The first point has me curious as well.
to the second…
Switches revert back to the ‘on’ position after a cycle. (I think it is each Night. but it is fuzzy in my brain)

[LightFoot]

This is for **Prof P ** in reference to my earlier post 432

@AngeloftheNorth

I did believe it but I’ve changed my position on it. I believed it because I have seen “benign” 3rd parties align with scum in voting when it makes it easier for them to survive.

The math has been explained to me several times now and I realize it is not valid in this game because the third parties (assuming they are truly non-win stealing) are more detrimental to scum than town.

and this is not the only time ** Angel ** said this
D3.27 D3.125,D3.138,

[HookerChemical]

Boozahol Squid - an 80 post summary -

Day 1 - 25 Posts
188 - votes Hawkeye for wanting the game to be fair to scum
227 - defends Colby, defends ToeJam
499 - meta discussion
507 - vote correction to mod
540 - unvotes Hawkeye, votes Angel for her early ignorence
546 - reformats Angel vote
552 - presents more on Angel
561 - more on Angel
567 - more on Angel
574 - more on Angel
576 - more on Angel
631 - Vote count from NAF - Colby in lead with 8 votes, Angel in fifth with 3 votes
634 - dissects a Meeko post, against Angel’s town read on Total Lost
934 - meta discussion of one-off votes
976 - corrects vote record (septimus post 967)
1116 - disagrees with case on Lakai-v1, expresses distrust of train (the unease feels disingenuous to me, though it was a quick runup on a now known townie)
1117 - meta note about two scum teams and scum hunting
1132 - questions late voters on Lakae-v1 being scum
1246 - speculates about existence of 3p Day killer
1287 - laments D1 results, fluff
1343 - fluff
1344 - meta discussion
1376 - wants to vote Lakai (context or reasoning is unclear)
1400 - fluff
1435 - fluff

Day 1 recap - early defense of Colby and ToeJam, attack on Angel, low fluff until night, some meta balanced with scum hunging. Only Post 1116 really feels wrong. Squid was one of the hard chargers at Angel, but I have a hard time with scum making that case when there were easier cases to make/places to land a vote (e.g. Colby).

Day 2 - 21 Posts
80 - votes Angel
100 - won’t name other suspicions
122 - reaction to Inner Stickler wondering if Angel and Squid are putting on a show
143 - agrees with jsgoddess about multi-lynch being bad
145 - disagrees with sachertorte about multi-lynch
147 - addendum to 145, continues to support single lynch
153 - prods Sunny Daze
172 - meta about multi-lynch
188 - meta about multi-lynch
220 - meta with Meeko
227 - switch meta
556 - unvotes Angel, votes brewha for lie
557 - fluff?
566 - wants Crys and bewha dead despite qualms about multi-lynch (This is after Crys comes out as third party, but before sachertorte claims as well)
1155 - more advocacy for multi-lynch of 3p
1157 - reference to Chronis finding lie
1297 - fluff
1318 - more advocacy of 3p lynch
1329 - more advocacy of 3p lynch
1331 - minor amendment to 1329
1334 - confusion over switches

D2 recap - I’m okay with the 180 on the multi-lynch. It makes sense in context. There’s much less meat here, but, in my opinion, the waters were tainted by the brewha lie which made for easy policy votes.

Day 3 - 14 Posts
306 - meta on multi-lynch
326 - anti-Angel post
493 - prompts Klutz for reasoning behind vote on Squid
499 - vote Crys, doesn’t buy cases on Idle and Prof. (there were no viable candidates at this stage that Squid liked [Prof, Idle, Squid, and ToeJam were the four leaders)
532 - declines to switch to sachertorte with Johnny as a 3P candidate
596 - meta with Idle
620 - defends vote on Crys from Pleonast, concedes he’d rather vote non-3P claimant
650 - prods Angel regarding Idle
1027 - meta re scum teams
1032 - meta, reviewing Thing Fish
1033 - fluff re name
1044 - sees case on Pleo and Diggit from Angel’s short list, doesn’t see case for me (HookerChemical) on same list
1046 - addendum to 1144
1084 - OOG discussion

D3 recap - I get the Crys vote and see that it could be the least worst option. (My vote on Pleo served a similar sentiment.) Squid continues to spar with Angel, but not with the intensity of D1.

Day 4 - 20 posts (as of my query)
48 - votes Professor based on assumptions about Angel kill
58 - meta re redirects
61 - unvotes Professor, concedes Post 48 needs some diligence
83 - defends vote in Post 48
84 - addendum to Post 83
89 - more acknowledgement of flaws in Post 48
92 - walk through of logic he’s assuming behind Angel’s lynch
101 - facepalm
106 - meta
303 - response to Biotop’s case in 180
304 - prompts Meeko for better than a drive-by
307 - on narcissism and Angel
314 - votes Meeko for the drive-by
322 - responds to Hawkeye’s accusation of Squid voting defensively (Hawkeye’s case is overstated, and the Meeko vote is the first on somebody that had a vote on Squid)
324 - meta re WIFOM and scumtells
365 - defensive fluff

• response to Diggit D4.288 which accuses Squid of a skip in D1.1116 (I don’t see the alleged slip, but understand how it could be read as Sicilians needing the way. In fact, my initial thought was vampires and Italians, but I’m not aware of any vampires in this game.)
  373 - to storyteller re math
  386 - meta lamentations about Mafia players these days (shut-up old man! Get with the times!)

There you go. A summary of about 80 posts. I’m a lot less sold on Squid as scum than when I went into it. As noted above, the position on multi-lynch and third parties makes rational and justifiable changes. Speculation that Angel was killed to throw suspicion on Squid is speculation and could easily be used to justify votes on anybody Angel expressed an opinion on, including me. The only evidence that sticks much is what appears to be self-conscious grouping with town, but that’s not nearly enough for me to vote this deep into a game.

He’s pinged me since Day 1 when I mentioned him and Johnny Bravo as early players in need of an audit, but in context, I don’t think there’s much there. I’m much more suspicious of Diggit.

unvote all
vote Diggit

[LightFoot]

One* thing that has me a bit confused. ** Prof.P. ** keeps flogging the same horse that nearly got them lynched-and may still- Town or Scum, why ?’
there are more but this is one.
[sub] when researching for post above.( not this one the previous one) I thought I heard an Angel voice saying " see, this is what I said! " [/sub]

[Lakai]

@LightFoot

The first point has me curious as well.
to the second…
Switches revert back to the ‘on’ position after a cycle. (I think it is each Night. but it is fuzzy in my brain)

That would make my second point moot I guess. I don’t remember a rule or rule clarification about it.

More about my first point. If Biotop thought the switch holder was dead on Night three, and we had mostly dead town, then he must have thought the switch holder was town. If that is true, then why turn the switch off on the first night? It’s also a weird assumption to make (that the other switch holder is town - base on what evidence?), unless of course Biotop is scum, then it makes perfect sense to think town has the other switch.

If Biotop thought the switch holder was scum, then it wouldn’t make any sense to think the switch holder was dead on the third night. Even with two scum dead at that point it doesn’t make any sense.

Unvote Hooker Chemical

Vote Biotop (at least until he explains himself)