Meeko… there is a mini game with a basic setup starting soon on idlemafia.com
http://psychopathgame.proboards.com/...ead=943&page=1
If you are interested go sign up on the site and then follow the link and post /in
That goes for anyone else who is interested in a basic mafia game as well.
What value is there to be gained by blackhearts or sinners by knowing the answer? If he is the one buying votes than he has made it pretty obvious by talking about it so much. And he has done nothing but cause a whole mess of confusion by doing so. Knowing the answer to the question will clear some of that confusion… It will also help me understand why Meeko is so stuck on it.
OK, back home with notes again.
Day 2, paul1.0 claimed his vote was bought. He never posted a vote, but at the end of the Day, there was a vote cast in his name for Captain Pinkies. This vote tied Pinkies (who turned out to be a Sinner) with paul1.0 (who turned out to be Town).
Day 3, Mahaloth claimed his vote was bought. Near the end of the Day, he cast his vote for Angel/paul2.0, who ended up leading the vote by a considerable margin. Now, Day 4, BillMC/paul3.0 claims to have had his vote bought.
paul, if Meeko were the politician, would he be saying that he thinks the politician is Sinful?
You think I can discern what MEEKO would or would not do in a given situation? You give me more credit than I deserve 
Pretty interesting that all three times the bought vote had to do with roles I “played”… granted it occured before I took over the last two times…
Notice that Paul1.0 was forced to vote for a sinner. And Mahaloth was forced to vote for a player who was ensinned and had chosen the sinner wincon. Taking those two points to mind… how would a rational person come to the conclusion that the politician is a sinner?
I am against the peeker bandwagon. People are voting him for “being anti-town”. Guys, anti-town isn’t the same as pro-scum. The main two points that I see against peeker are:
Similarly, I see no good reason for scum to make that Mahaloth vote. It was ridiculous, and he rescinded it a couple of hours later. You know what? That’s just peeker being peeker. Honestly, I’m sensing that a lot of players are frustrated with all of the noise in this game and they’re taking it out on peeker.
Quoth paul:
Good point.
Quoth Rysto:
Of course it is. Either Town will win, or Scum will win. There is no way for neither Town nor Scum to win the game, nor is there a way for both Town and Scum to win the game. Therefore, that which harms Town must necessarily help Scum to the exact same degree, and vice-versa.
Now, maybe peeker is just being peeker, but you could say that no matter what he said or did. He’s still not being pro-Town, and if we’re going to win this game, we need to vote for people who are not pro-Town.
Let me rephrase. “Not helpful to town” is not equivalent to “helpful to scum”.
No Chronos… to win the game we need to vote people who are scum… not people who are not pro-town. Voting for someone because they are annoying and then provided shotty evidence to back it up is not gonna win us the game… no matter how anti town you think that person is.
Firstly, I appreciate the fact that you are going after new targets. No one should slide through unsuspected, it is not pro-Town.
Secondly I, of course, disagree. I haven’t been seeding bad ideas or encouraging them anymore than anyone else. Trying to save paul 1 was a legitimate idea, one which wound up with the Town bagging a Sinner.
Saving paul 1 was either proTown or proSinner, due to the nature of his powers. Lynching a Sinner was either proTown or proBlackheart, of course. Therefore, these actions of mine were proTown.
Well, maybe. But instead of trying to convince us that a vote on peeker would be bad, how about convincing us that a vote on someone else would be better. I will gladly change my vote when a case against someone scummier is presented.
I guess I get your point, Rysto, but how exactly are you making your choice as to who to vote for? I think everyone, especially in this game, can admit that it is difficult to identify anyone doing anything we can see as directly and definitely “pro scum”. Obviously, if someone does something we know is helpful to the scum, we would lynch them immediately.
Let me explain how Peeker’s actions lean heavily toward scumminess.
He voted me and others on a total whim. I know I’m town*, so a guy out there throwing votes around randomly with no reason on townies is definitely the kind of guy that aids the scum in their quest to eliminate townies.
So much so, in fact, that I believe he is the scummiest active player.
Now, Rysto, can you identify someone who is acting in a more advantageous way than Peeker? If so, and you can give us the evidence, I’m totally game for voting for that person instead. If not, what are you going to do?
*I know, I know. You don’t know for sure I’m town, but I do and that’s all I can rely on. 
I’m not Rysto, but I can identify plenty of people who are acting in a more advantageous way than peeker. Did you mean “advantageous to Scum”, or “advantageous to Mahaloth”?
Oh, and more on softclaiming:
Quoth paul:
If Player X is in such a situation, and he thinks his information is worth the risk of soft-claiming as you describe, then why wouldn’t he make a full claim? I see no advantage of soft-claiming over full-claiming in that situation.
To sum up: There are reasons for a power role to claim, and there are reasons for a power role to not claim. The reason to claim is that it gives Town information. For this purpose, full-claiming is better than soft-claiming, because it gives Town more information. The reason not to claim is that claiming gives the Scum an obvious choice of target. For this purpose, soft-claiming is no better than full-claiming, since either one lets the Scum know who’s claiming.
Well in my case I gave information as part of a soft claim instead of a role claim because the info suggested my role was more powerful than I actually was.
Oh.
What?
I can see how that might be good - if you are perceived as powerful you are an obvious NK candidate, and therefore an obvious Doc-protection candidate. However, it doesn’t make you look too good from the Town’s perspective.
So I’be been looking over things, trying to make sense of it all.
Rysto
I can’t really get a read on Rysto. Has a sort of confidence in his posting. If that means anything at all, it is the world’s weakest scumtell. A mix between fluff posting and an interrogative style - but who doesn’t?
Thing Fish
Has the unfortunate history of going after players who are later confirmed innocent. By my count, and I may be missing sum, this list includes Angel, special, Meeko, paul 1. Also has made cases against peeker and Mahaloth, who are as yet unconfirmed as being anything.
Anyone else? There has to be stronger cases than this.
I don’t think there are… There has been too much distraction in the game allowing the scum to slip by.
Ok Paul,
What do you think about Bear Neno and Inner Stickler then?