Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TolyK]

Well, I am kinda checking Flabort's claim "right now" (i.e. in this current action cycle )

[flabort]

Also, because I have no idea why you think I would put an everyone wins condition in a BYOR. I will absolutely guarantee that there is no such thing available in this game.

...
4maskwolf

Well, I am kinda checking Flabort's claim "right now" (i.e. in this current action cycle )

It's truthful. Do let me know when you get the results, since I assume you already put the action in.

[TolyK]

Oh, you'll know.

Lenglon, I invited you. Waitin on Wuba now.

[flabort]

Oh, you'll know.

That... sounds more ominous than you probably meant it. Unless it was a threat.

[Jack A T]

If third parties cannot be converted, mass buy-in is unlikely and Everyone Wins, by the methods we know of, is impossible.
I've been holding this case/vote back for a while, waiting to get a key answer without tainting the response (TolyK can confirm this).  It's increasingly clear that I will not be answered within any reasonable time frame.

TheDarkStar is my top suspect, but I would be happy with a 4maskwolf lynch.

Throughout D1, TDS made statements indicating that he suspected FallacyofUrist.  Caveats at times, and TDS's statements were pretty light at times.  Alright.  TDS laid his vote on TheBiggerFish and let it sit there for the day.  In general, a pretty good set of moves for scum: away from the scum-favouring lynch that has mass support, a bit of distance from the partner, and a credible (though TBF) vote away from the attention-grabbing wagons.  If it wasn't for D2 and the flip, I wouldn't suspect him.

D2, TDS started with a quick FoS and vote on flabort.  Reason given: flabort targeted doll, and doll was a townie who suspected flabort of being a redirector.  flabort had, of course, repeatedly stated strong suspicion of doll the previous day, right up to the end.  That flabort would target doll is far from shocking.  The malicious block TDS guessed happened wasn't even possible.  TDS's case against flabort was a baseless case to lynch someone who looked like an easy target, propped up with a mention of investigative powers as a substitute for reasoning.

After that fizzled, TDS did not vote.  He did not vote for Fallacy, who he said he suspected.  He completely abandoned the TBF push.  Now, he was clearly busy for the rest of the day, but the complete abandonment of his D1 vote is strange.  The D2 behaviour is scummy, and the full set of behaviours work quite well with Fallacy as a teammate.

I'm also a bit troubled by TDS's claim, which seems to flip between watcher and tracker at will (the tracker result against flabort, the watcher result against Tiruin with the declaration that he was watching flabort N1, the later tracker claim...), hence my last question to him.  This is why I held back: I wanted an untainted response.  I did not get a response, and I cannot hold back forever.
My 4mask read is quite similar to my TDS read.  The two played in quite similar ways: reasonable but scum-consistent D1 play, dropped cases and low-effort baffling new ones D2, strange behaviour beyond.  I find TDS's flabort rush D2 more troubling than 4mask's FoU NYAHvote, though, and while Monster Within makes me want to see 4mask's claim, I'm less convinced by it than most: that wasn't just some line about monsters in the breadcrumb, but Nietzsche's most famous quote.  The connection is quite possible, but there are a lot of places that breadcrumb could reasonably lead and there is a lot of unclaimed flavour.

His in-thread behaviour alone, though, is troubling, and I would be happy with a 4mask lynch.

[TheDarkStar]

Here are various responses to stuff:

TDS: what we have would not be balanced if it was on a single person. we can only do what we can because of the fusion. it's a combination of two roles, not just one.

That makes a bit more sense. It still seems just a bit cult-ish. Reading through what Tiruin has said, though, Shakerag got your alignment (since you started out with the merging ability, right, Lenglon?) so Shakerag is more like a reformed third party. IDK how that would work with what webadict has said about third-party conversions though.

Webadict: Can a Mafia convert to a Town alignment and vice versa? May we know the situations wherein alignment conversion will fail because of incompatible alignments (If any; and if any, can you state them?)

Anti-Town alignments cannot be changed. Town may convert to Mafia, but Mafia cannot convert to Town. This is because Anti-Town players (Mafia, Sk, Cult, Lyncher, and Assassin) have the problem of information not present to the uninformed majority.

Also, because I have no idea why you think I would put an everyone wins condition in a BYOR. I will absolutely guarantee that there is no such thing available in this game.

...alright, so there is some reason to keep playing the game, assuming there are evil third parties (which is nearly certain in a BYOR). Here's why the mafia conversion plan will fail, then:
1. Evil third parties can't win with this plan, so they will actively try to kill whoever there is that keeps the plan going.
2. Evil third parties usually have a LYLO breaker, whether it be vote control or multiple kills. This plan would basically hand a win to them.
3. Depending on what the role does to third parties, it could end the chain by simply killing that third party and removing them from the game.

TheDarkStar: Have some stuff written out on you on my end, but first I need answers to a few questions. You went through D2 suspecting Fallacy, but not voting for him (or anyone).  Why?  In addition, what led you to drop the TBF case?
Finally, to be absolutely clear, your action claim is that you are a watcher who watched last night and flabort the night before, seeing who visited them?
Please answer my questions for once.

Whoops, this got buried.

First, I watch myself and track other people. iirc I've said that certain people were visited by other people because I tracked the person who made the action. As for Fallacy, I was going to say more stuff but the day ended before I expected it to. I'll get back to you on TBF (because it's been long enough that I don't remember much on my case on him other than that he was being lazy), but I haven't seen him post much lately.

PPE: and there's more stuff posted that I haven't had a chance to read yet.

[Tiruin]

PFP
I'm...kinda thinking that another person lynch may also be okay today since we've at least somehow probably maybe more likely confirmed 4mask as scum?

Here are various responses to stuff:

TDS: what we have would not be balanced if it was on a single person. we can only do what we can because of the fusion. it's a combination of two roles, not just one.

That makes a bit more sense. It still seems just a bit cult-ish. Reading through what Tiruin has said, though, Shakerag got your alignment (since you started out with the merging ability, right, Lenglon?) so Shakerag is more like a reformed third party. IDK how that would work with what webadict has said about third-party conversions though.

I can pretty much confirm Lenglag and it's not really feel-y culty It's more feely PROTECTIONISM [just like the name of dat political role], although it's...curious why you say cult-ish?

And nope--Lenglon gets SHAKERAG's alignment, not the other way around. I do believe Lenglon started the game as Town due to her behavior and I was her second pick but whomever she is now, is Shakerag's.

...alright, so there is some reason to keep playing the game, assuming there are evil third parties (which is nearly certain in a BYOR). Here's why the mafia conversion plan will fail, then:
1. Evil third parties can't win with this plan, so they will actively try to kill whoever there is that keeps the plan going.
2. Evil third parties usually have a LYLO breaker, whether it be vote control or multiple kills. This plan would basically hand a win to them.
3. Depending on what the role does to third parties, it could end the chain by simply killing that third party and removing them from the game.

Can...you expound on that one statement you have ._.

First, I watch myself and track other people. iirc I've said that certain people were visited by other people because I tracked the person who made the action. As for Fallacy, I was going to say more stuff but the day ended before I expected it to. I'll get back to you on TBF (because it's been long enough that I don't remember much on my case on him other than that he was being lazy), but I haven't seen him post much lately.

PPE: and there's more stuff posted that I haven't had a chance to read yet.

So...um, what happened with 4mask and yourself that made him see me and you as Town and you...something?
Was it a day thingy or night thingy? Because I feel like it's a N2 thing but the wording is feeling strange (and/or my parser is broken)

After that fizzled, TDS did not vote.  He did not vote for Fallacy, who he said he suspected.  He completely abandoned the TBF push.  Now, he was clearly busy for the rest of the day, but the complete abandonment of his D1 vote is strange.  The D2 behaviour is scummy, and the full set of behaviours work quite well with Fallacy as a teammate.

I was biased in seeing TDS at D1 because I *KNEW* he was winning it for Bay12 on DCSS Roguelike Tournament
*cough*
Although what had happened to you, D1, TDS?
Can you please explain your activity?

[hector13]

Before I forget to tell y'all, I'll be going on vacation on Wednesday until... Saturday/Sunday this week. I'll be able to post, but probably sporadically. I'll try to keep up as best I can, though.

[Jack A T]

First, I watch myself and track other people.

TheDarkStar: Thank you for the response.  It's much more helpful than I expected.

Would you be so kind as to explain the following:

Tiruin:
I watched Lenglon-Shakerag last night and you did not visit them. The only people who visited them were themselves. Explain, please.

To be absolutely clear: As the basis of a Tiruin vote, you claimed today to have watched Lenglon-Shakerag and not seen Tiruin visit them.

For that matter, please explain the following:

EBWOP: I also watched flabort n1 and you didn't visit him either.

To be absolutely clear: To support your Tiruin vote, you claimed to have watched flabort N1 and not seen Tiruin visit him.

Why did you push a fraudulent case against Tiruin?

[Jack A T]

For context, as I realize it's important: TheDarkStar's result from his action on flabort, as claimed D2, was a tracking result.  It is awfully difficult to get both a tracker and a watcher result from the same action if one's power covers only one of the two.

[Lenglon]

Jack, the waych+track claim was verified by 4mask when he confessed to redirecting TDS. He showed its both.

[Lenglon]

wait, nvm, im an idiot. plz ignore the above, its wrong.

[Jack A T]

Yeah, 4mask's interference does not make an impossible claim possible.  Someone with a track action and no watch action cannot take a watch action.

[TheDarkStar]

I reread what I claimed and did. IDK what I was talking about with Tiruin, but I'm pretty sure I was misreading my own role.

Here are my night actions:

n1: tracked flabort, flabort targeted doll. (I was targeted by Lenglon-Shakerag)
n2: tracked Lenglon-Shakerag, my target targeted Lenglon-Shakerag (according to 4mask I targeted Tiruin). (I was targeted by Lenglon-Shakerag and 4maskwolf)

My comment earlier today was because I confused who gets tracked (someone else) and who gets watched (myself) with my role. (If I haven't done so already, I'll unvote).

[Jack A T]

TDS: I can easily see how N2 confusion would come about, with the believed target apparently targeting themself.  What I'm having trouble with is the second version of the N1 result: how did you end up coming up with the N1 result you gave earlier D3?  Your PM would show your target visiting doll, yes?