Print

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

[kingawsume]

EBWOP: (cont. from above) What's the endgame? All I see are two players, one (or both) lying through their teeth, and having gone nowhere.

TricMagic: You seem to be even more passive than I am. You soft-(hard?)-claim cop, and make 3 posts. What's to stop the mafia killing you tonight? Unless you're pulling a lead-away stunt, you've essentially killed yourself.

[IcyTea31]

Would that be the only question?

Yup. I'll elaborate on the wall fight later in this post.

Why only one? Why that question in particular?

I feel as if his wall of texts (alongside yours) is a defensive tactic to distract town, or obfuscate the game.

What's there to distract from? What's there to obfuscate? It's not like many other players have done much. The purpose of text walls is to thoroughly dissect complex arguments. How else could I respond to a post with like 15 separate talking points?

I'm leaving the scumhunting to the scum/people who are a whole lot better at it than I am. And I'm usually this terse anyway.

No. If you don't scumhunt, you will never learn anything useful, will never figure out who's scum, and will never be able to defend yourself from town and scum both when they come after your blood. Refusing to scumhunt is decidedly anti-town.

IcyTea, dolores: Why are you two so focused one another? All I see is what's been stated above.

Because the name of the game is that when you're spoken to, you respond. Dolores has been speaking to me, and I have been speaking to them. I would like to speak with all of the players in this game, but only hector and dolores have been responding properly so far.

What's the endgame?

The endgame is that we figure out each other's alignments and act accordingly.

All I see are two players, one (or both) lying through their teeth,

Here's a thing to consider: what if we're both speaking the truth?

and having gone nowhere.

It has gone much farther than your engagement with anyone. How do you plan to win this game?

there's a point I'll have to talk about once I get back on my computer

Alright, dolores. What the hell was this?

Now here's the part which people don't think about; this is an excellent method for finding town. Scum don't make use of that because they know who isn't in the mafia, and can generally assume that other players are town. But I can use this method as town. I can say, "oh, Hector and IcyTea think that I'm town, but they've got some things they want to ask me about". Then if you follow up on it, I can decide whether or not you're making a genuine case. Scum should want me lynched, but town should want an explanation. Conversely, if you don't follow up on it, and you do acknowledge that it's there, that's useful for me as well.

This is exactly my current argument and the method I've described, as posted by you seven months ago. What has changed so much since then? Granted, we were both scum in that game, but you take pride in using the same playstyle as any alignment, no?

[hector13]

I didn't say you were going to be able to lynch dolores solely off that, I suggested you were planting seeds to reap later, in a manner similar to what dolores said they would do with Questorhank if they didn't step up.

The difference between the two, as I'm sure you will ask, is that dolores won't need to rely on an argument made in the early goings of the game should Questorhank prove to be less than stellar, whereas dolores is going to be a tough nut to crack and you'll need to pull out all the stops to lynch 'em, hence the airing of my suspicions.

The way I see it, this implies one of three arguments: "IcyTea31 and dolores are of the same alignment", "what IcyTea31 is doing isn't alignment indicative" or "what IcyTea31 is doing is scummy, but what dolores is doing isn't, because of their chosen targets."

I don't know if I and dolores are of the same alignment. Do you?

If what I'm doing isn't alignment-indicative, why do you say it makes you suspicious?

Emphasis mine. I made no implications, you made inferences. Consequently, your questions here are invalid.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth, it's very annoying.

The second half of the third part is further nonsense, my read on dolores presently has a lot to do with my read on you, though them answering questions directed at me and pressuring you could easily be them buddying.

The first half of the third part is correct, in that the very first thing I said in our interaction was:

I'm not sure what your plan was here. It looks like you're laying groundwork to take out a stronger player. The earlier you start on that, the easier it will be.

So again, no implication, this is a direct statement that I thought you were trying to lay the foundations for taking out dolores later. This leads into:

If I was scum, why would I lynch and not nightkill dolores?

There are two very good reasons that scum!you would attempt to lynch dolores.

Firstly, the town's only method of getting rid of scum is the lynch, which enough people have to agree on to make. If you can not only get rid of a town player with a lynch, but a town player that can rally the town behind them, for good or ill? You would receive much kudos for that.

Secondly, and I'm not particularly happy to have to bring this up publicly, you are aware there is a 2/3 chance of there being a jailkeeper in the game. A sensible jailkeeper this early in the game is going to use their power to protect one of their strong town reads. You also know that dolores starts the game strongly as any alignment, and is going to be among the top town reads of enough players that there is the strong possibility that they get protected N1, so even if scum!you tried to NK dolores, you are far from guaranteed success.

And again, honest question: how could that argument be used as 'seeds to reap' against a strong player? In my experience, having a huge pile of weak evidence against someone over a couple strong arguments only serves as an intimidation tactic. I would argue that scum!dolores would have more to gain than scum!IcyTea31 from their respective arguments, because there is hope of intimidation working against QH.

dolores already pretty much said what needed to be said here. It's not how strongly you start in mafia, but how strongly you finish.

If we were going by what I would do in scum!you's position, this isn't a D1 lynch. Maybe midway through D2 you point out the deliberately nonsensical argument you made as the start of your suspicions against dolores, and that you have found some other things that dolores has done that support that assertion. Boom, now you have a case against dolores.

If none of the above, what exactly is your argument here?

Frankly, what I'm doing is trying to figure out what your motivation was for your deliberately nonsensical argument. The reasons you have presented so far don't make sense.

You have said your argument was deliberately nonsense; could you describe to me how someone would engage with a deliberately nonsensical argument in good faith - fairly, openly, honestly - and also in bad faith - a duplicitous, backstabbing ma'fa'?

The difference for nonsensical arguments is that town players usually back off the argument itself when they realize little useful information lies that way, and turn to the player instead.

What do you mean here by "turn to the player instead"? The only things you have in this game are the positions you present the other players, and you have stated the position you took on dolores using psychological tricks to mind control other players was deiberately nonsense, and you have suggested that you took that position in order to paint a target on your back (for whatever reason) but then you go on to say that only scum want to lynch you, which... I mean, I'm struggling to understand what you expect painting a target on your back will achieve for the town, while simultaneously saying only scum will respond to it.

I mean, the point of a target is to be shot at, yes? So when people start shooting at the target and then the target jumps up and says "haha, I'm not a real target, you're all really bad at shooting" it does raise many questions.

As I have done in past games, and how I posted clear numbered steps to do.

... this isn't paint by numbers, guy.

So your plan is to deliberatly make it easy to lynch you, and see which players are not on your team (are scum) by determining which players don't try to lynch you?

The opposite: the players who entertain the thought that they might not have determined my alignment yet are most likely town.

See the whole fake target metaphor thing above.

This doesn't make sense, though. If dolores and I are not trying to figure out your alignment, what are we doing by engaging with you?

Regardless of my alignment, it's in my interest to see you lynched. The correlation between 'easy to lynch' and 'should be lynched (is scum or antitown)' is generally pretty high, and the only real problem with that methodology is it's easier to lynch antitown than it is to lynch real scum.

It's not in your interest to see me lynched if we're both town, unless you believe my behaviour is actively counterproductive to the town's goal. Is that so?

dolores and I are the only ones engaging with this. Does that mean we're both scum or both town?

The only players who 'know you're town' are the players with the strongest motivation to lynch you.

Exactly. The whole point is to determine alignment by determining how motivated players are to lynch me. Town wants to lynch scum, scum wants to lynch me.

Again, this doesn't make sense. You paint a target on yourself, which attracts attention, but then you say it was bullshit, and... expect the attention to disappear?

I can't see how you could think this was a good idea unless your actual motivation is totally unrelated to your stated motivation and is more along the lines of trying to drag me into a hole of suspicion with you and then trying to climb out without my noticing.

Most likely not, since I've used this strategy before in games you were not part of.

See, dolores posted something about this in the mafia theory thread years ago. Basically, the idea was that during RVS you can get away with doing some off-the-wall bananas play in an effort to get people to respond and provide content so long as once it is clear your out of RVS you claim as such and stop, and actually start being sensible.

The problem with what you've done here is that it's not outside the realm of possibility that you would present this argument normally, which is why the reasoning behind it doesn't make sense.


I'll read the rest of the thread later.

[IcyTea31]

dolores already pretty much said what needed to be said here. It's not how strongly you start in mafia, but how strongly you finish.

That's not how I understood dolores' argument. How about you restate it, in your own words?

If we were going by what I would do in scum!you's position, this isn't a D1 lynch. Maybe midway through D2 you point out the deliberately nonsensical argument you made as the start of your suspicions against dolores, and that you have found some other things that dolores has done that support that assertion. Boom, now you have a case against dolores.

An interesting hypothetical. You do understand that what I've said so far has made doing that impossible?

Frankly, what I'm doing is trying to figure out what your motivation was for your deliberately nonsensical argument. The reasons you have presented so far don't make sense.

Not an answer to the question presented. What was the meaning of your argument when you said that dolores wouldn't need to rely on an early argument to lynch QH, but that I would to lynch dolores? Finish the sentence: "IcyTea31 is scummy because..."

What do you mean here by "turn to the player instead"?

As noted before, I mean asking "why is this player asking this question" instead of "what is the answer to this question".

you go on to say that only scum want to lynch you

Town players want to figure out whether they should lynch me, scum players want to lynch me. I have enough faith in this town to figure out that I really am town and thus not someone who should be lynched.

I'm struggling to understand what you expect painting a target on your back will achieve for the town, while simultaneously saying only scum will respond to it.

That's not what I'm saying. I expect town and scum both to respond when I attract attention. It's in the nature of that response where I win.

I mean, the point of a target is to be shot at, yes? So when people start shooting at the target and then the target jumps up and says "haha, I'm not a real target, you're all really bad at shooting" it does raise many questions.

A good person would then stop shooting at the target and start pondering those questions, while a bad person might keep shooting, wouldn't you agree?

... this isn't paint by numbers, guy.

No, but if paint by numbers is too difficult a game for you, I don't know what to tell you. I find it implausible that you would still not understand at all what I was trying to do after I presented the answer to you in so simple and clear terms.

If dolores and I are not trying to figure out your alignment, what are we doing by engaging with you?

For example, trying to convince other players that I'm scum. There are many reasons to engage with someone, some more townish and some scummier than others.

dolores and I are the only ones engaging with this. Does that mean we're both scum or both town?

Not my argument. My argument is the clear counterexample against the statement "regardless of my alignment, it's in my interest to see you lynched," namely that if dolores is town and knows that I'm town, it's not in their interest to see me lynched.

Again, this doesn't make sense. You paint a target on yourself, which attracts attention, but then you say it was bullshit, and... expect the attention to disappear?

I don't need the attention to disappear, but I expect that a town player with a town read on me is likely to focus on investigating other people.

See, dolores posted something about this in the mafia theory thread years ago. Basically, the idea was that during RVS you can get away with doing some off-the-wall bananas play in an effort to get people to respond and provide content so long as once it is clear your out of RVS you claim as such and stop, and actually start being sensible.

The problem with what you've done here is that it's not outside the realm of possibility that you would present this argument normally, which is why the reasoning behind it doesn't make sense.

We've played together several times as varied alignments. You should know by now that I don't normally present nonsensical arguments. Maybe it's not outside the realm of possibility, but it requires an unreasonable number of assumptions to reach the conclusion you have reached.

Hector, your responses have made me doubt your good faith and/or your intelligence. I don't think you lack the intelligence to understand my reasoning, so I suspect you are purposefully playing dumb and being obstinate. This is exactly the sort of behaviour the method is intended to catch. It's also how you've acted in the past when you're scum.

[dolores]

Spoiler: kiddies table (click to show/hide)

tric

Pooka, why do I not care about asking you questions?

You don't get to say things like this and not follow up on it, tric.

Dolores, what do you think of my vote on you? IcyTea and Hector, what do you think of it? More importantly, which of you are scum, if any?

Probably hector, but I'll get to that later and it's not insignificantly based on a post that hadn't been produced yet.
I honestly couldn't care less about your vote. I keep forgetting who it was that voted me. Not only are you not going to be able to lynch me, I can at any time produce a four man lynch on any of the inactive players because people would rather have a D2 with players than a barren wasteland where nobody posts.
kingawsume

I'm leaning towards you, Questor, and Icy. Top billing goes towards Icy and you. I feel as if his wall of texts (alongside yours) is a defensive tactic to distract town, or obfuscate the game.

"(Activity) is a defensive tactic to distract town, or obfuscate the game."
Fucking really? Engagement with the game is strictly pro-town. There's a reason why the most active player is almost without exception town. Town have a lot to do that they can only do by posting. The more you post the more apparent your alignment becomes. The more you post the easier it is to control where the lynch goes, which is strictly pro-town if you yourself are town, since even if you don't know the alignment of a single other player, lynching someone other than yourself is better than random lynch (which includes one extra town player in the pool for no reason) and infinitely better than a no-lynch.
Not posting, especially while you're actually here and could be posting, is the definitive scumtell. Active lurking is the highest sin you can commit in a game of mafia. Nothing hurts the town as badly as having the town do nothing during their days. Even the worst content produced in the most misguided fashion can be, at the least, used to draw insights into a player.

I'm leaving the scumhunting to the scum/people who are a whole lot better at it than I am. And I'm usually this terse anyway.

How do you expect to get better at scumhunting if you never do it?
Anyway, and actually importantly; how the fuck do you expect us to find out your alignment if you don't post? What am I going to do, look into the empty space where a kingawsume post should be and cast the bones? You've admitted you're here and able to do more than you can do, which is unforgivable and scummy in the highest order. I'm prepared to accept that it's a mistake you could have made as town (I'm not really but I'll pretend I am, I'm more inclined to think you're being deliberatly malicious in a metacontext), but being aware that you should be doing something in the game, the onus is now on you to do something in the game.

IcyTea, dolores: Why are you two so focused one another? All I see is what's been stated above.

Because he's here. You, critically, are not. If you produced even half the content that ICT does, I'd be the first to engage with you on it. But you don't, so I can't.
Awful long time between posts, Pooka Ion QH NG

Alright, dolores. What the hell was this?

Now here's the part which people don't think about; this is an excellent method for finding town. Scum don't make use of that because they know who isn't in the mafia, and can generally assume that other players are town. But I can use this method as town. I can say, "oh, Hector and IcyTea think that I'm town, but they've got some things they want to ask me about". Then if you follow up on it, I can decide whether or not you're making a genuine case. Scum should want me lynched, but town should want an explanation. Conversely, if you don't follow up on it, and you do acknowledge that it's there, that's useful for me as well.

This is exactly my current argument and the method I've described, as posted by you seven months ago. What has changed so much since then? Granted, we were both scum in that game, but you take pride in using the same playstyle as any alignment, no?

I did, seven months ago. Exposure to that game and to high level analysis (i.e. guides/theory) arising from other metagames has made me reconsider that position. Playing as scum I've not been using my leeway the same way I should; as town, I can get away with egregious methods of forcing lynches etc. on the strength of my position. As scum, I could also use my leeway to literally disrupt and ruin town efforts; the naive idea of not contaminating the metagame for the sake of offering the potential of future growth was a result of not thinking through the ways in which that would limit my game and the resulting lack of growth and, worse, mental blinds it would produce. The quality of your play in particular is a big source of this change in views, so if you want you could say I've taken a leaf out of your book.

Emphasis mine. I made no implications, you made inferences. Consequently, your questions here are invalid.

Boo fucking hoo, answer the question. Did you miss the part where all of this content is stemming from a conversation that ended like this:

Is the response "I don't understand what your point is, please clarify" a suspicious response?

Yeah, because it slows the game down. "I've got no idea where you were going with this but here's some bullshit in response" is much better because you still get the idea that they could rephrase the question for clarity across, but you also generate content. The idea that not giving a bad response is more important than getting content out onto the page where other players can see it is deeply scummy, ICT. Why are you so concerned about how you look? Surely if you give a forthright response and let slip things like your identity, that can only be good for you, right ICT?

How come I gave that answer and ICT agreed with the further implication that that was the answer he was fishing for from town!dolores from the start, and yet here you are right after that refusing to engage ("But dolores, I posted about it!" Yeah, but you were a defensive little bitch and did as much as you could to avoid getting the fallacious cases associated with yourself. Why are you so insistent on maintaining a clear position over putting out content? Surely strong players like ICT and myself, if not also everyone else, could see your alignment from a forthright engagement and use that to defend your position from any shade accidentally brought on by engaging with loaded questions.) with a question just because you didn't like it's implications.

The second half of the third part is further nonsense, my read on dolores presently has a lot to do with my read on you

I'm sure there was no way to cut up the quote to make this part easier to understand, right hector?
Anyway, the second half of that sentence is pure bullshit. ICT's alignment has no bearing on my alignment, unless I guess you're talking only about an dolores/ICT scumteam, in which case the game is over because we could just stop posting and 90%+ of the thread would disappear.

though them answering questions directed at me and pressuring you could easily be them buddying.
The first half of the third part is correct, in that the very first thing I said in our interaction was:

I'm not sure what your plan was here. It looks like you're laying groundwork to take out a stronger player. The earlier you start on that, the easier it will be.

So again, no implication, this is a direct statement that I thought you were trying to lay the foundations for taking out dolores later.

Why is it that when I lay the foundations for lynching ICT, and freely admit that I'm doing so several times in a conversation which we know you are following, it's either town-read or seen as buddying (something like "surely dolores is pretending to think ICT is scum to get close to me who isn't the same alignment as ICT", I assume, which isn't a good position to hold this early in the game, my dude), but when he starts to do the same for me (or you), it's suspicious, or at least 'deliberatly nonsensical' (anti-town, I guess)

This leads into:
Secondly, and I'm not particularly happy to have to bring this up publicly, you are aware there is a 2/3 chance of there being a jailkeeper in the game. A sensible jailkeeper this early in the game is going to use their power to protect one of their strong town reads. You also know that dolores starts the game strongly as any alignment, and is going to be among the top town reads of enough players that there is the strong possibility that they get protected N1, so even if scum!you tried to NK dolores, you are far from guaranteed success.

Why are you so ginger to bring up nightroles? Is there something you don't want us to know, hector13? Are you the cop? Are you scum? Both, maybe?

And again, honest question: how could that argument be used as 'seeds to reap' against a strong player? In my experience, having a huge pile of weak evidence against someone over a couple strong arguments only serves as an intimidation tactic. I would argue that scum!dolores would have more to gain than scum!IcyTea31 from their respective arguments, because there is hope of intimidation working against QH.

dolores already pretty much said what needed to be said here. It's not how strongly you start in mafia, but how strongly you finish.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth, it's very annoying.

Frankly, what I'm doing is trying to figure out what your motivation was for your deliberately nonsensical argument. The reasons you have presented so far don't make sense.

He's alignment testing me by seeing if I engage with him even when he's playing dirty, and he's setting up a future dolores lynch. As I've said before, both of these things are in his interest just as both of these things are in my interest in the reverse.
He hasn't addressed this directly and he hasn't come forward directly with these reasons (he's maintained a position against one of them, at least for the sake of the play), so icytea isn't likely to complain that I've tainted his opportunity to answer, for those of you on the sidelines. ICT still has to address this point if he cares about leaving it unaddressed.

If I address the rest I'll do so alongside ICT's commentary.

See, dolores posted something about this in the mafia theory thread years ago. Basically, the idea was that during RVS you can get away with doing some off-the-wall bananas play in an effort to get people to respond and provide content so long as once it is clear your out of RVS you claim as such and stop, and actually start being sensible.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth, it's very annoying.

In my first game as doll I did this and echoed that it was a good idea after the game, but that doesn't mean that I wasn't wrong. You shouldn't claim 'we're out of RVS' and stop making plays. Just do actual work and pull yourself along by the force of your investigation. Tell Leafsnail to go fuck himself if he keeps trying to lynch you after posting 1/10 as much useful content. 'It was RVS' isn't a valid defence, but that doesn't matter because 'town don't lie' isn't a valid criticism.

The problem with what you've done here is that it's not outside the realm of possibility that you would present this argument normally, which is why the reasoning behind it doesn't make sense.

Huh? "Your method is so questionable you must be doing it for a particular reason as part of an early-game low-information play, but it's also something that you might normally do"
Either what he's posting is suspicious or it isn't, hector. I think I've gained both insight into ICT's alignment and a strengthened position if I were to then try to lynch him out of it. The only way that could be bad for him is if we're not the same alignment, which only the scum player would know. I'm feeling that he's probably more likely to do this as town, and given how conservatively I played when we were both scum, probably thinks that this is a good way to check how hot my blood is running and consequently whether or not I'm town.
You don't get to abandon this argument either, hector. You've been harping on this for a long time and to the exclusion of other content, if you don't finish up strong you've got a lot of backpedeling to do that's not going to look very good.
Honestly I don't really have many problems with IcyTea31's latest post. I'm 95-99% satisfied with it as a quality town post and want answers to most of it's questions.
IcyTea is active and hector isn't. Now, hector would theoretically be less active due to external factors if he wasn't going to go in on a mafia game, but he also went in and didn't give any sort of excuse about it so maybe I'm reading too much into that. Hector is still more active than 2/3 of the town, but that's not surprising given who's making up the other 2/3 of the town. ICT seems to care a lot more about the state of his information and potential cases generally, whereas hector seems more focused on specific narratives. What I'm trying to say is, so far in this game, hector13 is suspicious to me and IcyTea31 isn't.

Spoiler: In other words, something like this: (click to show/hide)

Active players:
dolores
IcyTea31
hector13
Inactive Players:
Naturegirl1999
IonMatrix
Pooka
kingawsume
TricMagic
Questorhank
(y'all need to fucking post)

[hector13]

Well, I’m out guys. Shouldn’t have joined the game in the first place. Too much effort to be treated like a cunt, and watch others be treated the same for trying to play.

[IcyTea31]

Busy day today, will post more later. Here's a read list while I'm gone.

Naturegirl1999: Null, leaning town. Not enough content, though attempts at scumhunting seem honest and misunderstood buzzwords imply a lack of a coach.
dolores: Neutral, leaning town. I had a strong town read before, but that latest post rung my flattery alarms and gave me a bad gut feeling. Will have to analyze it more carefully later.
TricMagic: Null. All posts being utter nonsense is, sadly, not alignment-indicative for this one.
Pooka: Null, leaning scum. A single post gives an illusion of activity while subverting some common towntells, then gives no followup.
kingawsume: Slight scum. Explicit refusal to scumhunt without presenting an alternate technique for getting anywhere in this game. Could also be honest idiocy though.
Questorhank: Conditional town/infolynch. If their answer to my questions is what I expect, they're likely town. But if they don't answer, I believe they are currently the most informative lynch for reasons left unstated.
IonMatrix: Null, leaning town. Single post seems to be an honest attempt at RVS questions with no idea on how to follow it up.
hector13: Scum. Plays far dumber than he actually is.

I'm not at all satisfied with this many nulls and neutrals. Everyone: Since I likely won't post any scary walls until much later, how about you use the breathing room to make something of yourselves?

Well, I’m out guys. Shouldn’t have joined the game in the first place. Too much effort to be treated like a cunt, and watch others be treated the same for trying to play.

You shouldn't be surprised of the emotional baggage associated with the game. I try my best to maintain detachment and to stay respectful of others. It's never my goal to utterly crush a player, only to defeat their arguments for the sake of the game. Were my recent comments unreasonable, all things considered?

[dolores]

Well, I’m out guys. Shouldn’t have joined the game in the first place.

Well that was a fast game. Still a fairly interesting run, if limited in it's scope.
With as many inactive players as we have, I'm not anticipating an exciting D2
hector13 I'm happy with you as scum and if you are going to replace out there's both not likely to be time to change that on D1 and probably going to be other follow on problems.

Questorhank: Conditional town/infolynch. If their answer to my questions is what I expect, they're likely town. But if they don't answer, I believe they are currently the most informative lynch for reasons left unstated.

I really don't like this. Besides the fact that I don't agree (my gut read on Qh tastes like scum) and they're displaying the wrong priorities for town, I really dislike the idea both of 'information lynches' in general (I don't really believe in them at all) and especially ones where you don't outline what you could follow up on them with.
I'll also take this chance to remind you that if you are town, you're probably going to die tonight because the hypothetical jailkeeper will be on me and all but the most inept or easily wifom'd scumteams will realise this.
Regardless, unless Qh both gives a satisfactory answer to your questions and shows an independent interest in the alignment of the players around them, they're probably either scum or a cop.

I'm not at all satisfied with this many nulls and neutrals. Everyone: Since I likely won't post any scary walls until much later, how about you use the breathing room to make something of yourselves?

Everyone (besides hector/icytea)
I cannot stress enough how bad it is to have one or close to one post on D1
Not only is it bad play as well as suspicious, it's incrediably rude. There's a certain level of engagement and activity that mafia games need to function. There's no way to determine alignments or even make the blindest possible lynches if you don't post. D1 ends in twelve hours and there are four players who have voted. If you're not scum, you have absolutely no excuse for not having placed a vote (and justified it). What do you expect to happen to a game which you join, post once in RVS, and never vote in?
I'll vote to extend but given that that would require the entirety of the voting portion of players, one of whom is posting everywhere but in this thread and one of whom is pulling a wuba, I'm far from optimistic.
There needs to be a lot more content from most of the players if we get an extended D1

[dolores]

EBWOP/addendum:

Well, I’m out guys. Shouldn’t have joined the game in the first place. Too much effort to be treated like a cunt, and watch others be treated the same for trying to play.

I've seen too many legit real appeals to emotion on B12, which I have traditionally bought into because I didn't want games to die and I'm not too bothered about the unethical nature of this kind of emotional blackmail to chase the alternative, to bother reacting to this.
You didn't even show the good faith to actually bold out or anything like that. If you think I'm being too harsh, you can blame tiruin and flabort and everyone else who legit real did this shit as scum and then continued to play the game after garnering unwarranted town sympathy.

[Superdorf]

Not voting: IonMatrix, kingawsume, Naturegir1999, Pooka, Questorhank

dolores: TricMagic (1)
hector13: dolores (1)
Naturegirl1999: hector13 (1)
Questorhank: IcyTea31 (1)

Votes to extend: dolores (1)

Day One ends on 2019-10-10 18:00 EST.
Extension is available, requiring 4 votes.

[Naturegirl1999]

Also, in case it wasn't clear, Cop should reveal once they've found Mafia in this game. There are no special gimmicks after all.

If you were the cop, and a townie you knew innocent was one vote away from being lynched, what would you do?

I would reveal that I am cop and reveal the innocence of a town member so we don’t lynch fellow townies.

ICT assume that I -- serve as a useful comparison for other players to make themselves.

I don't think I've made that assumption. When have I compared anyone to you?

What did you edit out? Where is the entire quote?

[Pooka]

The game quickly escalated out of hand. My recent cold just makes it much harder to read those walls of text, and it's the reason why I haven't posted apart from that lone post. Maybe I shouldn't have joined the game in the first place, as I certainly don't feel that invested to the game as I was last time. I'll respond to the questions sent my way.

This implies that you don't know what to go for with social scumhunting methods. How are you planning to puzzle out scum logically in this game where the presence of vanilla townies lets practically everyone say they didn't do anything on a night?

By putting together the little pieces we've got to form a picture, if incomplete, of a night. While it is there are vanilla townies, the setup does have some power roles going on, and unless at least one of each has been lynched, it is safe to assume some power roles are left in play. If the mass claims all give us vanilla townies and we're reasonably sure no power roles are left, we start worrying. A slip or two may give us an idea of who is scum.

Pooka, why do I not care about asking you questions?

That's a question directed to me, so one can say you care about asking me questions, in which case the question itself is paradoxical.

Anyway, I can boil it down to one of two things:
- I already know the how-to of Mafia
- Inactivity

If it's the latter, you'll have to bear with me especially when good ol' text walls drop. I have a tendency to just skip them, especially if they're banter between two persons and packed with rebuttals to quote after quote (see ICT and Dolores), which are very hard to follow on a normal day.

No questions of your own?

I didn't have an idea what to ask and was getting tired while writing the post. Now that we're on the final day, I think it is THE time to start asking the questions.

Dolores, I have scrolled up and down the game's two pages and found nothing of a "reads list." Do you have one on hand?
IcyTea, how do you intend to act on the nulls in your list? They're big question marks, there is no indication if one of them feels scummy or towny. Also you think a high level of engagement is a town tell, but how likely do you think that scum can hide behind it?
Everyone, what is the most likely target for the next night kill?

I'm leaning on a dolores lynch unless the answers convince me otherwise.

That's about what I can think of for now.

[Naturegirl1999]

Pooka, I found dolores’ read list? Hope it helps

Spoiler: In other words, something like this: (click to show/hide)

Active players:
dolores
IcyTea31
hector13
Inactive Players:
Naturegirl1999
IonMatrix
Pooka
kingawsume
TricMagic
Questorhank
(y'all need to fucking post)

[TricMagic]

..... That isn't exactly helpful.

Dolores, can you give a short list of reasons to lynch Hector over you?

[Pooka]

Pooka, I found dolores’ read list? Hope it helps

Spoiler: In other words, something like this: (click to show/hide)

Active players:
dolores
IcyTea31
hector13
Inactive Players:
Naturegirl1999
IonMatrix
Pooka
kingawsume
TricMagic
Questorhank
(y'all need to fucking post)

That's not a lynch list, it's merely a list saying who is active and who is inactive. Besides Dolores and ICT, notice how everyone in that list is blue, they all have a finger of suspicion pointed towards them. Not exactly useful because there is two scum, not that many.