Judge, Jury, and Executioner - Over

[StrangerCoug]

I also think it's a really good idea that we send Nocmen back up as a Defendant considering he was freed Night 1.

VOTE: Nocmen

By that logic, why should we be sorry we hammered you?

Because I'm town? I shouldn't have been hammered in the first place, lol.

I actually asked to die in my defence statement. In my opinion, the town has nothing to gain by ever deciding a defendant is Not Guilty (unless their defence statement shows

without a doubt

that they're town). We send people up as defendants because we think they're mafia. Every town player who has to decide the fate of a defendant during the Deliberation Phase should respect the opinions of the collective town, and vote their charge Guilty.

Plus I knew surviving the Night would just see me hammered again the following day.

So you wanted whichever of the judge or the executioner you got (since we know I got sent to the jury) to kill you, since that's what the town should be doing to the defendants in general. This means one of two things (which aren't mutually exclusive):

• You are caught scum.
  
• The executioner is scum, ended up with you, and had a reason to keep you. (I doubt you went to the judge last night, as Mastermind of Sin's second-to-last post is a preemptive
  ad hominem
  attack against anybody acquitting you and the scum being able to overturn two decisions in one night is too swingy for my liking.)

Unless I'm mistaken, it looks like greyICE just attempted to quickhammer Ser Panda. If we were allowed to have 3 votes on someone then Ser panda would have 8 votes right now and would have been lynched.

However, the max votes you can place on another player is 2 so that didnt happen. But the point is that it is clear that greyICE just attempted a quickhammer to end the day early.

vote:greyICE

Let blood check someone else tonight and see what happens. We can sort all of that crap out tomorrow.

Sold.
UNVOTE: Ser Panda
VOTE: GreyICE

[BloodCovenent]

...that's a damn good catch. But surely it makes more sense to lynch the person he claims to have a pseudo-guilty on, rather than lynching the role itself? That way if he IS telling the truth, we still have an actual PR.

...that's a damn good catch. But surely it makes more sense to lynch the person he claims to have a pseudo-guilty on, rather than lynching the role itself? That way if he IS telling the truth, we still have an actual PR.

What?

His guilty on me is dumb.

He investigated me knowing he would get a guilty no matter what.
If he investigated greyice he would get a guilty.
if he investigated the other guy who voted to convict he would get a guilty.

Are you seriously telling me it makes more sense to lynch his guilty because this guy says he believes the guilty I got is from something else?

I was fucking pretty confident that either this guy was making a mistake or his claim was bullshit.
And yeah he asked the mod and then got told that he was making a mistake.

That said I don't think this guy's scum. I don't see this guy making a gambit like this to get me lynched.

I investigated you based on my read. I sent my night action in BEFORE i was selected for jury duty. Had to check my PM time stamps.

...that's a damn good catch. But surely it makes more sense to lynch the person he claims to have a pseudo-guilty on, rather than lynching the role itself? That way if he IS telling the truth, we still have an actual PR.

well now i know where my third vote goes (thanks for destroying all confidence I had in reading players)

vote Knight of Cydonia

...seriously? If you lynch the claimed PR, and it turns out he is as he says, then we have one result from him. That's it. If you lynch the person he claims a result on, and they come up as town, then we have a scum fake-claim unearthed and no more false information being fed into the town, OR if Panda flips scum we have a confirmed town PR. This is exactly the same as with a cop claim - you lynch the guilty, and then you act on that flip. You don't blindly lynch the PR and hope.

He isn't a cop.
there is no fucking guilty.
He's pretty obviously town.
I'm pretty obviously town.

Vote KoC
Unvote Sirbastion
Vote KoC

so i'm obviously town you say?
i'll go through and see who was on jury duties and what not. From there i'll try to pick a good target, however that will be tough i assume =/

unvote: Doom
Vote: GreyIce

[Quilford]

I also think it's a really good idea that we send Nocmen back up as a Defendant considering he was freed Night 1.

VOTE: Nocmen

By that logic, why should we be sorry we hammered you?

Because I'm town? I shouldn't have been hammered in the first place, lol.

I actually asked to die in my defence statement. In my opinion, the town has nothing to gain by ever deciding a defendant is Not Guilty (unless their defence statement shows

without a doubt

that they're town). We send people up as defendants because we think they're mafia. Every town player who has to decide the fate of a defendant during the Deliberation Phase should respect the opinions of the collective town, and vote their charge Guilty.

Plus I knew surviving the Night would just see me hammered again the following day.

So you wanted whichever of the judge or the executioner you got (since we know I got sent to the jury) to kill you, since that's what the town should be doing to the defendants in general. This means one of two things (which aren't mutually exclusive):

• You are caught scum.
  
• The executioner is scum, ended up with you, and had a reason to keep you. (I doubt you went to the judge last night, as Mastermind of Sin's second-to-last post is a preemptive
  ad hominem
  attack against anybody acquitting you and the scum being able to overturn two decisions in one night is too swingy for my liking.)

Why the selective memory? I expressed this policy in jury duty with you and I certainly wasn't 'caught scum' then.

[GreyICE]

Explain to me why the fuck quickhammering would matter in this setup?

Wouldn't someone just pardon the quickhammer victim?

God you're stupid.

[Sir Bastion]

Explain to me why the fuck quickhammering would matter in this setup?

Wouldn't someone just pardon the quickhammer victim?

God you're stupid.

the executioner wouldnt

[GreyICE]

Sure he would. Why does the executioner WANT to kill town you morons? If the scum executioner kills town then we can't lynch the townie again. And if the scum executioner pardons everyone whose lynched we never know if he pardoned town or scum and we have to lynch the same people again and again and again.

[Quilford]

You do realise the scum don't have a NK, right, GreyIce?

[GreyICE]

You do realise the scum don't have a NK, right, GreyIce?

Again, so? They gain a lot more from not killing than killing when we have to send the same people there again and again. First, they're obviously going to spare any scum (and SC, at least, is obvious fucking scum) over killing town. So if you think that their choice would be to kill town over making us send SC to the gallows YET AGAIN because he will not die, well...

And second, Ser Panda is obvious. Fucking. Scum.

He needs to die.

[IceGuy]

Vote Count

Ser Panda (6): BloodCovenent, BloodCovenent, guille2015, StrangerCoug, Nocmen, GreyICE

BloodCovenent (4): Sir Bastion, Sir Bastion, DoomYoshi, DoomYoshi
GreyICE (4): Axelrod, Knight of Cydonia, DCLXVI, Knight of Cydonia
Nocmen (3): WrathChild, AurorusVox, Quilford
DoomYoshi (3): BloodCovenent, Nocmen, AurorusVox
Knight of Cydonia (1): Sir Bastion
Sir Bastion (1): Nocmen

4

votes are currently not on a player.

StrangerCoug (8): Ser Panda, guille2015, Knight of Cydonia, DCLXVI, WrathChild, GreyICE, Quilford, Quilford
Quilford (8): guille2015, WrathChild, StrangerCoug, StrangerCoug, GreyICE, AurorusVox, Axelrod, DCLXVI

Every player has

3

votes.
With

14

alive, it's

8

to hammer.
There are

42

votes in play,

16

of which are frozen, leaving

26

votes active.

Deadline is October 4th, 11 p.m. CEST.

Vote: Quilford

Unvote

Ignored.

@IceGuy: Am I allowed to reveal my defence statement?

Yes.

Unvote All

Vote: Ser Panda

Vote: Ser Panda

Vote: Ser Panda

You can only have two votes on any one player, and two of your votes are frozen. Ignored all votes except the first.

[Quilford]

You do realise the scum don't have a NK, right, GreyIce?

Again, so? They gain a lot more from not killing than killing when we have to send the same people there again and again. First, they're obviously going to spare any scum (and SC, at least, is obvious fucking scum) over killing town. So if you think that their choice would be to kill town over making us send SC to the gallows YET AGAIN because he will not die, well...

Uh...

Last I checked, scum generally have to kill town to win... so yes, I do think they would kill any town that came to the Executioner. They gain no benefit from making us send SC to the gallows again.

[GreyICE]

You do realise the scum don't have a NK, right, GreyIce?

Again, so? They gain a lot more from not killing than killing when we have to send the same people there again and again. First, they're obviously going to spare any scum (and SC, at least, is obvious fucking scum) over killing town. So if you think that their choice would be to kill town over making us send SC to the gallows YET AGAIN because he will not die, well...

Uh...

Last I checked, scum generally have to kill town to win... so yes, I do think they would kill any town that came to the Executioner. They gain no benefit from making us send SC to the gallows again.

Uh... was that an admission that you know StrangerCoug isn't scum?

[Quilford]

Uh... no?

[Quilford]

Wasn't your 1782 an admission that you know StrangerCoug isn't scum?

[Ser Panda]

And second, Ser Panda is obvious. Fucking. Scum.

He needs to die.

How did you come to this conclusion?


And greyice are you seriously telling me that strangercoug isn't scum?

[StrangerCoug]

I also think it's a really good idea that we send Nocmen back up as a Defendant considering he was freed Night 1.

VOTE: Nocmen

By that logic, why should we be sorry we hammered you?

Because I'm town? I shouldn't have been hammered in the first place, lol.

I actually asked to die in my defence statement. In my opinion, the town has nothing to gain by ever deciding a defendant is Not Guilty (unless their defence statement shows

without a doubt

that they're town). We send people up as defendants because we think they're mafia. Every town player who has to decide the fate of a defendant during the Deliberation Phase should respect the opinions of the collective town, and vote their charge Guilty.

Plus I knew surviving the Night would just see me hammered again the following day.

So you wanted whichever of the judge or the executioner you got (since we know I got sent to the jury) to kill you, since that's what the town should be doing to the defendants in general. This means one of two things (which aren't mutually exclusive):

• You are caught scum.
  
• The executioner is scum, ended up with you, and had a reason to keep you. (I doubt you went to the judge last night, as Mastermind of Sin's second-to-last post is a preemptive
  ad hominem
  attack against anybody acquitting you and the scum being able to overturn two decisions in one night is too swingy for my liking.)

Why the selective memory? I expressed this policy in jury duty with you and I certainly wasn't 'caught scum' then.

It was less my memory being selective than us being jurors together being some time ago, but you could still have made a reasonable attempt at a defense statement, which I don't really define as "kill me". Your reminder does make the first option less plausible, but that's really it.

Also, ITT GreyICE is clearly out of the loop.

[RedPanda]

Guile is scum. Using my phone to post will post with details and votes with my hydra account when I get my power back on

[AurorusVox]

I'm rapidly losing enthusiasm. I'm tempted to double-vote-hammer just to end it.

But stay strong.

Unvote: DY, Vote: Nocmen

Join me.

[DCLXVI]

Also, ITT GreyICE is clearly out of the loop.

He doesn't get the voting rules, but that doesn't excuse his attempted quickhammer.

[StrangerCoug]

Also, ITT GreyICE is clearly out of the loop.

He doesn't get the voting rules, but that doesn't excuse his attempted quickhammer.

That's why I didn't unvote him.

[DCLXVI]

UNVOTE: Ser Panda
VOTE: GreyICE

GreyICE (4): Axelrod, Knight of Cydonia, DCLXVI, Knight of Cydonia

My bad SC, the votecount was off

@ICE can you fix this?

[GreyICE]

Also, ITT GreyICE is clearly out of the loop.

He doesn't get the voting rules, but that doesn't excuse his attempted quickhammer.

What attempted quickhammer?

Are you scum?

[DCLXVI]

Vote: Ser Panda
Vote: Ser Panda
Vote: Ser Panda

If all of these votes counted, Panda would have been lynched. That's the attempted quickhammer.

[DCLXVI]

At the time of those three votes panda was at L-3, I'm going to assume you checked how many votes were on someone before attempting to triple vote them and therefor I'm going to reasonably conclude that you tried to hammer him with those votes.

[DoomYoshi]

So, v2v had to be replaced before I could get support for his lynch? Ridiculous.

VOTE: greyICE
UNVOTE: BCov
VOTE: greyICE

[DCLXVI]

doomyoshi, that was the hammer...