Nintendo Mafia (Game Over)

[Kdub]

Missing the point. I am accusing you to misrep the situation by comapring your own reconstruction with a 4-scum one, ignoring every other possible 5-scum patterns. It is a methodological remarl, as it is made clear by the parts of my post you do not quote. As for 4-scum being unlikely, I would agree if I hadn't a town read of TMH.

I don't see other 5-scum scenarios being that different balance-wise from each other. Can you give a specific example of a plausible 5-scum setup that does NOT seem more balanced than the 4-scum scenario? Because that really is my main point with this: the most likely 5-scum setup appears to be more balanced than the 4-scum case.

so your scum completely ignored the fact that someone killed chk and it was not the SK?

Scum had no reason to think that the vig had another shot. chkflip died on N3, and that kill flavor had not shown up on any other night. There were suggestions that Dekes might have been responsible for chkflip's death. They were caught by surprise when esurio killed thil.

you pushed so much on the fact that 4 scum is unlikely, that this objection sounds really weird.

I don't see your point here. I'm accounting for all possible scenarios in case my theory is wrong.

it is absolutely clear from what I have written that I think scum was going to attack Looker. Looker scum is almost an implication of what you have written. As I saw bunny's death, I sat on my chair and said to myself: let's see who is the first one who suggests Looker is scum.

And I have not accused Looker of being scum. It is absolutely clear from my post that I think you and TMH are scum, so logically, the implication is that Looker is town. If you think I "suggested" that Looker was scum, it was only in the part of my post where I accounted for all possible scenarios in the case I was wrong (as mentioned above). If you think I was attacking him, you are wrong, and I think any objective person can see that.

Ok. It's possible. But so you think that not only SK was not nk-immune but just one-shot BP, but there was also a role around capable of detecting him? Sounds extremely unlikely to me (balance-wise), ad trust me, I know the role a little bit.

There's already a role that has flipped that can detect him (thil), so there goes that argument.

[Looker]

• Sorry, Kdub, but I won't be much help to your balance discussion, seeing as I don't even balance the games I create. If it involves matching this game's roles with roles of past games then maybe, otherwise I'm useless.
  
• @lewarcher, RE:your dead Bunny theory
  • Let's not base today's lynch solely on WIFOM induced from last night's kill.
  
  
• Also, I hope we're not in a rush to end the day because, once again, I won't be placing a vote until I'm fully read through.

[lewarcher82]

as for Looker: mmmh maths failed me, I am afraid... we are five, so it is obvious from your pov that if the team is not I+TMH then it must be 1 of us + Looker.

I still think that bunny's death must mean something. You implied so yourself (by rhetorically stating it made no sense) and then never bothered analysing it. I think that the likliest reason to kill bunny was to make Looker look guilty. I think this would work very well if you are the last scum.

as for the whole 1vs1 thing: I said it before and I stand by it. There were plenty of explanations for two players being blocked. A JK, a scum JOAT, cop investigating a player who returns no report. I believed cop's claim and had a strong town read on patb. Tell me: how is ignoring an uncc'd cop report that turns out to be correct any better than not accepting an absolutely non-compelling 1vs1 situation on two players I used to read as town?

on your balance speculation:

Ok. It's possible. But so you think that not only SK was not nk-immune but just one-shot BP, but there was also a role around capable of detecting him? Sounds extremely unlikely to me (balance-wise), ad trust me, I know the role a little bit.

There's already a role that has flipped that can detect him (thil), so there goes that argument.

why do you assume that thil would be able to detect sk?
and even so, do you realise that the more roles are able to detect an sk who is not nk immune, the less balanced the setup is? Or are you - again - ignoring this contraddiction on purpose?

[Kdub]

Sorry, Kdub, but I won't be much help to your balance discussion, seeing as I don't even balance the games I create. If it involves matching this game's roles with roles of past games then maybe, otherwise I'm useless.

The balance argument is only a part of my reasoning. Once you've read through, it would be good if you can comment on the rest of my points as well.

I still think that bunny's death must mean something. You implied so yourself (by rhetorically stating it made no sense) and then never bothered analysing it. I think that the likliest reason to kill bunny was to make Looker look guilty. I think this would work very well if you are the last scum.

The reason I'm not analyzing Bunny's death much is because I don't think any solid conclusions can be drawn from it. I think it was strange, but whatever the reason was for it, I don't think there are any obvious suspects that it points to. And again, I am not accusing Looker of being scum, so how does it follow that Bunny's death being intended to frame Looker somehow makes me scum? This is actually quite ironic that you keep bringing up Bunny's death and pushing the idea that someone is trying to use it to frame Looker, when it is

you

are the one who is actually trying to use it to accuse me.

as for the whole 1vs1 thing: I said it before and I stand by it. There were plenty of explanations for two players being blocked. A JK, a scum JOAT, cop investigating a player who returns no report. I believed cop's claim and had a strong town read on patb.

That's fine if you stand by it, I am just saying that it makes you likely to be scum. The fact is, the scum had a very obvious motive for not wanting to resolve the 1v1 on D5. There are some fairly obvious problems with those explanations you provided, but I'll just invoke Occam's razor and say the most likely explanation was that one of them was lying, and I think any reasonable town player would have seen that.

Tell me: how is ignoring an uncc'd cop report that turns out to be correct any better than not accepting an absolutely non-compelling 1vs1 situation on two players I used to read as town?

Bad comparison. The fact that thil turned out to be a cop is irrelevant to the 1v1. If thil had been scum and PatB was town instead, my argument would still hold. As for the "non-compelling" part of the 1v1, I realize that isn't something I can objectively disprove, but as I said, if you are standing by your stance on it, I think it makes your motivation quite clear.

why do you assume that thil would be able to detect sk?
and even so, do you realise that the more roles are able to detect an sk who is not nk immune, the less balanced the setup is? Or are you - again - ignoring this contraddiction on purpose?

Why wouldn't thil be able to detect the SK? SK doesn't automatically imply investigation immunity, especially when his role specifically included the word "bulletproof" but nothing about II. SK is generally a difficult role to win with, I don't see the lack of investigation immunity as a deal breaker.

I'd really like to hear from esurio and Looker (after he finishes reading). I'm engaging in this quote war mainly for their information since I'm becoming more confident that lew and TMH are scum given their reactions today.

[lewarcher82]

The reason I'm not analyzing Bunny's death much is because I don't think any solid conclusions can be drawn from it. I think it was strange, but whatever the reason was for it, I don't think there are any obvious suspects that it points to. And again, I am not accusing Looker of being scum, so how does it follow that Bunny's death being intended to frame Looker somehow makes me scum? This is actually quite ironic that you keep bringing up Bunny's death and pushing the idea that someone is trying to use it to frame Looker, when it is you are the one who is actually trying to use it to accuse me.

As I said, maths failed me, and brought me to over-intepret what you had written about Looker. I am still glad I brought this argument, tho. I am convinced scum was preparing the field for a frame. No death is meaningless. I will still refer too this point later in this post(*).

I still find it hard to believe that scum didn't reaalise that there may be a vig.

you should probably put things in the right perspective. n1 was generalised protection by JOAT. We all know that. N3 was 3 kills. Thil died n5: I think any rational scum team would have assumed an odd night vig. So either they decided to sacrifice patb to get rid of the tracker, or they planned to sacrifice him to make the players who did not support the 1vs1 thing look bad. another element pointing to you being scum.

From my pov, you will naturally undrestand that it's you and/or looker and/or tmh. bunny's death(*) still works to point to looker being town, and the fact that TMH committed himself to denying the 1vs1 points to him being town. I may be wrong about one, but I can hardly be wrong about both.

And don't be ridiculous: 99% of cops are unable to detect SK's... is this the first time you play a game with a sk? (<-- real question: please answer)

[Looker]

• I'm going to have to refute lewarcher's POV statement for the simple fact that I don't subscribe to POV arguments. I also don't see how Bunnylover's death implicitly points to me being scum. I'll get to the other thing you two are arguing about - I take it it's further back in the thread - later on.
  
• Moving briefly and somewhat superficially on to the Bunnylover debate as well as the 1v1 issue
  • I agree with Kdub that no solid conclusion can be drawn from Bunnylover's death; however, if we're going to speculate, let's list everyone's name, state what they could possibly gain from it, discuss it and be done with it.
  • As far as the 1v1 issue, that's where my problem with balance comes in. I don't know if lewarcher had sufficient reason to believe what he claims he believed due to not being familiar with what's common to put in games like these. Sorry. Someone with my limited experience is likely to believe anything.
  
  
• I don't like lew's statement "No death is meaningless"
  • For one, it looks like you're trying to make something out of nothing
  • For two, maybe BL was targeted
    because
    he was such an unlikely victim
  • And three: Please don't WIFOM the fuck out of us
• (Do you know you FOS'd the entire playerlist in your fourth paragraph?)

[esuriospiritus]

Bunnylover: If you had to order {thil, DemonHybrid, weirdalexv, GW, esurio} in preference of order of lynching, what order would you put them in?

@PB:

DemonHybrid

,

Esurio

,

Weird

,

GW

, then

Thil

.

Thoughts?

[lewarcher82]

@looker:

(Do you know you FOS'd the entire playerlist in your fourth paragraph?)

(1) ^ no, where?

(2) the whole theory by kdub is based on pov, man... no more and no less than mine... please, explain better the merit of your objection.

(3) why are you calling yourself unexperienced? You joined mafiascum before I did. Actually, we even played together already in 2009, when we were both "freshmen"...

(4) how many

weeks

do you need to compete your re-read? You have joined the game more than 10 days ago.

@esurio: even though some players are refusing my theory, I implicitely already commented on the posts you quote. I am glad someone else noticed it. I think someone else is pretending not to.

[esuriospiritus]

THEORY:

There are most likely two scum.

One of them is probably Looker.

It actually has nothing to do with Bunnylover.




I haven't read most of the last two pages yet. Getting on that and considering whether or not to share why I think what I think.

[Kdub]

you should probably put things in the right perspective. n1 was generalised protection by JOAT. We all know that. N3 was 3 kills. Thil died n5: I think any rational scum team would have assumed an odd night vig. So either they decided to sacrifice patb to get rid of the tracker, or they planned to sacrifice him to make the players who did not support the 1vs1 thing look bad. another element pointing to you being scum.

Since only one kill had shown up with the "slashed" kill flavor, I don't think it was at all obvious what the vig was. As evidence, take a look at what players were speculating about in the game thread. People were suggesting it might have been Dekes, or even the SK (since we didn't know the SK kill flavor at the time). Did anybody suggest odd night vig? That couldn't be ruled out, but hardly something that would have been a natural assumption.

Your argument about the scum sacrificing PatB to make you look bad is WIFOM at its finest. You can always try to spin things in a way such that someone is trying to make someone else look bad, but the fact is, there is a clear, objective reason why the scum didn't want to resolve the 1v1, which is something you have failed to address.

And don't be ridiculous: 99% of cops are unable to detect SK's... is this the first time you play a game with a sk? (<-- real question: please answer)

I just glanced through my game history. I have played in 4 games that included both an SK and a cop. The SK was investigation immune in

none

of them. I will gladly provide links if you want. I don't know the overall statistics, but I'm pretty confident that your "99%" figure is wrong.

I haven't read most of the last two pages yet. Getting on that and considering whether or not to share why I think what I think.

No problem, I'll hear what you have to say.

[esuriospiritus]

TMH:

What do you think of Looker? Did either of you breadcrumb your name/role at all? I'm aware Andrius has a thing for crumbs.

Kdub:

Why is lewarcher more likely scum than Looker?

Lewarcher:

Who's scummier, Kdub or TMH? Why?

I don't really care if you've answered these questions or not before, do it anyway.

TMH:

Post moar. Hydras have half the excuse anyone else does, and since I caught something on a skim just now that makes me think you might actually be town after all (which is hilarious in hindsight since I've been thinking you were scummy most of the game) I need your opinions even more. Is Andrius still around or have we been talking to just Toasty for a while now?

Looker:

Hurry the fuck up on that catch-up plzkthx.

All:

Please correct me if I have anything wrong here:

TMH - Pokey, VT
Looker - Prince Fluff, VT
Kdub - Daisy, VT
esurio - Meta Knight, 2-shot Vig
Lewarcher - T.A.C., 1-shot flavour cop


As I'm sure you all understand, I am keeping the reasons for my reads close to the chest for right now. I don't want to color anyone else's reactions too much other than leaning looker-scum, tmh-town.

[Kdub]

Kdub:

Why is lewarcher more likely scum than Looker?

1) He (and TMH) pushed strongly for alex's lynch on D5. I've stated many times why this is very scummy given that PatB was scum.
2) His role claim does not fit with the rest of the setup (one-shot version of a role that is already weaker than an unlimited role that has flipped), and based on his claimed result, the role seems quite weak since he couldn't have caught either alex or PatB.
3) GW tracked him to thil on a night thil was roleblocked. Note that lew came up with his claim after being confronted with this result.
4) If my theory about the mafia having a role cop is correct, it explains how lew was able to call alex's role before he flipped, as well as why he was so adamant that alex was the SK when the evidence certainly wasn't conclusive.

As I said, I don't have much of a read on Looker. He hasn't said a whole lot (having not caught up on the game), and his slot going through replacement hell during some critical moments was not helpful. I have to conclude that he is town though due to the fact that I think the scum are lew+TMH.

[The Master Hand]

@Esurio: In case you didn't know, Andrius has been V/LA for like 2 weeks. He just got back so I'll encourage him to post soon (he's still been busy as he's now catching up with life)

We both find Looker scummy (look how easily he hopped onto Kdub's argument!), but need to do a review of the other players. If it wasn't for your claim I would have found you the most scummy. As for breadcrumbs, neither of us had any idea who Pokey was. We breadcrumbed vig a few times so we could eat a night kill, but no one seemed to catch it
-Toast

[Looker]

• esurio's argument
  • I think this is what I was talking about when I said don't WIFOM the shit out of us. I'm wary of people trying to spin last night's kill to secure a lynch as opposed to everything else that's gone on in the thread.
  
  
• lewarcher's statements
  • Not important; it's just you basically said "it's one of you guys" and then listed everyone except you and esurio.
  • I'm not believing k-I'm not believing
    ANYONE'S
    argument based on POV because we all have different views and anybody can go "It's not me, so it's him."
  • Yes, I did join Mafiascum before you but I don't do theme games. Not well, anyway. It's mostly Newbies and Normals.
  • What exactly do you want to know?

[lewarcher82]

and here I am, I answer esurio:

TMH

seems to have followed a similar train of thought as I did. He believed thil, was surprised at those who wanted to lynch cop despite results, was completely wrong about patb... all this screams town to me.

kdub

played a safe game til this last day... he followed safe wagons on espeonage (right after rereading, in his first post) and dana, but he did little more (except putting a vote on GW for no apparent reason, which could look like pressure but actually be an attempt at fishing). His theory on scum rolecop is weird in the merit of the case and presented with fallacious rhetorical stratagems. I had my reasons to think sk was in the voting bloc. I had my reasons to think it was CP, and I explained them in a quite convincing way. I call for a claim, claim came and it was the name of a bounty hunter who has an evil doppelganger. Honestly, it is ridiculous not to see how easy the connection was. Especially if you think that I was smart enough to fake the report on thil's crystal ball (I even asked him if he had one after reporting!) but not smart enough to make the connection between samus and dark samus.

You did not ask me what I think of Looker, but I am doing some thinking. If kdub is scum and he is pushing my mislynch in such a blatant way, he probably know that this is lylo. So I was entirely wrong in assuming that wifom pointed to Looker being town. The fact that: I proposed a theory with him town --> he still rejects my arguments in favour of him being town, may point to him being scum with kdub, whose case on me looker is now indirectly supporting without committing himself to it.

tl;dr

: scumminess: kdub>looker>tmh; esurio confirmed town.

looker, why does this statement of mine bother you to the point you criticised it:

From my pov, you will naturally undrestand that it's you and/or looker and/or tmh.

but this earlier statement by kdub bothers you not:

If I am right that there are two scum left but it is not TMH and lew, then what is a less likely scumteam: TMH+Looker or lew+Looker?

?

[esuriospiritus]

We breadcrumbed vig a few times so we could eat a night kill, but no one seemed to catch it

TMH

: Oh trust me,

I

caught at least one during the course of the game. But I can certainly see the town motivation from your slot to eat a NK earlier on in the game. Was there anything else? Do either/both of you frequently fake-crumb as town? Can you point me to specific examples from prior games? (Posts, plz. Don't make me hunt through a million isos.) Please encourage Andrius to make an in-depth post ASAP. I recommend

NO LATER THAN

2:30 AM EDT on the 10th of July in order to provide us with a full week for discussion with all of us here. As I said before, lurking from your slot is absolutely

not acceptable

.

Looker:

Your wording @me suggests you think I'm trying to "spin last night's kill". I'm confirmed town; I have nothing to "spin". Therefore your response to me reads as light OMGUS. When are you going to finish catching up and comment on that "everything else that's gone on in the thread" that you seem to think we should be looking at instead? Please commit to a specific date with the knowledge that I will auto-lynch you if you don't have some damn good commentary on the game as a whole and the living players by then. This deadline may be

NO LATER THAN

2:30 AM EDT on the 10th of July (Sunday). I don't give a fuck what you have to sacrifice in your real life to get this done; you

will

get it done and you will get it done

fast

or I will get you lynched without a lick of remorse.

Kdub

and

Lewarcher

: Please continue responding to each other's arguments and anything else relevant you see. I don't really have anything to say to either of you at this time; as I said, I am trying to keep my cards somewhat close to my chest right now.

@All:

You are forced to give someone a bulletproof vest that will block the mafia kill tonight. You cannot give it to me, and you can not keep it for yourself. Who do you pick and why?

[lewarcher82]

kdub, what makes evident that your purpose is tunneling and not scumhunting is that you didn't even ask me "how did you peg cp/weird's role & flavour?". You started with your theory without trying to see if I was or was not able to provide a description of my train of thoughts. This is something only scum does.

Unfortunately for you, my scumhunt style is very much based on inference and abductive reasoning. Making inference and try to verify it is what I always do, both as town and as third party, meaning whenever I have to scumhunt.

Meta(1): In cookie scout mafia I was town. from ISO 23 to ISO 36 I made a case based on mere inference about the flavour was formatted in the PMs. I got someone lynched. I was wrong.

Meta(2): In murder at the hotel mafia I won the game as sk by assuming that the last scum was a member of the jailers neighborhood, based on the fact that it was conceivable that the tracker was killed because they knew they had jailed another PR. I took the risk of killing the last scum and made everyone think the other lylo-player was the last scum.

In this very game - and sorry but I have no time for linking - I made a similar inference when I thought it was conceivable that Ythan was a RB and had blocked thil the night in which thil wa reporting. I was absolutely convinced of my theory and voted thil. Ythan claimed doc and my theory collapsed. I moved my vote.

My case on CP worked exactly this way, and since you didn't ask for any explanation before attacking, I will answer the question you didn't ask and explain how I got to the result I got.

Since no one in the VB was targetted by scum, I assumed that scum *might* have targetted someone on one of the nights in which less than two kills occurred: sk's are often nk immune. So I looked at the VB and concluded that 2 players were likely to be the SK: either esurio or CP. Esurio was the one player whom hohum FoS'd, and since SK had killed hohum, I saw to options: (1) esurio SK kills hohum for fosing her or (2) CP SK killed the player who FoSed esurio to wifom. I decided to bet on the second one, because my townread of esurio was strong, and started pushing to get a claim by CP/weird. Weird claimed a role that is the perfect fakeclaim of a SK. After some chaos, he claimed to have been hit on n2. My initial inference was confirmed. Meanwhile, a nameclaim came, and it was the name of a bounty hunter who has an evil doppelganger. Why should a bounty hunter be a BP. Now I realised that of course if weird was a sk he could not claim a killing role, because he knew there must be another one out there: the one who killed chk. Likelihood of weird being SK was now enormous. I pushed my theory to its natural conclusion and hypothesised samus was prolly a fakeclaim for dark samus.

I will now answer any questions on this. Please, take your time to make up something credible...

[esuriospiritus]

lew:

@

All

: You are forced to give someone a bulletproof vest that will block the mafia kill tonight. You cannot give it to me, and you can not keep it for yourself. Who do you pick and why?

[lewarcher82]

missed that. I have no idea, esurio. Honestlly, what should I answer?

I may say TMH, as he is on the town-side of my scummylist... but it's just stupid, scum will definitely kill you next night. If there is a tomorrow, it's 3 player lylo... why would they keep alive someone who will automatically have the hammer?

There is also another point, which may bring me to answer: to nobody. But in case it did not occur to those who are actually scum, I will not mention it, because it would help them. Unless you ask me to mention it, of course.

[Kdub]

You did not ask me what I think of Looker, but I am doing some thinking. If kdub is scum and he is pushing my mislynch in such a blatant way, he probably know that this is lylo. So I was entirely wrong in assuming that wifom pointed to Looker being town. The fact that: I proposed a theory with him town --> he still rejects my arguments in favour of him being town, may point to him being scum with kdub, whose case on me looker is now indirectly supporting without committing himself to it.

Come on, is this not the most obvious case of "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" that you've seen? To recap:
1) I mention that Bunny's death is weird, but it's not conclusive so I don't say much about it.
2) lew tries to say that Bunny's death implies that Looker is town due to WIFOM, and that implicates me for pushing Looker-scum...
3) ...despite that fact that I didn't actually accuse Looker of being scum. I point this out.
4) lew brings up Bunny's death again, trying to implicate someone (me) with it,

even though this is exactly what he said himself that the scum would be trying to do

.
5) I point out again that I don't think Looker is scum. He finally backs off, now he reverses course and says Looker is

scum

, and that implicates me.
I don't expect to convince lew how ridiculous this is and how much it looks like scum scrambling to find a foothold since he is scum. For the others, just look back at his posts today and see how he has tried every possible way to discredit me, even doing complete flip-flops on his opinions to somehow conclude that I am scum.

I call for a claim, claim came and it was the name of a bounty hunter who has an evil doppelganger. Honestly, it is ridiculous not to see how easy the connection was.

Weird claimed a role that is the perfect fakeclaim of a SK.

This really is the main problem with your entire argument right here. Your explanation about your scumhunting style is nice and all, but the key fact is that

we didn't know at the time that scum safeclaims were related to their actual roles flavor-wise.

It's easy, in retrospect, to claim it was obvious, but this was before either alex or PatB flipped. How often is it, in a theme game, that scum safeclaims are constructed in this way? In my experience, it is certainly not what I would consider common (in fact, I'd say it's even discouraged in the current meta to prevent setup breaking,

especially in multi-faction setups

). Dark Samus is not even the only Metroid villain that works as a SK flavor-wise. Why not Ridley or Metroid Prime for instance? That you called alex out as Dark Samus tells me that you had some way of suspecting that the mod constructed safeclaims in this way, despite it not being common practice. There are two plausible ways I can see this occurring: 1) you knew that this was the case because it was the case for your own faction's safeclaims (in which case you still had to guess correctly that alex was Dark Samus specifically, though this would be a much easier deduction than if you were town), or 2) your actually knew alex's role due to an investigative result. Both ways point to you being mafia. If you are town, the explanation for you being able to do this is that you had to correctly conclude that the mod paired scum with safeclaims in a flavor-related way (which is a crapshoot at best given the current meta, and actually goes

against

standard mod meta/intuition),

which we had no way of knowing was true at the time

.

@All: You are forced to give someone a bulletproof vest that will block the mafia kill tonight. You cannot give it to me, and you can not keep it for yourself. Who do you pick and why?

Assuming we lynch lew or TMH today and they flip scum, I suppose I would pick Looker. I've detailed why I think lew is scum, and TMH's play with regard to the dana lynch and alex's lynch is scummy to me, while Looker is null. Process of elimination.

[lewarcher82]

role, kdub, r-o-l-e. When I said a role that is a perfect fakeclaim for sk, I meant r-o-l-e. Role = BP. Not samus. BP. And BP is the perfect claim for a sk who is in a game with a vig and, for what he knows, vig could confirm him being hit.

Are you really unable to understand this much? I think I explained what a role is earlier in this game, although I would expect you to know the definition if you are played a large themed :-/

(I already acknowledged my mistake on what you had written on Looker: skimming and english third language. More important, in my third-to-last post I have written that

If kdub is scum and he is pushing my mislynch in such a blatant way, he probably know that this is lylo. So I was entirely wrong in assuming that wifom pointed to Looker being town

)

[Looker]

• lewarcher's post 1739
  • Kdub's post listed TMH and lew as primary suspects. Yours listed everyone.
  
  
• esurio's punk ass threat
  • You're not the only one on the subject of last night's kill.
  • Also, all that shit about sacrificing life - yeah, cool, whatever.
  • As far as your question, I'd roll dice to pick who gets the vest. Why? Because everybody's town to me. I'm going through, looking at people's posts, but nobody's jumping out as scum to me.
• Worst case scenario: What happens if we No Lynch?

[Kdub]

role, kdub, r-o-l-e.

When I said a role that is a perfect fakeclaim for sk, I meant r-o-l-e. Role = BP. Not samus.

BP. And BP is the perfect claim for a sk who is in a game with a vig and, for what he knows, vig could confirm him being hit.

Post 1605 says otherwise:

I can hardly imagine a character name that is likelier to be a sk than Aran Samus; and I wonder: are you Aran Samus or are you Dark Samus, and

Aran Samus is your good doppelganger and perfect fakeclaim

?

Bolded is my emphasis. You're not getting out of this, no matter how many times you try to retcon your previous arguments.

Worst case scenario: What happens if we No Lynch?

If there are two scum left, we lose if we no lynch. There is no reason at all that we should consider no lynch today.

[The Master Hand]

So Andrius promised to post tonight, as I'm helping him with something.

In any case, both the possibilities I see for it there are 2 scum left (lewarcher+looker or Kdub+looker) include looker, so thats where I'm leaning. His little no lynch suggestion is scummy.

[Looker]

You twisting my words is scummy; I said worst case scenario, not "let's do this". And I thought that's where esurio was headed with that "who gets the bulletproof vest" question - no lynch and hope the kill doesn't go through.