Mini 760 - Bleach Mafia: Karakura Town - Game Over!

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

1.) ZEEnon did not notice that Gorrad has yet to confirm.
2.) Therefore, ZEEnon and Gorrad are probably not scum together.

Vote: PhilyEc

.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

ERROR: 404 NOT FOUND

How can actions beyond this game make you automatically "suspect" somebody in this game?

Unvote: PhilyEC, Vote: Giuseppe

.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Query: [Insert Subject Name Here]

Since when do random votes need "justification"?

When you said you had "auto-suspicion," was that false?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Unvote: Giuseppe, Vote: Green Crayons.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

GLaDOS: Why the change to Green Crayons?

If I had wanted to give my reason right now, I would have done so while voting.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Korlash, this is how stupid you sound:

HelloOoOoOoOo!

But I do agree that PhilyEc should not fear "leading the town" or "building up a case."

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Korlash, sounding stupid is not the same as being stupid. But please, continue to read things into my posts which are not there.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

ERROR: 404 NOT FOUND

Why should others "think up" reasons to vote for Green Crayons? Your posts sound disingenuous.

FoS: PhilyEc

.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

<snip>Im asking town to check out what happened and

think up whatever they think is appropriate

</snip>

Analysis Upgrade: Semantic Change

Why should others "think up" reasons to

suspect

Green Crayons?

Your post encourages others to list various reasons to suspect or vote Green Crayons. This allows you to later choose any of them and say "Yes, this is what I was thinking."

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I do not approve of Green Crayons' attack on Giuseppe on the whole.

Second, do you plan on actually launching future discussion about item X or do you plan on just talking about launching future discussion about item X?

I do not like this. I cannot explain why in a manner I find satisfactory.

<snip>randomness is not all we have for our use in determining who to vote</snip>

At the time Giuseppe made his vote, randomness

was

all we had. The fact that there were less random things by the time Green Crayons made Post 39 does not change the situation of Post 14.

"I'm randomly voting Player Y because of these reasons, but this vote is still random and you can't blame me because all we can do is randomly vote at this time!" ...Uh, what?

I disapprove of this characterization. It tries to lead readers into thinking there is a greater discongruity in Giuseppe's posts than there actually was. Giuseppe's vote was random in that it was not based off suspicion in the game.

I did not want to disclose the reasoning for my vote because this may have discouraged further attacks on Giuseppe which may have been informative. GhostWriter in particular I thought may have made a similar attack. We now seem to have moved beyond that issue, however.

~~~

I also noticed that Green Crayons did not follow up on his question in Post 39 to PhilyEc. However, (i) Green Crayons may have felt his question was indirectly answered, and (ii) I feel that asking questions without checking for answers is only a scumtell if it is done multiple times so as to create a pattern. Since a pattern had not yet formed, I saw no need to point this out.

[GLaDOS]

I have no post restrictions.

What do you think about Green Crayons?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Seraphim, I never said that I did not have a reason for my vote. I said that if I wanted to explain my vote when I voted, I would have done so.

Using your own words, what in particular do you find to be "interesting discrepencies in GC's posting"?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Still not liking the way Green Crayons is attacking Giuseppe, which is strange because I think Giuseppe still needs to be questioned. I suppose I just do not think Giuseppe was

lying

about his vote being random a

bad

sense -- which is why I simply asked him early in the game if his claimed "suspicion" was "false." I considered -- and still consider -- his vote to have been appropriately random, whilst being informative.

This is not to say I am satisfied with Giuseppe's recent attempts at explanation, because I am not.

I'm weak when it comes to defending myself

Please link me to an example, preferably multiple examples. Make sure they are finished games. I have some time to kill this week, so I can afford to read through a game or two if necessary.

I don't like the spotlight on me, especially when I'm town, because I'd fail at successfully redirecting the point to the real scum.

You say "especially" when you're town; why do you prefer being in the spotlight when you're scum? If I'm misinterpreting please correct me.

The benefits of quick discussion outweighed the risks of trying something unorthodox.

Did you actually think you were going to generate a discussion? If so, on what particular subject were you anticipating a discussion?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

ERROR: 404 NOT FOUND

Need more input.

Mod, please prod GhostWriter, Gorrad, LynchHimNotMe, and ZEEnon.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Seraphim, please answer my question to you from Post 76.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

That vote count is interesting.

CRAB-G.

Mod: Please prod ZEEnon

since he has now hit the 72-hour mark.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Zwetschenwasser: A Play in Three Parts

Act #1: Zwetschenwasser, what do you think about Green Crayons?

Scum, but I want Phily to answer first.

Act #2: Zwetschenwasser, why did you not vote Green Crayons? There were no questions for Phily at the time!

I think Phily could be scum. That's why I was holding off on GC until Phily gave me something to work with. How is this hard to understand?

Act #3: Zwetschenwasser, didn't Phily already give you something to work with?

Exactly. Which is why I didn't ask for something to work with. I had just gotten it.

Zwetschenwasser exuant. Fin.

I find no way to read these three statements without there being a contradiction. If he had already gotten what he wanted from PhilyEc, he had no reason to hold off voting for Green Crayons. This looks like a classic case of muddying the water.

~~~

I think Giuseppe nicely explained the "discrepancy" of whether or not his vote was "random" in Post 79. The thing I currently like least about him is his martyr-like choice of words in Post 81 and Post 103.

~~~

I 100% disagree with Green Crayons' analysis in Post 80.

Green Crayons has been pushing an agenda of "lying" this whole time. I find that most games do not have "true" random voting to begin with. This is like telling children there is a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. It is akin to when I falsely tell tests subjects that I am going to murder them. It is simply part of the protocol.

I still think the best way to think of Giuseppe's vote is as "random whilst being informative," and he called it random because that is the traditional thing to do. For those following the game, this is almost entirely a rehash of my own Post 82.

~~~

I am not intrigued by the debate between Albert B. Rampage and PhilyEc.

Albert claims he had suspicion of PhilyEc prior to voting PhilyEc, but even the most cursory glance at his posts shows that this is false. The most he had done was say that he would ignore PhilyEc until PhilyEc "posted something of value." This is ironic because Albert B. Rampage himself had posted nothing of value by that time – he instead pointed to Green Crayons' posts to explain his suspicions. This is decidedly not "open and honest."

~~~

Unvote: Green Crayons, Vote: Zwetschenwasser.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

When I sign up to play a 12-player game, I expect to see twelve players. This game has fallen far short of that expectation. Even some people who have been posting I would not call "players" for their lack of contribution to the game.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

You are close to earning my vote as well. My one regret is that I only have one vote to give.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

How is voting Seraphim better than voting Green Crayons?

What prevents you from voting a player you think is scum if you are not sure of the alignment of another player?

By your logic, what prevents from saying:

I don't think Phily is scum, but now I want to wait and see if I think [Insert Subject Name Here] is scum.

In theory, you could continue doing this until you claim to know whether

everybody

is scum. Quit your stalling.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I am not moved by the “lynch all people who say lynch all liars” discussion. The only person we seem to need clarification from is Giuseppe. Right now the discussion is focusing too much on theory and too little on scumhunting.

~ Nap time ~

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

1.) Korlash’s repeated attempts to get rises from various players are noted.
2.) Albert B. Rampage’s pettiness is noted.
3.) zwetschenwasser’s desire to post as few words as possible is noted.

Now that this is all noted, perhaps these players will not feel the need to remind us of these characteristics about them all throughout the game. It is more annoying than it is useful.

~

I am interested in Xtoxm’s take on zwetschenwasser. Giuseppe also needs to clarify what he meant by “lying is never good.”

ZEEnon, how did you go about writing Post 157? Did you read the game and then type it up? Did you type as you were reading? Did you read through first, then type as you read a second time? Did you edit in things as you typed?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert, what happened to open and honest? Why do need half a majority to switch your vote to go anywhere?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Newsflash: The deadline is March 29.

Let’s get a move-on.

~

Green Crayons, is your main reason for voting Seraphim that he has yet to answer my question? I just want to be clear. If there are other reasons, I would appreciate seeing them.

~

Seraphim, how often do you forget to post in a game for an entire week directly after promising content? Hint: This question is purposefully loaded to make you look bad regardless of your answer.

I find it difficult to believe that this game never crossed your mind to the point where you felt obliged to at least explain that you have been busy – or whatever – rather than not posting here at all while posting elsewhere.

~

Right now I am not comfortable with the deadline because there are too many players I do not feel I have a grasp on whatsoever. This includes Ghostwriter/Xtoxm (which is somewhat understandable), LynchHimNotMe, Seraphim, and ZEEnon. This is literally 1/3 of the players in the game, and does not include the fact that I do not feel I have a good grasp on some of the players who

have

been posting more regularly. Please be more forward with your thoughts and opinions.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I am not trying to make Seraphim "look worse than the event seemed." I am trying to make him look exactly how I think he looks -- which is not believable. My question was worded to get that point across.

When you promise eleven people that "I will do this later today," I do not believe that you can forget about it for seven consecutive days. This is compounded by the frequency of his posts in places that do not include this thread.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Vote: Albert B. Rampage

FoS: Green Crayons

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

The sign on his back says "Vote Me."

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert, if you are town then you are not the only one scumhunting; when people pose questions to you, you ought to assume that they, too, are scumhunting and answer them unless you have a specific reason to withhold an answer. If everybody took the attitude you are displaying right now, nobody would answer questions.

Furthermore, your lack of explanations are mirroring zwetschenwasser's lack of explanations. You both claim to "explain" things without really giving an adequate explanation, and then when asked to clarify you just keep pointing back to your original "explanation." Need I elaborate?

Fact

: Scum like to leech off other players' arguments.

Fact

: You are leeching off Green Crayons, and when asked to explain why you agree with GC you cannot do so.

Fact

: I am now voting for you.

I find it ridiculous that you claim that you were "forced to physically write out your suspicions" when all you did was quote Green Crayons. Your word choice here also conveys the connotation that you just about exhausted yourself with these efforts, which is rubbish.

Note

: I recognize that Seraphim has done something very similar (in claiming to not remember what in Green Crayons' post he found suspicious), but Seraphim -- unlike Albert -- has not continually tried to defend that position.

~

Green Crayons, did you suspect I was an alt before the game went into night, or was that some revelation you just had today?

What in particular would you like me to elaborate on, if anything?

What exactly was the purpose of your post concerning me where your ultimate conclusion was "she is either scum or she is not"? At a glance you appear to be trying to ask me to explain things more often, but I am catching the ulterior motive of trying to probe into how experienced a player I am without asking me up front.

As scum, who do you generally choose to nightkill? Do you like to kill players like me?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

You definately pulled the classic "Look, I'm mafia trying to look like a town!" or the less classic "Look, I'm doc trying to not be subtle about me being the doc!" Either way, players don't congratulate the doctor anymore. It puts a big fat target on their head (by the town if they're scum; by scum if they're the doctor). So, congrats, you just exposed yourself for one or the other.

False dilemma. I suggest that ZEEnon neither confirm nor deny whether he is a Doctor.

Your Albert vote. Your me FOS. If we could be scum together. Your thoughts on ZEE's Gorrad suspicions. Your thoughts on my Seraphim's suspicions. Who you think would round out a three person mafia (assuming Albert and myself are you first two suspects).

That's a tall milkshake you're ordering.

At the very least, I just explained the main gist of my Albert vote, and my reasons for FoSing you stem largely from yesterday. Yes, I do think you and Albert could be scum together, and I made a note for myself to that same effect in Post 120 when the thought first occurred to me. (

CRAB-G

meaning GC + ABR, of course).

As for your other areas for which you would like elaboration, I will try to look over the game again with those in mind, but I do not have the time to do so right now.

Why in particular are you interested in a three person mafia group? Why in particular would you even want somebody to post a full list of three mafia on Day Two of the game with no dead members of a mafia?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I do not understand the current penchant for trying to narrow down who could be a Doctor in this game. Stop it.

~

ZEEnon, where exactly did you check for Albert B. Rampage’s meta?

You have been misconstruing the gravamen of the tell of ‘congratulating the doctor.’ What the tell gets at is: (i) scum who realize that they have been thwarted in their nightkill attempt want to pass it off as being great for them, despite the fact that they are likely feeling an icicle to the heart; and (ii) doctors tend to think that the scum are less likely to suspect that they are doctor if they spent a post to congratulate the doctor. Your reaction since being accused has definitely been on the excessive side. Have you ever encountered this tell before?

~

Gorrad, what do you think of PhilyEc? What do you think of Albert B. Rampage? I am looking for substantial answers here, not one-liners.

~

Glados, do[es your position] on Albert still stand?

Yes. His play has been inconsistent and he is trying to sweep it under the carpet by blatantly asking us to ignore it, all the while refusing to answer direct questions posed to him. Can you think of a more perfect thing for scum to be able to get away with if they can? Now he is going out of his way – along with Green Crayons – to narrow down who could be a Doctor. It disgusts me.

~

FoS: PhilyEc

. Something about using the phrase "leeching" directly after I myself use the phrase to describe ABR is rubbing me the wrong way. It feels like you have been ingratiating towards me for much of the game, and now I think I'm catching instances of imitation.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I was first to bring leeching into play to describe ABR.

I stand corrected. Apologies.

I noticed you doing exactly what you've accused me of yet I hadnt brought it up BECAUSE its a word anyone can utilise.

But this makes me wonder. I'm not sure I believe that. There is a definite lack of immediacy between your use of the word leeching on Day One and my use of leeching on Day Two. I really only noticed your usage of it today because the word seemed to be suddenly popping up in multiple posts.

~

ZEE, I gotta say, this nails it. Resulting to a personal insult when attacked like that when there was no need makes me pretty bloody set in my vote.

Not really understanding this. I seem to recall a good number of personal insults flying around in this game, but none of those made you "pretty bloody set" or even caused you to vote, that I recall. Please explain ZEEnon's insult to Korlash is different from other insults in the game (perhaps even my own "this is how stupid you sound," if you consider that an insult).

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

As part of a required test protocol, I will not be monitoring the next few days unless I can find time.

Before leaving, I will write up a short synopsis of the things Green Crayons asked me to elaborate on that I have not yet addressed.

Your thoughts on ZEE's Gorrad suspicions.

ZEEnon’s suspicions seem to be based largely on the theory of other players turning out to be scum (those players being Albert B. Rampage and Seraphim). For my thoughts on this in general, read my answer to Question #3 below.

Your thoughts on my Seraphim's suspicions.

To continually point out the obvious, Seraphim’s “reentrance” into the game at the end of Day One pretty much consisted of claiming the two people most likely to be lynched were also his top two suspects.

Seraphim is one I have been puzzling over, however. I have been tempted to vote for him today, but I have found myself rather deterred by the fact that both Green Crayons and Albert B. Rampage are pushing for Seraphim.

Who you think would round out a three person mafia (assuming Albert and myself are you first two suspects).

This I will not answer. I do not see the relevance, as:

(i)

There may not even be a mafia group of three;

(ii)

A third person in such a group would be completely dependant on the premise that both Albert B. Rampage and Green Crayons are scum together and have a third partner. Trying to deduce alignments based on the assumption that two particular players will turn out to be mafia is statistically likely to be a futile exercise;

(iii)

It invites the faulty inference of “if you cannot find a third person to be in our hypothetical scum-group, then you are obviously wrong about the scum-pairing.” In my experience, scum groups of three usually do not make “sense” without the benefit of some hindsight and alignment reveals; and

(iv)

Searching for a third partner would only be a distraction for me at this point, and would likely result in me developing a sort of tunnel-vision about Green Crayons and/or Albert B. Rampage being scum.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Actually, I did not address Question #1 as directly as I thought my answer to Question #3 would. To be more precise, then:

I am not a fan of including somebody as a "suspicious player" based on possible connections to a player whose alignment is unrevealed. ZEEnon's inclusion of Gorrad as a suspicious player on his list of three appears to be largely contingent on others' alignments, and I hence generally disapprove of it.

[GLaDOS]

I have skimmed the latest happenings, and I will process them later.

I am not Kon.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

ZEEnon, where exactly did you check for Albert B. Rampage’s meta? This is a repeat of my question from Post 300.

~

Mastin, you have already have three instances where you point out possible roles: (1) speculating that Korlash hinted at something with “<3 Chadokun”; (2) speculating that Korlash hinted at something by using “train”; and (3) speculating that I have a killing role because I used a quote from

Portal

about killing test subjects;

What was the purpose in bringing this speculation to the town? How does it help the town? This sort of thing seems better suited to give the mafia ideas or ideas for fake-claim, and is a subtle way to fish at roles. I completely agree with Green Crayons on this point.

FoS: Mastin

.

Additionally:

Seraphim’s lack of posting seemed to be interesting, for the most part.

What made Seraphim’s lack of posting more interesting than others’ lack of posting? This seems to be revolving around page 4 of so of the game, where multiple players were not really posting. Honestly, this throwaway line in your post makes me think you only included because Seraphim happens to be a top suspect today.

~

I am somewhat skeptical of Seraphim’s claim. Seraphim, why did you target Gorrad on Night One? Do you die if you hide with scum?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Seraphim, a few more questions:

I am

Kon

and have the ability to "hide" with another player rendering me untargetable for kills that night. However, if the player I am hiding behind is targeted for a kill, I also die.

1.) You said you die if the person you hide with is

targeted

for a kill. Are you saying that if the player you hide with is town and somehow eludes dying (through protection, unnightkillability, etc.), you die anyways?

2.) Specifically, you say you are "untargetable for kills. Are you "untargetable" for other actions?

3.) Were you summarizing while looking at your role PM, or from memory?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Seraphim, your claimed role is leading me to a lot of confusion.

1. I target someone to hide behind.
2. If I am targeted for a kill, the kill does not go through.
3. Any other action translates to the person I am hiding behind. For example, if someone targets me to track, investigate, role-cop, etc, I would return a result of the person I am hiding behind.
4. If the person I am hiding behind dies, I die as well.

In addition to Gorrad's concern:

1.)

What happens if you are tracked? Would the tracker get results on the person you hid behind? They wouldn’t see you hide behind the person?

2.)

What happens if you are watched? Would the Watcher instead get the results on the player you hid behind? Would the Watcher get results on

both

all players who targeted you

and

all the players who targeted the person you hide behind?

3.)

What happens if you hide behind a Doctor and that same Doctor protects you? Does this essentially mean the Doctor protects himself, therefore leaving both of you completely invincible so long as there is only one kill each night?

4.)

Same as above – a Cop could investigate themselves and would not even know it? [Same goes for Tracker, Watcher, or any information role].

There are also further concerns with the role that I do not see the need to point out now, but I will have to think on them. From an experience standpoint, I do not recall seeing a Hider who did not die from hiding behind scum.

Please link me to fake-claims you have made in the past from finished games.

[GLaDOS]

3. I would assume that if the doctor protected me and I was hiding behind him, he would target me normally. Also, I looked back again, one would also conclude that roleblocks would stop me hiding altogether.

Come again? Does your role expressly state that all actions are attributed to the person you hide behind except for Doctors? Why do you assume a Doctor to be an exception?

I’m starting to disbelieve Seraphim’s role-claim even more than I was previously. The whole “transferred investigations” seems to be a way for him to argue with investigation results: “well, you didn’t investigate

me

, you investigated the person I hid behind.”

~

On his profile. On everyone's profile you can find a link 'Find all posts by ******.'

So just to be clear: you do not know the difference between ABR as town and ABR as scum? You just know how ABR “usually posts,” without knowing the context of those posts in an actual game?

I don't like how Gorrad uses his gut to scumhunt.
In the past i've seen that scum use this as an excuse to push more suspicion on players
when they have nothing else to use against them.

Would you mind citing an example (or a few examples) of this?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

If he hides behind the doctor, he's immune to being killed. If the doctor protects him, then he's double-protected. If the scum target the doctor, the doc would, probably, still die, yet he would live, due to doctor protection. Depends on whether the mod believes in 'doc owns all', or 'doc's weak'.
Just my insight.

Then let me explain again. Seraphim just explained, for example, that investigations will transfer to whoever Seraphim is hiding behind. So if a Seraphim hid behind a Cop, and that Cop investigated Seraphim, then the Cop would investigate himself or herself.

A Doctor would work in the same way -- the protection would be transferred from Seraphim to the person Seraphim hid behind. That means the Doctor would protect himself or herself. And when that occurs, then a nightkill against that Doctor would fail (because they are protected), and also, a nightkill against Seraphim would fail (because he would be hiding). So in effect both would be immune to single nightkills for the entirety of the game.

I have definite problems with believing that.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I am going to join with the call for more expansive answers from Albert B. Rampage. And if you are counter-claiming the name of Kon, we definitely need to know that. Right now it seems to me as if you are trying to rush this day to a finish, and I see no need for such a rush.

~

As for Mastin's claim that a "transferred investigation" would only result in a loss of one day, two points to make.

1.)

Losing a single day is more than a town should be willing to give if they can get by without losing any days.

2.)

Worst-case scenario is a waste of three days. Worst case scenario assumes a Sane Cop who investigates Seraphim as Seraphim hides behind X. In that situation, we only know that at least one of those

three

players is scum (and that is only under the assumption that we have a Sane Cop, etc). It does not actually narrow down the realm of possibility to two lynches, since we have to first believe the Cop.

~

As a point to consider -- and I have pondered whether or not this is an appropriate consideration, and I believe it is -- if Seraphim is telling the truth about his role, then the town might just lose the additional lynch we have gained by having no nightkills last night.

For example, if we lynch somebody other than Seraphim today and then Seraphim dies along with the person he hides behind tonight, we'll jump down to 8 players rather than 9 players.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Still waiting on Albert B. Rampage.

I will emphasize that deadline is Monday morning (closer to Sunday evening) in forum time, and that we

must reach a full majority

in order to lynch anybody in this game. If I do not think we have a feasible lynch on somebody that I want to lynch other than Seraphim, then I will vote for Seraphim before the deadline hits to assure we get a lynch.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Crunched on time, but I am not dissuaded from a Seraphim lynch.

Unvote: Albert B. Rampage, Vote: Seraphim

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Short on time, but I do not believe that PhilyEc had a guilty result on Gorrad.

First, PhilyEc made about 4 substantive posts on Day Two before ever voting for Gorrad. Second, PhilyEc switched from Gorrard to Seraphim as Day Two come to a close. Perhaps just as importantly, we

did

just lynch a scum Redirector – this casts doubt onto all investigations done on Night One, even

if

PhilyEc did have such a result.

For the record, though, if I were to speculate as to PhilyEc’s result, it would probably have been an innocent investigation on Albert B. Rampage, given the contrast of language we have from PhilyEc’s last post on Day One, which was Post 252, and PhilyEc’s first post on Day Two, which was Post 283.

[GLaDOS]

Edit by way of Post:

Looks like Post 283 was PhilyEc's

second

post of Day Two. The point remains.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

And anyone who speculates on who the cop might have investigated and the result of it is doing something

extremely scummy

.

Here I disagree -- which is obvious, seeing as I just speculated as to who PhilyEc investigated on Night One. Quite often, Cops die before they can claim. If they probably have results -- which is likely in this case, although such results are obviously not guaranteed to be accurate -- I think it entirely careless to

not

try and figure out who they investigated. There is no point in ignoring potential sources of information, especially sources of information that come directly from the Mod.

That said,

heavily relying

on such speculation is another matter. Possible investigation results are simply something which ought to be taken into account.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Hi. It looks like I will be connected for the next thirty minutes or so if you would like to give me something to respond to.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I want a full-claim from Xtoxm. To this day, I have never seen somebody in a position where they are about to be lynched who was better off not claiming their role, especially this early in a game.

~

I am perfectly fine with posts like the one Mastin just posted. Seeing a thought-process can be more helpful than seeing the product sometimes.

However, please stop speculating what roles you think people might have (such as your Mason group speculation). This definitely seems to be a bad habit of yours in this game. If people drop tells/hints for their roles, it is because they

do not

want them pointed out – and chances are they know more about when information is relevant to point out more than you do. If you finding completely

inconsistent

tells then that could be different, as there you may be dealing with somebody trying to set up multiple avenues for fake-claims. Just be sure to use judgment.

~

I have not yet seen a real reason to suspect Korlash of being scum. I would appreciate seeing some reasoning, or being pointed to reasoning.

[GLaDOS]

Hmm. That is definitely an interesting theory (about which Hollows are in the game), and my own role tends to corrobate the theory. I may choose to claim after Xtoxm fully claims, but I will need to think on it.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

1) Indirectly defends (her scumbuddy) Xtoxm.
2) Proves how she found out PhilyEc was the cop.
3) Tries to appeal to me by saying that PhilyEc got an innocent result on me.

1.) My post saying that I do not believe PhilyEc did not investigate Gorrad is not in any way a defense of Xtoxm; I was disagreeing with his post. Furthermore, I later say that I disagree with relying on such speculation, as Xtoxm did.
2.) My post shows that I have the common sense to analyze a Cop’s posts after they are dead to figure out who they were likely to have investigated and what their likely result was, and nothing more.
3.) Considering that in my own post I point out that I would be distrustful of investigation results stemming from Night One, I don’t see how my post does anything to appeal to you. Like I said earlier, PhilyEc’s possible result is something I will consider when making my choices on who to vote, but I will not be using it as a crux of any analysis. Furthermore, even in the event that I am correct about PhilyEc's investigation, and assuming he was not redirected, that does not rule out investigative immunity.

~

I am just going to go ahead and claim. I am Yasutora Sado. My passive ability is to survive the first nightkill attempt on me (which made me immediately skeptical of Seraphim’s claim). This does not seem to be a ‘latent’ ability that really needs to be ‘awakened’ before it can be used. If I have some latent ability, I was not told of it.

For the record, I was planning on never claiming my actual role, but I think there is a fair chance I have already exhausted it’s effect on Night One, especially since more than one more player (not recallnig who at the moment) alluded that they ‘thought I would be dead’ by Day Two.

~

Note: Yuichi was the boy saved from Shrieker, who was the Serial Killer in this game.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Although actually, my role does hint that I am not fully aware of my abilities. I had just thought of that as a throwaway descriptive line until now.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

*gasp* I have found Chado! My non-official sub goal has been achieved! Hold me... ^_^

Well, you found me. Congratulations. Was it worth it?

~

I am wondering if a mass-claim is proper here. In all likelihood, the scum has quite a good idea of the set-up already by this point, and claiming now deprives scum of the opportunity of an additional night of thinking of fake-claims. We seem to have a number of people who think it might be detrimental to claim their roles, but as others have pointed out, it is not really detrimental if it (i) successfully prevents a town player from being lynched, or (ii) results in a scum being lynched.

~

Green Crayons, considering that you say:

I'm thinking Xtox, ZEE and Albert are solid town. DOS and Mastin are leaning town.

I think we should be lynching either Korlash or Gorrad today. Nobody else.

What are your thoughts on Jebus / LynchHimNotMe?

~

Instead of enabling positive effects, he enables negative.

Can you go into more detail for this speculation? I am not understanding how such a role would work in theory or in practice.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

On the whole Post 634 is reading very poorly to me.

1.)

I don't have any feelings towards [Jebus], because he has been more of a lurker than you. Amazing, but true.

Excuse me? If you are accusing me of lurking then be up-front about it, and then explain why you think that.

2.)

I actually would be really happy with a Jebus lynch simply because he's acting like a super lurker scumbag. I'm not dead-set on it because we

are

ahead and can afford a mislynch - so I'm willing to go for either Korlash or Gorrad today.

I am just not following the logic here. If we can “afford a mislynch” then this should be an argument in favor of Green Crayons being more willing to consider lynching Jebus, rather than keeping his options narrowed down to Korlash or Gorrad as he ends up doing.

3.)

This is so scummy that it hurts so much. And it's scummy because the reason for my dichotomy is so incredibly town. If you truly don't see the cause behind it, it's because you're either a really dense/blind town or you're a scumbag feigning ignorance.

I will plainly say that I do not see a reason for the dichotomy.

I agree with Korlash’s post in many respects. Townspeople get things wrong all the time – period. This is a turn of phrase, and obviously does not literally mean “town’s are wrong 100% of the time,” as that is a clearly preposterous position to defend.

As a game continues, one can only hope that the town becomes more and more accurate and more able to agree on their suspicions. This does not change the fact that most actual townspeople are at some point suspicious of almost

every

other player in the game, and that necessarily a majority of such suspicions are wrong. It is an extremely rare occurrence for a townsperson to be correct with every suspicion they give, let alone every non-random vote they give.

4.)

So I'm asking the town to trust the cop (as they should) and me (who was one of the players who strongly pushed for scumbag Seraphim's lynch). Not too much of a stretch here.

There are a good number of things wrong with this.

->

a.)

PhilyEc may not have had correct information. [See: Cop sanities, mafia redirector, investigation immunity, etc.]

->

b.)

There is no reason to foist PhilyEc’s judgment over my own judgment. To use your words, I know that

my

suspicions are not motivated by scum origins. Why ignore my thought process and rely on a thought process that I can no longer even ask about?

Your argument, in effect, is:

This person was town, so let’s follow whoever they were going after.

This is clearly a bad argument, and it is furthermore just about the easiest argument for scum to manipulate their play to subvert. It is pretty much

the

most classic way to get a town to chase it's own tail.

->

c.)

Last I checked, PhilyEc thought “Seraphim is confirmed in [his] books” and was actually opposing the Seraphim lynch for almost the entirety of Day Two. I see little reason to think that his other thoughts were more valid.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I want to have him lynched slightly less than I wanted to have him lynched yesterday, and that is largely due to his involvement in the Seraphim lynch. As of yesterday, if I were to quantify my want to have Green Crayons lynched, it would probably have been: "I want Green Crayons dead before the game can get down to five players."

Right now I am unsure who I want to lynch for today, since I am still thinking through the claims and processing Days One and Two.

Still, I have not liked the way he has attacked people throughout the game. This includes his attack on Giuseppe on Day One, his attack on Seraphim from Day One and Day Two (despite the fact that these attacks ended up being against scum), and now his attacks on Gorrad and Korlash on Day Three. There is something about the way he has been going after people that does not sit with me.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Since you lack the most technical aspects of the game and are far behind everyone else in terms of experience, I think you should latch onto a more experienced player and expand on their theories instead of playing an independent game, which you are not yet ready to do. Look at ZEEnon as a model; he is a prime example of faithfully attaching yourself to someone with a more clearly defined mafia skillset.

This may be the most callous and most insulting thing I have ever seen in a game of mafia -- and it is directed at both Mastin and to ZEEnon. Regardless of what your alignment is, you should be ashamed for suggesting this as a serious strategy. What kind of role model are you? Any respect I had for you as a player -- and especially as "mentor" -- has just been lost.

~

ZEEnon, would you mind giving a compiled synopsis on why you suspect Korlash?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Yes. From what I can discern, ZEEnon has been researching the game independently, creating theories based off that research independently, and drawing conclusions as to alignments largely based off those theories. Green Crayons has been doing no such thing. Simply because two players come to similar conclusions -- which in this case involves a dichotomy between Korlash and Gorrad -- that does not mean that one is latching onto the other.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Incredible. Warning: Long post.

Pardon? Are you suggesting that you have been an incredibly active player this game?

Since when does "not being

incredibly

active" mean "lurking"? I post when I can, and I post when I have something to say. The only time where I was

inactive

was the time frame between April 1 - April 6, when I told the town ahead of time that I would be gone as "part of a required test protocol." I probably average about one to two posts a day, and that is about what I expect my posting rate to be.

Why don't you lay down your definition of lurking?

~

Oh, wow. Wow. Wow.

DOS thinks we should completely ignore suspicions of confirmed (dead) innocents.

That's about the scummiest thing I can think of to say. It doesn't matter that Phily was the cop. He could have been a vanilla townie for all I care. But he was town. It's confirmed. We don't have to worry about him attempting to manipulate the town with his suspicions when we look at the previous days. We can take his opinions and suspicions at face value - a luxury we don't have with any living players.

You have done it again. You have taken a phrase and tried to interpret into meaning the most rigid and preposterous thing possible. Let’s compare your “interpretation” to what I actually said:

Your argument, in effect, is:

This person was town, so let’s follow whoever they were going after.

This is clearly a bad argument, and it is furthermore just about the easiest argument for scum to manipulate their play to subvert. It is pretty much the most classic way to get a town to chase it's own tail.

Never did I say to "ignore" the suspicions of PhilyEc. My position is that we should not be blindly following the dead and throwing away

our own suspicions

in the hopes that the dead player was correct. I have a brain of my own, and I think I am better served to find scum with it then the last words of a dead player who was completely wrong about Seraphim.

Unless you give reasons as to why you think PhilyEc’s judgment is better than my own judgment, I have no reason to try to lynch whoever PhilyEc was going after last. I guarantee you that as scum I have set up “domino” lynches many times. In other words, I kill somebody who was on the wrong track, and then people rush down the wrong track, and then they double-back on whoever

that

person was going after, and so forth. It is mindless and very easy to manipulate through nightkill choices and bandwagons.

~

I also loled at the "manipulating" dead town's play. It's clear that Phily suspected Gorrad and Korlash. You don't have to agree with those suspicions, but they're there. It's a fact. Please tell me how stating Phily's suspicions is somehow "manipulating" his play?

This is absolutely ridiculous. I honestly do not know how you can even

read

my post to say that scum are currently manipulating players who are

dead

. It is easy to manipulate because once

one

town player is proven wrong through a lynch, then why not try following the second town player, or the third town player? It is just a continues cycle that can easily result in the town chasing it’s own tail.

Your argument lies completely on the assumption that "whoever the scum killed was correct in their suspicions," and this is not a premise I find to be valid, especially in this instance where PhilyEc may have been killed for other reasons entirely.

~

Basically, I'm suggesting we should pay attention to dead town's suspicions as we reflect upon our opinions. We pay attention to living players' opinions who we think are town. So the only difference is the fact that dead players are town-confirmed by the mod whereas living ones are not, so dead players' opinions are more legitimate.

Not

reliable, but legitimate, because we can trust them more to reflect the town's best interest. The fact that Korlash and DOS both don't want to rely on this incredibly rich minefield of information is... I don't know... incredibly scummy?

See above. I

agree

that it is

worth

looking at what dead townspeople say. But this does not mean I am going to

follow

dead townspeople.

And you are wrong to say that the only “difference” is that we are alive and PhilyEc is dead and confirmed.

1.)

We have one more night’s worth of information.

2.)

We know the alignment of one more player than PhilyEc does. [Discounting possible correct investigations, obviously.]

3.)

We have had the opportunity to see how positions have changed during Day Three.

4.)

We have had the opportunity to see a good number of role-claims today, and therefore have a much better view of the probable set-up.

I have a good deal more information than PhilyEc had, and I am much more inclined to use my own reasoning over somebody else’s reasoning, whether they are town or not. Yes, it is true that PhilyEc is not scum, but the same will be true of all other players who die in this game as town.

Now, I would like you to answer this question, Green Crayons. Suppose you are a Cop that has a 100% Sane result -- there is absolutely no question that your investigations are always accurate. Now, you get an innocent result on a player who is alive. Would you then begin following that player simply because their reasoning must be legitimate? Or would you continue acting off your own reasoning?

The difference between us here appears to be the following:

You think we should follow PhilyEc (and you) without question because PhilyEc is confirmed and town, and therefore his reasoning is legitimate and not scum-motivated.

I

think PhilyEc's suspicions are worth noting, but that they should not subsume a player's

own

thought process.

~

I actually typed it out, previewed it, looked it over, gave it a final moment or two of thought and then decided against it. I'm really confident in it and I think my suspicions of both Gorrad and Korlash are legitimate while standing on their own - dichotomy not needed. Since one of you (Korlash) has a significant chance at being scum, I'm not going to harm the town to appease scum to explain why these two are in an either/or position. The rest of the town can just accept the fact that I (and Phily, and ZEE...) find them both to be suspicious and make their judgments based off of the examples of scum play I brought up.

Pardon my French, but:

FISH-SHAPED SOLID WASTE

. If you

honestly

think you have a theory that narrows a scum down to 1 or 2 players, then there is

absolutely no reason to withhold it

, especially when the town is in such a good position as we are. Who cares if it “might” help the scum a little bit? I guarantee that whatever mystical "benefit" that would be given to the scum will be outweighed if your theory actually results in a scum-lynch.

When it comes down to it, mafia is a game of numbers, and not information. If the town lynches scum every day, then it simply does not matter how much information the scum has.

[GLaDOS]

… Processing …

I think we should be lynching either Korlash or Gorrad today. Nobody else. I don't want to explain my reasons for this (so, yes, I'm asking people to trust me and my judgment) at all today - besides saying that the reasons are grounded in D2 judgment - because it would really help scum at the town's expense.

The evidence behind the Gorrad/Korlash dichotomy is one of them, though it's plain to see with one's eyes open while looking at D2. I will say that Phily, our cop and confirmed innocent, thought that either Gorrad or Korlash was scummy. My reasoning does not stem from this fact, but this just shows that a confirmed innocent was also of the mind that at least one of these two were scumbags. So, technically, the town doesn't just have to trust me - the town can trust Phily and I.

Both of these posts are essentially asking me to follow you (i.e. PhilyEc) without question. You explicitly ask the town

trust you

. That is the very definition of blindly following. I am not in the least convinced that you are town, so the fact that “PhilyEc’s inclinations match with

your

own” does not mean anything to

me

. Everything I said I stand by.

~

To say I want you out of the game for some “inexplicable” reason is ludicrous. I have been suspicious of you for much of the game, and I have made that clear. To say that I would want you dead before the game can reach 5 players alive is to say that if I had the chance to kill all but five players (let’s assume through some special dayvig power), you would be one of the players I kill. In other words, yesterday you were not in my top five “players most likely to be town.”

~

Fine. ZEE is the doctor. Or, if he isn't, he been acting like he is the doctor - and to the outside observer it's one and the same. He dropped at least three big time hints/tells at the beginning of yesterday. It was so incredibly obvious that I can't believe you didn't catch it. In light of these doctor tells, Gorrad and Korlash pushed his lynch heavy all throughout the day. My best guess as to why ZEE isn't currently dead is because scum thought they would at least give it a day/night cycle so we wouldn't immediately go back and check out what scumbags really wanted ZEE-doc dead. The fact of the matter is, both Gorrad and Korlash were big ZEE-lynch supporters. So was Seraphim. I think it's either/or because I can't see SeraScum AND scumbuddy one AND scumbuddy two trying to lynch the doctor - it's just too incredibly obvious. But, coupled with their suspicious play style, I'm convinced at least one of them was attempting to help their buddy SeraScum get out from beneath the spotlight while lynching the doctor in the process.

You say this as if I am blind (“I can’t believe you didn’t catch it”). I have long since thought that if there is a Doctor that ZEEnon is the most likely candidate. This led me to believe that: (a) either ZEEnon is the Doctor who probably protected me on Night One (given that he thought I was “an excellent choice for a night kill”), and that he wondered if you “knew that I was Night Two’s target”); or (b) ZEEnon is town and has accidentally / purposefully given off strong Doctor tells; or (c) he is scum that probably tried to kill me Night One and is setting up a possible avenue for a claim.

As you can probably tell, I think it is very likely that I was indeed scum’s target for a Night One kill, and this was largely the reason why I asked if you “like to kill players like me” back in Post 270. Players like me – of course – being an experienced player (which you admit you suspected since Day One) who has been going after

you

.

I will be frank that I think your theory of “scum are the most likely to have attacked ZEEnon for his Doctor tell” is not as surefire as you make it to be. I think it quite likely that one scum would take such an avenue of attack, and that has already been proven through Seraphim’s death. To now say with 95% certainty (although you admit this is just a number you’ve thrown out) that there must be a second scum is to stretch too far, in my opinion.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Largely waiting on ZEEnon.

~

Albert B. Rampage, where exactly has Green Crayons been 'bragging' about Day Two?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I want a Gorrad claim. I am ready to vote for him and I am only not doing so in order to disallow a hammer vote (including a self-hammer).

I am still in favor of a mass-claim. If we’re going to do it, though, then sooner is better, as (i) it prevents an additional night of thinking and planning and reacting to further deaths; (ii) the scum probably pretty much know most of the set-up by now; and (iii) it prevents an end of the day claim on a wagon which could result in a last-minute scramble.

~

I am also going to make this very clear. Our claimed Nurse has claimed to protect me on Night One, the night we did not have nightkill. Unless you think mafia no-killed or something else prevented a nightkill, then in all likelihood the mafia tried to kill me on Night One. For those who do not think there are three scum groups, this means I’m not scum. This comment is mostly made with an eye towards Albert B. Rampage, since he seems to be the only one who has not gotten this through his head.

If I am correct about this then if the scum want me dead they’ll pretty much have to lynch me. Good luck with that, by the way.

~

ZEEnon, a few questions.

1.) What did you have to ask the mod about to clarify your role?
2.) Why did you protect me Nights One and Two?
3.) Are you given any indication of what way your 50% goes each night? Any notification for successful protects?
4.) Please explain how the presence of Yuzu makes Kanonji a less likely character with your theory. It seemed like just a while ago your theory

supported

Kanonji being int he game, so I am confused.

Also, because I feel it might be unfair for me to keep silent on this issue, the first thing I did was to check ZEEnon’s link for his picture to see if it came from the same website as my picture. It did not. ZEEnon’s picture in fact came from ZEEnon’s photobucket account, where he had 7 other recent photos with Yuzu in them. A few of those had other characters in them, but they all largely centered on Yuzu (except for one ‘family’ picture). Unfortunately I could not find a way to figure out what days ZEEnon uploaded the photos onto his account.

The mod has allowed me to post this since the information was fair game for anybody willing to do the research. I tend to think this supports his claim.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Apologies; when you said you were "wary" of Xtoxm's claim I thought you meant you doubted the claim more than you claimed to earlier (when you bordered on saying Xtoxm was 'confirmed'). I can see how I read that incorrectly.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

ZEEnon: I am not told when or if I use my passive ability. I have already checked with the moderator on this point.

Albert B. Rampage: If I had wanted my identity known I would not be playing under an alternate account.

I am putting myself in sleep mode for the night, so if you have other questions I willl answer them when I reboot.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I am also going to make this very clear. Our claimed Nurse has claimed to protect me on Night One, the night we did not have nightkill. Unless you think mafia no-killed or something else prevented a nightkill, then in all likelihood the mafia tried to kill me on Night One. For those who do not think there are three scum groups, this means I’m not scum. This comment is mostly made with an eye towards Albert B. Rampage, since he seems to be the only one who has not gotten this through his head.

Your own claimed role directly contradicts this paragraph.

Unvote, Vote: GLaDOS

.

What? The point of my paragraph is that if ZEEnon is telling the truth, then in all likelihood

nobody

besides me would be protected in some manner on Night One. If ZEEnon had protected somebody else on Night One, then there would be more than one option on who could have been targeted for the Night One kill (i.e. me and whoever ZEEnon claimed to protect), such that drawing conclusions about who was the nightkill target would be much more difficult.

You might want to get to claiming soon.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Waiting on claims from Albert B. Rampage, Jebus, and Mastin. I don’t particularly care what order so long as we get them quickly. We also need to get targets from Korlash and Xtoxm. Every player in the game has had the opportunity to say whether they had their latent abilities activated and none have done so. For the record – as I do not believe I have said it explicitly – I have been given no indication that my latent powers, if any, have been activated.

~

Gorrad, why did you jailkeep PhilyEc on Night One?
Why did you jailkeep ZEEnon on Night Two?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

My role

definitely

has a latent power. At least, i'm pretty sure.
I had to ask for clarification on my role from the moderator during confirmation to fully understand it.

My role PM did not come out and say what my role was.
It told me what I did, but I was not informed of the role name.

Please reconcile these statements. This first quote seems to say that you did not understand your role, while the second seems to say that you understood your role but simply did not know your role-name.

~

Albert B. Rampage, I find that you hover around Coney Island quite a bit. Next time you do, try claiming.

~

Gorrad, what were your thoughts on Day Two when you saw that there were no deaths?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Still waiting on claims. Chop, chop.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage, you have claimed a name and not a role. Hurry it up.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage, you have still not claimed your role. Get on that, please. We also need targets from Korlash, and a more complete claim from Green Crayons. Also waiting on Mastin to flesh out his claim.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage, I have noticed that you still have not claimed your role. I suggest that this be remedied.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Definitely suggest that nobody hammers Gorrad right now. We have a week until deadline hits, and Albert B. Rampage is

still

not claiming his role.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I have a passive ability that I do not want to claim at the moment.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage makes a rather bad argument that because I have claimed that I survive the first nightkill on me, that I am scum. Allow me to quickly demonstrate how this is incorrect.

1.)

When I claimed my role, the Serial Killer was already dead, and there have been no indicators that there are any killing roles beyond that of a Serial Killer. Albert B. Rampage essentially implying that not only could the mafia redirect the Serial Killer kills, but that a member of the mafia could also survive at least one Serial Killer kill.

2.)

Even the most cursory of glances at past OhGodMyLife games show that our mod has a penchant for including partial nightkill-immune roles in various ways.

->

a.)

In Medieval Mafia there were members of the town who were immune only to kills from particular members of the mafia.
->

b.)

In SPQR Mafia the mafia had to keep a particular member of the mafia alive in order to nightkill at all.
->

c.)

In Satin Doll Showdown, there were no such restrictions on nightkills. However, the game did include the presence of a Jailkeeper as well as a Governor (who could prevent lynches).
->

d.)

In New Age Mafia there were no such roles that I can see, although the role PMs were not posted to my knowledge. The only protective role was a “weak doctor” (the mechanics of which I do not know), but the town also had a Vigilante to compete with the two scum groups. Note that the game also had two town Trackers, and based on this I do not think it is unreasonable to have two town Spirit Enablers in this game who use different flavor.

Obviously not all of the games share a common theme, but this actually supports me in this case. None of the set-ups from OhGodMyLife have been

too

similar, but they all had reasonable ways to counteract the scum’s nightkills (with immunity to certain killers; restrictions on which members the mafia can kill with; a jailkeeper and a governor; and a weak doctor with a Vigilante).

3.)

Assume for the sake of argument that Gorrad is scum. This means that – with the claims as they are currently – only one person in the game had any semblance of protection on Night One, and that person would be me. This would necessitate that the mafia no-killed on Night One.

That theory is ridiculous in that this would keep the game at 11 players rather than reducing the game to 10 players. This effectively gives the town a free lynch. Any ‘advantage’ that might be gained by trying to use the lack of nightkill to bolster a claim is immediately counterbalanced by the fact that such a claim would have to survive an additional day and night of scrutiny.

~

I would like to hear his theory on how he can "prove" that I am scum. He also needs to fully claim his role. What do you mean by becoming a "full" Cop? Do you have any results?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Advising again that a hammer vote is not preferable here, even if Gorrad is scum. We just had a lot of information thrown at us and it needs to be properly processed. We literally have seven more days before deadline hits, and I see no benefit in ending today as quickly as Albert B. Rampage is trying to do.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage's continual avoidance of claiming is noted. In case you have not noticed, you are pretty much the only player in the game who has not actually claimed their role, other than Green Crayons.

Also, role-fishing implies subtlety. There is nothing subtle about directly asking you multiple times to claim your role. The town has clearly expressed it's intent in mass-claiming seeing as practically everybody has claimed their role.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Why would Glados try to rolefish on a player (me) she thinks is town?? Because she's scum, that's why.

You have an incorrect assumption here about me thinking that you are town. Your claim: (i) allows me to consider if you are lying individually, and (ii) allows me to have a better grasp of the likely set-up and therefore who is likely to be scum.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage and Green Crayons still need to claim. Korlash needs to claim targets, and Xtoxm needs to claim his target from last night.

My theory I have had since Day Two has just proven to be more and more correct. I can say now with 99% certainty that I was the nightkill target on Night One. The claimed Nurse protected me on Night One, and even if he was redirected to another player I would have survived a nightkill on me. And – of course – if ZEEnon is mafia then I would just plain be the only player with any semblance of protection in the game, and would hence know that I was indeed the target for the Night One kill.

Really there are only two situations where my theory would be wrong.

1.)

If the Mafia no-killed; or

2.)

If ZEEnon is town and the Mafia redirected him into protecting somebody other than me

and

also targeted that player for their nightkill.

Both are preposterous.

The first I have explained: keeping the game at 11 players rather than dwindling the numbers down to 10 players only gives the town an extra lynch. To give the town another night/day process without even taking a shot at potential investigative or protective roles is insane.

The second is ridiculous because it requires a complete lack of foresight on behalf of the mafia: they would have to somehow discount the possibility that they might be redirecting a Doctor (or some protective role) to protect the very person they are trying to nightkill.

If you vote for me at all, I fully expect for you to give your theory for what you believed to have happened on Night One.

~

I will not be “defending” myself concerning the argument that I am the only claimed major character. That is something beyond my control.

~

Jebus, I have a one-shot nightkill immunity; it is a passive power that I do not choose to activate. Once it is used, it is gone.

~

ZEEnon, I was not against a Gorrad lynch yesterday – as I was hinting at in Post #758, Gorrad's ‘thought process’ at the start of Day Two did not seem genuine to me. If he had

really

role-blocked the person he was most suspicious of to find no kills the next day, I would expect him to give some indication of that in his posts.

My main concern yesterday was to make sure the town followed through with mass-claiming before I placed my vote: I do not like partial mass-claims if the town has decided on mass-claiming.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Jebus, do you consider Kiego to be part of the main plot? What about Mizuiro?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Korlash, I was under no pressure when I claimed on Day Three. I claimed because I thought ZEEnon had a fair chance of breaking the set-up, in that perhaps the scum were Numb Chandelier, Jibikurai, and Bulbous G and that hence the town likely had Orihime (who defeated N.C.), Don Kanonji or Ichigo Kurosaki (who accidentally created / defeated Jibi), and Sado (who defeated Bulbous G), with the theme of awakening spirit powers (which made sense with Xtoxm / Korlash). Additionally, I was working under the theory that I was the Night One kill, which if correct was something I felt the town needed to know at some point.

and the comment about not thinking Phily got a guitly on Gorrad doesn't help

I

still

do not think PhilyEc had a guilty result on Gorrad. The fact that Gorrad turned out to be scum does not mean that PhilyEc magically also investigated him. If you believe PhilyEc had a guilty on Gorrad, then I would like to see your argument.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Albert B. Rampage, I do not even send a PM to the mod at night. My ability is passive, and I survive the first nightkill on me regardless of what night it occurs.

~

My passive ability is Hunted, and the effect is that because I'm being so closely stalked by hollows, their foul reiatsu is overshadowing my own [paraphrased].

Green Crayons, just to be clear: are you claiming that being a miller (as you suspect) is a passive

ability

? And you are also claiming that your passive ability is not set forth for you in a straightforward manner (i.e. you are not told exactly what your ability does)? I am just trying to be clear on this because my passive ability is very straightforward, and not really subject to interpretation.

~

I would still like a full claim from Albert B. Rampage.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

As self-interested as this statement is, trying to make inferences from the posts of a player who was going to be lynched is extremely questionable in itself. If you read through Gorrad's posts as Day Three came to a close, he was pretty much trying to get the wagon off of him by whatever means he could.

As the wagon began to form, he switches from you (ZEEnon) to Xtoxm on a theory he cannot explain; after receiving another vote he attacks you; and then after claiming he attacks me with reasoning he cannot explain. Trying to differentiate between distancing and deflecting in a death rattle is an art even I usually don't bother with.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I see no reason for people to be hiding things at this stage of the game. In all probability, we only need one more correct lynch to win. I see no benefit in withholding information if it could in any way be helpful. It is not as if people are going to be using this information to make a fake-claim.

IOW are you notified if you survive a NK?

No.

Once again I reiterate I have no bleach themed flavor in my ability... Do you?

Since we can apparently claim the names for passive abilities (I am inferring this from both Green Crayons’ and Korlash’s claims), mine is “Remarkable Endurance.” So to answer your question: Not really. I have nothing about reiatsu, hollows, kido(u), ‘spirit threads’, or the like.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

You might have noticed that I do not like to rush things. I am still waiting for Jebus to answer my question to him, as well as for fuller claims from both you and Korlash. I will decide who I want to vote from there.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Mafia lingo: The first nightkill attempt on you will fail.

Bleaach lingo: Your impressive size and strength combined with your armor will allow you to survive the first night kill attempt made on you.

Of these two, mine mirrors the "Bleach lingo."

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I was cleaning out my data banks earlier, and I came across a few lines of thought. They are still very raw, and I would appreciate commentary.

1.)

Assume that Xtoxm activated Albert B. Rampage last night, which allowed Albert B. Rampage to become a Mason with ZEEnon.

Albert B. Rampage has said that he has gotten to start a QuickTopic with ZEEnon, presumably during Night Three. This heavily suggests against the possibility of a Role-Blocker. If there were a Role-Blocker, our Mod would presumably have waited until night ended to make sure that Xtoxm was not role-blocked. (I would further presume our Mod would take such a precaution if the Mafia Redirector was still alive.)

Additionally, I think that having both a Mafia Redirector and a Mafia Role-Blocker is simply ridiculously powerful, especially against a Serial Killer with no known advantages.

2.)

If there is no such role-blocker, then this puts Korlash's failed target of ZEEnon into some question. If Albert B. Rampage believes he has a reason for why Korlash would fail with targeting ZEEnon (as he seems to suggest) I would quite like to hear it. I am already concerned that he was able to "attach" himself onto Gorrad (Godfather) but not ZEEnon (claimed Nurse).

3.)

This also makes me wonder about Gorrad's theory of "negative enabling" which he failed to explain -- perhaps the scum need to use their

own

enabler so that the other scum can use their special powers (i.e. Redirecting, Godfather) at all.

Note that if this theory is correct, it is

very

thematically similar to SPQR Mafia, where the Mafia had to keep a certain member alive in order to nightkill at all, and it had to keep the other two members of the Mafia alive in order to fulfill it's win condition. In this game, the mechanic would simply be that the Mafia needs to keep one of their members alive (their Enabler) to even get to use their special abilities.

4.)

What happens if Xtoxm and Korlash target the same person? Would Xtoxm's role take precedence such that Korlash would not need to "attach" to somebody, or would he attach even though he would not really be enabling? Note that this might explain Korlash's failed targeting, but this would necessitate Xtoxm's role to act

before

Korlash's role.

As I understand, Xtoxm has claimed a "one-night stand" ability, whereas Korlash has claimed an "attached until death" ability.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Hmm, fair point, Xtoxm. I will need to think on it.

Two scum power roles don't seem like too much of a stretch.

A Mafia Role-Blocker requires three scum-power roles (as I consider a Godfather to be a power role). In any case, I believe it is far too powerful because of the following situations:

Situation A

: Serial Killer v Mafia Redirector = Mafia Redirector wins (i.e. redirect the Serial Killer onto themselves while nightkilling them); and

Situation B

: Serial Killer v Mafia Role-Blocker = Mafia Role-Blocker wins (i.e. role-block the Serial Killer while nightkilling them).

In effect, such a set-up would be giving the Mafia two distinct ways to completely diffuse the Serial Killer.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Korlash, my theory comes directly from my workings of balance. When there are two scum-groups, they obviously do not have to be on equal footing, but giving one scum group two "aces in the hole" against the other (which so far as we know had no such "aces") is overkill. Of course, not all mods follow what I consider to be balanced, but judging from OhGodMyLife's past modded games OhGodMyLife definitely has a tendency of adding subtle

restrictions

to the Mafia as opposed to just making them blatantly powerful.

The

town

, on the other hand, gets more power because (i) it is uncoordinated, (ii) the town may rely on a power that is nonexistant when making plans [i.e. fake-claims], and (iii) in this game, the town needs to fend off two scum groups and hence two nightkills each night.

~

Since ZEEnon is basing a vote off of how Green Crayon's claimed passive ability works, I think this justifies Korlash claiming his own passive ability and how it works.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Jebus, please reconcile these three posts:

All I can say is that my role doesn't dance around the main plot

Same here.

I'm Mizuiro Kojima. There is nothing that suggests I'm anything but vanilla.

... Processing ...

Jebus, do you consider Kiego to be part of the main plot? What about Mizuiro?

I don't consider either to be part of the main plot - both characters are extremely minor, and hardly show up at all :/

~

Glados - Do you know if you bulletproof has been used or not, or does this not get told?

I am not told when my one-shot nightkill immunity is used. I feel like I have answered this question multiple times.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Green Crayons, my jump from 2 to 3 was roughly along the following thought-process:

Why would Korlash be able to attach to Gorrad and not to ZEEnon? Perhaps he can only attach to scum. Perhaps he is scum who only attaches to his partners, thus activating his partners. Therefore, perhaps Gorrad’s “negative enabler” was a more weighty suggestion than I first considered.

For the record, Gorrad’s suggestion was that there existed an Enabler who actually

Disabled

town roles; not an Enabler that only helped the scum. But the underpinning of “Mafia Enabler” is what I had in mind.

~

My speculation was obviously making me consider if one of Korlash or Xtoxm is being truthful about their ability, but not their alignment. However, Xtoxm pointing out that neither mafia member was revealed as having a “latent” ability is something that is definitely making me rethink my theory.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Was exchanging words with the Mod last night. Apparently if a role can effect the resolution of other roles (such as a role-blocker) then they cannot change their night-choice once it is submitted. Such a limitation is not placed on roles that do not effect the resolution of other roles (such as a Cop). So if there was a Mafia Role-Blocker then the mod would only have to wait until the Role-Blocker sent in a choice before knowing whether to allow other actions to go through. As such, a fair portion of my reasoning against the presence of a Mafia Role-Blocker may be incorrect.

~

Korlash, do you always know who you are attached to? For example, if you had been redirected on Night One to Albert B. Rampage, would you still be attached to him right now, and would you even know it? What if you were redirected to target yourself?

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Waiting for Jebus to rise.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

ZEEnon, there really are

not

a "million different things" to explain Night One. Various conspiracy theories (i.e. maybe scum purposefully didn't nightkill to make claims more believable) are still thwarted if the

town

has anything which also explains the lack of a nightkill.

For example,

your

role would normally cast doubt on any theory concerning a lack of Night One kills. Suppose you protected Albert B. Rampage Night One; then it would be possible for the scum to have tried to kill

either

Albert B. Rampage

or

me: therefore the point of no-killing would be largely nullified, since the town could not reliably draw any conclusions.

Perhaps, GLaDOS may have coordinated the mafia to NK in order to make her claim more likely.

How often have you been scum?

I can tell you that in my experience I have

never

seriously contemplated no-killing on the first Night of a game as mafia. I cannot even think of a single game off-hand where a mafia chose to no-kill on Night One. That is basically just giving all investigative roles a free investigation, and giving the town a free lynch. The advantages far outweigh the town than they do the mafia. In a game where the only information the scum has is "there was a Serial Killer," the mafia is going to know that the town has more beef than usual to counteract the Serial Killer. No-Killing on Night One just guarantees that the town gets to

keep

all that beef.

The fact is, if scum are going to no-kill to help "back up" a claim, they are going to do it

late in the game

when they can be surer that things will not backfire on them. On Night One it is simply a high-risk move with little chance of reward. Possibly making a claim

slightly

more believable does not matter if the town just decides to use it's extra lynch to lynch that

slightly

more believable scum a day later.

~

Furthermore, Albert B. Rampage, your argument against me based on Mastin's post is rather ridiculous, seeing as:

1.) ZEEnon "promised" to lynch me today

even if

I were

proven

innocent;
2.) You were asking the town to promise to lynch me today and saying that I

must

be lynched today; and
3.) Mastin said he wouldn't not vote for me today if Gorrad was scum.

Based off your logic, if

any

of those three players were nightkilled I would scum, guaranteed.

But I feel I might as well take you up on a bet.

Its impossible she's not scum. There is no WIFOM in this. Just fact.

When I turn up town, I am going to give you a signature which you must include in your signature for the next six months. I will decide on what it will be when I have more time to think on it. If I am scum you can instead force me to take such a signature. Since it is "impossible" I am scum, this should clearly be a no-brainer for you.

~

Vote: Jebus

.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

My point is that all three of you essentially said you would be voting for me today no matter what. Hence, on your logic, if any of those three players were killed then "all evidence" would point to me being scum.

~

Any

bet? Superb.

You need to guarantee that you will not 'coach' or 'mentor' any newbies ever again. I am being completely honest in saying that your post towards Mastin earlier in the game (telling him to stop thinking and to latch onto another player for the rest of the game) was one of the most insulting posts I have seen made towards a newbie, period. You are not fit to be raising new players.

I don't care what what terms you would like to weigh against this bet -- they can be pretty much absolutely anything at all, so far as I am concerned (and this includes my main account). At least this way I feel like I am doing a favor to mafiascum even if I do get lynched.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

If you bothered to do any research whatsoever, you would find that this account has played in one other game (Mini #565, Lethal Weapon), and in that game I accidentally posted under my main account twice, which is petroleumjelly. Furthermore, if you go on mafiawiki and type "GLaDOS" in the search function you will get exactly two results. The second will bring you to my page (petroleumjelly) which clearly states that I was playing as GLaDOS in that game.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Weird, is your username GLaDOS taken from somewhere?

The video game

Portal

features a psychopathic robot named GLaDOS (short for Genetic Lifeform and Disk Operating System). It is a popular game, and I expect I am neither the first nor the last person to make an account on a website under this screen-name.

All right PJ. If you lose the bet, and are indeed mafia, you will ask Jeep to take off your "Best Mafia Performance" banner.

Done. But to be 'fair,' feel free to add to this bet since Jeep should (theoretically) be taking down my banner soon enough. I earned it from it the year before last, and the new banners are probably past due.

Now please let us refocus on the game rather than main/alt accounts and wagers. I do not want this to become a distraction.

~

I am not seeing how Jebus' role "does not dance around the main plot" while simultaneously being an "extremely minor" character. I do not understand his explanation.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Am I just reading this completely wrong?

Not

dancing around the main plot = Major character. If you are not "dancing around" the plot, then you are necessarily

part

of the plot.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

I guess one could read it that way. I have always read something like "he is not dancing around the question" to mean "he is directly answering the question" rather than "he is not dealing with the question at all." I suppose I am forced to accept that there are other interpretations, though.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Difficult question to answer, because I am seriously starting to think that both Korlash and Green Crayons are town and that Jebus is scum. That aside, I have never really suspected Korlash except for reasons stemming directly from his role-claim, whereas I have been suspicious of Green Crayons for most of the game. Hence, I would probably prefer the Green Crayons lynch if I were forced to choose solely between those two players.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Not necessarily, no. Assume Jebus is scum. We are then left with:

1.) Two Spirit Enablers. When a mod basically includes two of the same role in the same game, they are almost always considering the fact that those two roles may get into a war with each other to the point where the town lynches one or both of them on the theory of "both cannot be town";
2.) A 'Hollow Cop' which is seriously weakened by the presence of both a Godfather (which I assume was investigation-immune) and a possible Miller; and
3.) A Nurse who is not even guaranteed to successfully protect anybody; and
4.) A hodge-podge of other seemingly weak roles that might be able to give the town small benefits, and even then some can only do so if they are actually activated.

Throw in the fact that the town has to deal with a Mafia Redirector and a second kill every night from a Serial Killer and I tend to think our town is not as strong as you think it is.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

Tired and about to go to bed. Guess I'm still not quite sure what the case against Korlash is, if there is something besides some form of process of elimination.

Regardless, I think this is definitely an appropriate time for Korlash to claim his passive ability.

[GLaDOS]

... Processing ...

This was a triumph.

I would like to see the night actions and role PMs (and alerts to powers being activated). For the love of all that is good, I hope ZEEnon was not lying about having protective powers, though I'm guessing he was. I would suggest against doing that in the future, as it definitely has an effect on determinations of balance from the eyes of the town.

[GLaDOS]

The rocket launcher is really the way to go.

The bet with ABR was a last-ditch effort to prevent me from getting lynched. I still haven't been lynched as town, and I was trying everything I could to get the wagon off me. Day Four was a very strange day for me, because after reading through the game, the lynches, and the results, I actually thought everybody seemed town. [How ironic that I was, in a way, very right about that.] Jebus was my best 'guess' but only because he didn't seem as likely to be town as everybody else.

Sorry for going after you early, Green Crayons, but I genuinely did not like the way you attacked people in the game.

The Vigilante kill was pretty much through process of elimation. I definitely wanted to use the ability so that I if the game continued I would hopefully be able to point to the two kills, claim responsibility of one of them, and theoretically clear myself.

I was actually at the point of wondering if I should kill ZEEnon because I suspected he was lying about his ability (specifically because he said early that he had to ask the mod to clarify his role, while later saying that he understood his role from the get-go, but just didn't know his role-name. I was also skeptical of his claim of never having heard of a "Nurse"). What prevented me was the likelihood of ABR/ZEEnon Masonry (being sisters) and hence town. I didn't kill Korlash in case his passive ability was truthful (i.e. I might end up killing whoever he attached to, which could lead to just one kill overnight). I figured that if Xtoxm were scum he would just not activate me and then claim he did to get me lynched (with the back-up "I must have been role-blocked"), so I didn't target him. That left me with Green Crayons, who had the unnamed character as a claimed miller to boot.