Not sure exactly what you want to hear from me. When I claimed I was at 4 votes, one away from a lynch. I believe in this setup that no lynch on Day 1 is a viable option, and to be clear that is in no way me pushing for a no lynch. If people want to assume that's what I mean then they should quit assuming things. Now I am done discussing my opinion on the no lynch, it's a distraction and nothing else at this point.

Fair enough. However, your answer is beyond unsatisfactory. Saying you believe it is a viable option, and then failing to detail exactly why, with copious details given the headache it caused, prompts me to believe you don't even know why you think it is viable. It probably sounds good on paper, but you did not bother in fact to go over the math of the process.

What do you believe our next steps should be like?

Yes, that's clear. But you didn't explain what makes no-lynch more viable in this game than in others. You just stated that the Day 1 lynch is more likely to hit town that scum. ... Yes, of course. Like in any other Mafia game too! So that's not a satisfactory reason.

But well, for now:
unvote trentonlf

Let's lynch you tomorrow.

Other targets for today:
drealmer: true, he seemed quite eager to take trent down right away, until it became apparent that that wouldn't go through today. But then again drealmer (just like me) tends to latch on and not let go (and sometimes tunnel vision a bit). So that's no clear indication of scumminess. Still, I could be persuaded to vote for him rather than risk no-lynch. He seems a better candidate than most others.

dedo: looks very towny to me. If he's the CL, he has me fooled at the moment. Not going to vote him at the moment.

Nacho: quick unsuccessful vote on trent. And after trent's claim: call for the Inquisitor to reveal himself. Normally I would cry scum at that, but his reasoning made kind of sense. (50% chance of winning the game tomorrow IF and only if trent is NOT CL ... but also a 50% of probably losing - and very bad suggestion if trent is CL) Not enough sense / probability to actually propose to follow Nacho's suggestion, but enough to think about it. Still, such an early call for revealing the last perhaps remaining PR of town looked strange to me. So I would be willing to vote Nacho too.

Sage: please play with us more! Can't read you yet. I would like to see more of you! ;-)

Hunter: not much from him yet either. But wrote some sensible suggestions.

Hijack: looks invested and towny so far. The only reason to lynch him would be because he's a Greyjoy. But that's not his fault (and no, I'm not seriously suggestion to lynch someone based on flavour).

So at the moment it comes down to drealmer or Nacho for me. Or perhaps Sage, but only reluctantly.

Interesting question. I do not have an answer, as I do not have a good idea how to proceed. This and you've already detailed whom you suspect. I'm expecting much of the action and focus to shift to those names, however, I can't see much good coming from it. I don't have a proper idea of how to proceed. JKitty is evasive. And drealmer is... well, drealmer. If memory serves right, he used to get in trouble just for being himself, though I shouldn't speak since I can subscribe to having gotten in trouble for my attitude as well.
I can tell you now that I'm not the CL, but honestly, that's what everyone says, so what were you expecting?

As nice as it would be for the CL to come out by themselves I never expected something like this to happen. What I wanted to hear was something other than giving Trent more bad time about the no-lynch or just reiterating events that have already been widely discussed by a couple of other people or just for the sake of producing some lines of game-related content. I asked you in specific since you were online at the time and were the last one to at least drop by but at least you are making some effort to participate. I'd like to see at least as much from Sage, Hunter and even Trent. And most of drealmer right now who was catching up yesterday. A lot of catching up...

Keeping quite and out of sight doesn't look good. I guess lack of time or having more important stuff to attend to might come as reasoning on why this is, but that's not a good reason for not trying. Unless, of course, it's just an excuse to keep low profile or not give up too much away just in case of a recruitment, but that would mean anti-town behavior which is not nice to have in situations like the current one.


@Lift, can you elaborate a bit on the math re the 50% winning chance Tomorrow in case the Inquisitor came out now?

Because I am looking at the big picture, and other than me the only other person who seems to be doing the same is dedo.

We have 8 players, 3 mislynches and we lose. The breakdown:
We mislynch today and start tomorrow with 7 people, cult now has two people in it. We have two lynches tomorrow, if we mislynch both we start the next day with 5 people and cult has 3 people in it, we lose automatically. There is the possibility I am able to choose the correct person at night for my ability and stop the CL from recruiting someone, if that happens once (and this is why the CL will probably recruit me) I can prevent an automatic loss even after 3 mislynches because the cult will only have 2 people in it.

If I am taken out of the picture the CL is guaranteed that no one can stop him/her from recruiting someone. I only claimed because I was at 4 votes and 5 is a lynch, and sadly it kills my ability to help us win. If we did not have the ability to lynch two people a day starting Day 2 then no lynch on Day 1 would not be a viable option. But as it is if we no lynch on Day 1 start Day 2 with 8 players meaning the majority to lynch is 5 instead of 4 and the cult would need 3 of us to side with them to lynch instead of just 2 (I would rather have 3 instead of the cult controlling half the needed vote to lynch). The only downside is if we mislynch both people on Day 2 is we start Day 3 with 6 and the cult would have 3 players, and that would mean we lose. But having two lynches on Day 2 is basically that same thing as lynching Day 1 and Day 2 like normal, and that is why I said a no lynch on Day 1 is a viable option. It's not the option I want, but it is a viable option.

As I said, people jumped all over me saying that like I was pushing for it and that was not the case. I would rather we find the CL today and end this, but I am not going to just vote someone to get a lynch either if I don't think they are a high possibility of being the CL.

Could've just said this then itself right? Plus dedo made that point before, why didn't you point out that you shared the same belief then?

This post, even you posted 2 posts below that but didn't refer to it at all. A bit strange if your thought was similar.

I pointed it out before dedo did, but as I said no one is reading my posts it seems

Go back and read posts 43 and 76,

I am satisfied with the way Trent has explained his argument. And granted it was my ignorance that prompted to question me his timing of the claim, I did reassess the situation after realizing that we are in fact just 8 players.

I seem to constantly get lost in the idea that there are at least the lowest double digit number of players. It all checks out with me. I don't inherently believe his idea of no-lynch is good, but the argument is convincing that he believes it is, and I am fine with that.

I will give him the benefit of the doubt, though I do reckon he will have to be a policy lynch tomorrow.

As for the rest, reads on most of you are sparse. Lift happens to look fairly town to me, but he does usually have a strong day one presence compared to others. Might be an illusion given the sparse posts. We shall see.

drealmer is just drealmer. I don't know a better way of how to put it than this. I can never quite read him. Too hectic. But I guess that's what makes it fun to play with him.

Currently of interest are Nacho and Kitty.

Sure. Start with reading Nacho's post on this. I'll try to re-phrase it and provide the calculation.
Nacho's assumption for the suggestion was, that trent isn't CL. So let's roll with that and assume trent=Alarmist, and we mislynch today (if we lynch correctly, this is moot anyhow because there will be no Day 2). Assume further, that the Inquisitor has claimed and got no counter claim. Consequently trent protects him in the night.

Tomorrow there will be 7 players. 3 of those are most probably not CL: trent, the Inquisitor and whoever the Inquisitor cleared in the night. Therefore the CL must hide amongst the other 4 players and we get 2 lynches. Fist lynch has a 1/4 chance to hit the CL and if that doesn't succeed, the second lynch has a 1/3 chance of hitting the CL.
Now statistics: the chance to hit the CL in both lynches combined is the reverse of the multiplied chance of not hitting him. 1-(3/4 * 2/3) = 1/2 = 50% chance.

Therefore what Nacho said was basically true. Therefore the suggestion that the Inquisitor might reveal himself does not automatically make Nacho scum. However, his calculation hinges on 2 critical assumptions: 1.) trent is not CL and 2.) the claimed Inquisitor is not CL. Both are shaky, since we don't know if there is an Inquisitor at all. If we push for the Inquisitor to reveal himself, the CL might take a gamble and claim Inquisitor, thereby securing his win, if we follow through on this plan.

Now there are 3 possibilities: Nacho didn't see that danger and it was an honest mistake (like his invalid vote on trent) or he didn't care about it or he is CL, suggesting this strategy to see if some Inquisitor claims and if no one does, he would claim Inquisitor himself.

@Nacho: I am aware that you didn't really push for the Inquisitor to reveal himself. But you threw the idea into the ring with a somewhat sensible sounding reasoning attached to it. Which is exactly what a CL might to to judge reactions to this idea, since it might lead to a winning strategy for him.

@trent: I just wish you had substantiated your suggestion, that no-lynch might be viable, right away with such a thorough reasoning behind it. Instead of just waving a big red flag without visible motivation.

I figured as much, but then I have to point one small error in your original statement. There is a 50% change to lynch the CL, not to win the game :) The CL might still recruit tonight and the lone cultist will have to be dealt with. Of course, without the CL in play their chances of winning will be slim to none, but still :)

Anyway, everything is clear now.

They escaped my attention earlier, thanks for pointing them out!

How much time is still left for day 1 to end?

I had exact same thought as I was reading, also in the previous dedo post I got the sense that he was CL who thought "OH! I'll just recruit trent tonight, just to be sure, and play it that way with a big wifom game and *other devious things.*"

My biggest feeling so far is that dedo is CL., I can only guess at why trent did what he did but I figure he did it with deliberateness and I'm not willing to damn him out of the gate - he obviously isn't doing it lightly, regardless of what role/position he is in.

it's 1 of 2:

1.) he sees an angle that it truly makes sense to consider NL today IF we don't feel strongly about a CL, whether he's wrong in that angle or not, he was surely confident enough from the out-set (probably after weighing both sides to it) to suggest it - if this is the case, we should heed/consider it, again, only IF we don't feel strongly about a CL candidate

he would expect the gut-reaction of us all to jump to lynch him, but he knows we're smart enough to not just do that and that we'd be like "wait it's trent, *insert #1* or #2" - it's a great way to NOT get lynched for trent, is what it boils down to, and that screams

2.) the angle he sees is that of CL WIFOM GO TIME!! He's coming at it full-force balls-out "come and try to lynch me motherfuckers I'm going to make you ALL MINE" style. Especially after the end of SMURFIA, I could see this likely being true, and it scares me.

After the game got going and my initial vote of trent I had reflection-time, as I usually do, and it hit me, as it does with trent of course: "fuck, if I'm suspicious of him, he's probably town!"

FuCK ME, DAMNIT WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN?! soooo, you're all going to have to figure this one out, my inclination is to be smart, play smart, and do the right thing, and LYNCH LYNCH LYNCH him

the other point going towards not-lynching him is that I see no-lynch being a viable option if there is an inquisitor in the game and trent could be soft-claiming inquisitor by voting nolynch hoping we pick up on that and if that is the case I'm not sure if it is best for me to type this paragraph and talk about it or delete it but I'm at least typing it out before I decide which to do...

*thinks*

ok it is probably safest just to talk about it and trent if that is what you did I am sorry I probably shouldn't have talked about it, but yeah..., so, I've said multiple times before that one of the reasons I think NL is viable on D1 (more than the rest of you mofoers generally do) is if there is an investigative role, we can use the forming of D1 and no wagon-flip WELL ENOUGH that sometimes the odds (especially when there's only fucking 8 of us and mylo is right around the corner anyway with double-lynch!), like, yeah, just treat this as the other end of that and give us "space" before end-game comes, makes a bit of sense, especially if we've got an inq., and regardless because we've got so few this game

*ramble ramble*

ok I haven't fully caught up yet so, bear with me, those were in initial thoughts I had coming back to the game prompted by the lift post which is where I was at when I went to catch up yesterday, and failed

and now I continue to catch up! weee