True. But it's a risk I'm willing to take.
But in those two samples, you were consistent. And kind of distinctive, really. Not here. And do not bring out the Damnation Defence, please. That will hardly sway anyone.
I'll reread the thing and get back to you on this.
Yeah, ultimately this point is my statement against yours. I know I'm backing my point of view, but I wouldn't be surprised if not everyone did.

Just a short comment, before going back to read the NFY damuna thing again, which I don't remember as being a setup, but if even NFY says she sees it I better check out again.

In regards of Vitek and the differences in death I fully support that notion, since I was also the first one to voice a theory in that regards, and I believe that even if its flimsy one might as well judge what we can from it and then make adjustments later when more evidence shows.

Lastly I like how you managed to attribute all of NFY's post to your self Bazilisek :D

Just to clarify, Baz, are you saying you don't like the fact that I decided to assume the cause of Vitek's death is third party rather than vig?

What is it with this game and people having arguments with themselves? xD

Notice it's mostly the Czech players... What are you guys up to? ¬_¬

No, I don't like that you decided to (very silently) assume Vitek was killed by someone else than the mafia. Because there are some players who know for a fact whether that is true or not in this game, and most of them are up to no good.
Talking to yourself is a national pastime around here; don't tell me you didn't know that.

ITT: SirPrimalform demonstrates his embarrassing lack of knowledge about central European cultures.

Right now...I've just been happy that there are more people...

I have to agree that to a degree, both of them look fairly scummy...but, REASONS...NOW! Especially for sounding so absolutely certain.

Vote Stoic again. People know why by now. There's an entire catalogue of little things that add up to one big puzzle.

Re Vitek's death... Assuming one of the two was killed by someone else other than the mafia is the most logical step. Otherwise it suggests that BOTH of the NKs were mafia kills (unless we're in another 1-night's-rest mechanic with two groups). I must admit to being more convinced than ever that there's an SK loose around here, but there's not a lot to be done with that information right now.

I'm curious as to why Robbeasy is assuming it's a 3-man mafia in a 16-player game... That 'out of the blue' post was either a kick up the arse for the game, or such blatant bandwagonning that I'm not sure what to do with it.

Baz, if you're going to pick me over Stoic as vote-worthy, can I ask why you find Stoic less suspicious? As in, is there anything aside from my encounters with him that gives you a neutral-town feeling? Brushing off a random claim so easily doesn't seem like you...

Oh, I still suspect him, and believe me, I'm not brushing it off. I've made my little note for later use, I just don't think it's worth pursuing quite yet.

As I said, I promise to reread the clash once again and say something specific about it. I'm just... not really looking forward to it :)

Would someone explain why my claim was suspicious? That's something that I actually haven't figured out to this point. I've gotten that it doesn't add anything to the discussion, but to be honest I don't understand what it takes away, either. What would I have to gain from making that claim if I was mafia?

It's the fact that it was unprovoked and that if you really are vanilla then you had nothing to gain by claiming. Thus, an unprovoked vanilla claim is often suspicious because it seems like there might be an ulterior motive.

What Primal said. In fact (if you're telling the truth) you've potentially helped the mafia narrow down folks to be NKed because they could be power roles. I think it was itai.sharim in game 9 who described vanilla town as a "meat shield" role - once you identify yourself as vanilla you become useless as a meat shield. If you really are vanilla, it's not a pro-town move...

But since you HAVE roleclaimed and therefore have nothing left to lose, maybe you could formalise it? Name etc?

OHhhhhhhhhhh... see, I get that now. Yikes.

Then again, why are people revealing power roles then too? Isn't that basically doing the same thing? Here's Damnation's rule #10 from 1st post: Would doing so violate that rule? As long as it's not against the rules, I will do that.

Yeah, it is. Actually, it's even worse, but it very much depends on the situation. It's for example common for a power role who's being pushed close to the lynch threshold to claim, because that's the one thing that could potentially stop the lynch (on the other hand, mafiosi will often fake power role claims for the same reason). Sometimes, claiming is actually very much a pro-town action.

Regarding rule 10, openly stating your name and role is not considered quoting. The rule is mostly there because if people simply copy-pasted their PMs, stylistic analysis could very quickly pinpoint those who are lying (see the case of Red_Baron in game 9, though that was a bit more complicated).

That being said, I'm not entirely sure you ought to fullclaim, and I'm not too thrilled with NFY's suggestion you should do so.