Oh, the double post.

"Immature, ignorant, grow up, blah blah blah!"

I'm not saying who I'm investigating this time, by the way. You all can guess while we contemplate the futility of it all.

Here's why I'm not a supporter of No Lynch:

Trust. The No Lynch idea focuses on one main thing. Trust in the cops. Obviously, there is no unanimous trust in any of the 2 known cops. Most people are inclined to believe yog, but not all, and obviously not everyone is sold on CSPVG, especially Robb. Now let's assume the cops are town, since in spite of what the most avid of believers will say there is no definite way of proving that. They are in actuality both town, but most people don't agree with their readings, either because they are scum, or because they don't trust the cops. How exactly does this benefit town? It doesn't. What it does is create more tension, chaos and countless debates that go in circles. I want to point out that a fair share of debates in this game, while ultimately contributed to the point where we are now pretty much took their course like this.

Yes, this is how I've seen most of these arguments and debates run their course. Lots of people not getting what the others mean and running in countless circles with Great China Walls of text.

Do we need more of this? I will argue we don't even need as much as it has been. So this is why I am not a supporter of no lynch, because not everyone trusts the cops, or at least not equally, and differences of opinions are bound to hamper our progress and weave confusion.

I made it clear in a way past post that I no longer see it mandatory for me to claim. Don't believe it? Go and check yourself. I said it twice. Not gonna bother a third time.

Oh, but please. Provide links to where I said I posses information I did not share. You kept talking about this, yet you always failed to point me to one post.

And if I may, I could remember things wrong, but the day where I didn't have time to post exactly who TB visited was because I was pressured by time with my SAT Subject tests. You can't really be late for those, you know?

But what is secretive about me? I don't make a correlation between what you say and my actions these games. You're 2 games too late to the party. This would've been a strong argument in the high school game.

Oh rly? Wanna bet I can "guess" in 1 try? I'm very skilled at this game.

Float like a butterfly, sting like....

Always with the assumptions. Yes, I have thought that TB may have been a scum investigative role, though I did reject the scum cop possibility since I'm not sure there are 2 scum factions, or that we have so many neutrals that it makes sense for scum to have a cop. Could be a role cop though, or another investigative role, but in that case, I'm running out of scum.
TB is scum one that visited Robb, scum 2 is whoever roleblocked Yog (I still doubt a townie would block a claimed cop) and scum 3 is whoever killed Darko. Add the 2 neutrals we had so far, and that gives us 5 non-town, with the recommended 25% being 4,5. Though I'm unsure if the 25% refers specifically to mafia or anti-town roles.
So, while it is possible that TB was scum and targeted Robb, I find it unlikely.


A small logic lesson (again). Statistics for a single case are possible, though their standard deviation is 0, thus any statistical analysis will be laughed at by statisticians. It's similar to the statement "I can fly for 0 meters", which is logically correct, assuming I cannot fly. It does not imply that I can actually fly.
And as for the scientific method, it is actually correct. You do know how the scientific method works, right?

Observe, form a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, revise the hypothesis.

So a sample of 1 is more than enough for the start of the scientific method, until evidence make you revise it. So far, we still didn't get a flip on lynch.


I'll point you to Ix's lynch and ask you how that lynch helped town. Feel free to analyze his wagon and make a hypothesis.


Yes, because I do not try to convince anyone that I'm the only one who knows the truth. I present facts, then make a statement, then ask you to evaluate said statement. If my statement is inherently wrong, I expect you to point out the flaws, so I can revise it and we can come to a correct statement. You know, the way education works (or should work). By making the student come to the conclusion, not by spoon feeding them results.


Ok. Going to track down said post in a bit.


Oh, I know that one. Hell, I know two such cases.

1) You said that you knew who the other scum is, then failed (for quite a while) to provide either of those cases. You did reveal it after so much time, it may have become irrelevant.
2) You said you'd claim to explain your reasoning, then no longer saw the need to do so. Again, information promised and withheld.

You mean "during the night", right?

At the betting game? Of course you are.

One thing that I was curious about was answered in this way. Ix and JMich obviously weren't lovers. JMich said so, instead of telling us he is. Ix did seem to try and protect JMich which may have been for three reasons:

1. A known fellow townie. Not sure how this would be possible considering JMich kept distance (counter-productive for masons and such). Mafia claim (it's important to note that it was scum rather than anti-town) also works against this, so highly unlikely.

1.1. A strongly town leaning player. Mmmmmphh...

2. JMich is Town (mafia would know, unless multiple mafia teams) and Ix was trying to gain some trust by backing up for a townie. Possible? Yes. Probable - I don't see it.

3. JMich is a scum buddy and Ix was trying to deflect attention from him but that backfired. Seems probable.

While this is a possibility, I don't really see where Ix tried to defend or protect JMich at all. He was voting on him you remember. To be honest I find it much more likely the whole thing was a scheme cooked up by Hyper to defend Ix and get JMich lynched instead.

But I know everyone else seems to believe JMich is scum so despite not seeing it myself I'm happy enough to pursue a lynch on him if nothing better shows up from Night Actions. If nothing else if he flips town that will tell us how flips work (I know this probably will look scummy to some, but I'm not 100% certain about JMich and if everyone else thinks he is scum I'm happy to run with it and see what happens)

The problem is the edit.

On topic: no flip. That still leaves the two possibilities open of
1. Scum does not flip
or
2. Town kills / lynches generate no flip.

But on the other hand no Jester reveal either. So it looks like we really got some scum again, guys. Night one we got rid of a SK, night two we got scum. Two nights, two correct hits. Woohooo for town!

So far the most obvious candidate for D2 seems JMich, but we have the whole night in front of us. I'll be pretty surprised if we don't get new information that will help us make steps in the right direction. I can totally see JMich being left for later on or even be exonerated (less likely) considering how crazy the game went so far and being a role madness.

Anyway, where would you put Hyper in your alignment list?

WHAT? Really? You have to ask? Ix's lynch helped town because: We got one scum lynched. We thereby reduced the total scum/anti-town number by one increasing town's chances. Also, we probably removed one scum night-action from the game, since we are in a role madness game and Ix will have had some power role. So Ix's lynch was definitely good for town. That you don't see it that way gives you additional scum points (as if you would need any more).
Sure, it may be that lynching you would have been even better for town. Maybe you have a much more powerful night-action for scum and Ix took the fall for you. So maybe lynching Ix wasn't the best of all possibilities, but it was definitely good for town and much, much better that a no-lynch.

I really think it's going well for town. Two scum down, one more coming up for day three (I am by now very confident that JMich is scum and unless he doesn't survive night or something other drastic happens, I think we already have a good lynch target for the next day).

So you are 100% positive he was scum, not neutral, nor town. Ok.

Context my dear Lifthrasil. See the part of HijacK's post I quoted. Or do you think that the whole Ix's lynch was ripe with communication and lacked confusing inducing arguments?

Not to mention that there is still no consensus about what gives us flip on death, and what doesn't.

Just to state the Obvious - I will be standing Guard again tonight. If you're feeling suicidal, feel free to visit..;)

If it is truly no-flip on lynch, then even if you lynch me you will never find out.

But let me re-iterate - I am Town PGO, and I fully expect to be lynched tomorrow or the next day, as I'm too dangerous to have around.

Or - you could trust me to be telling the truth. And wait for Mafia to try and get to me somehow...