Define 'everyone', 'think', and 'necessary' in the context of your statement.

Right now my answer is either 'Maybe', or 'Runtime Error'.

It was such a hard cypher, I don't think we could have done it without him/her! In seriousness, is everyone else just accepting that "decipher" as correct, despite the glaring inconsistencies? I'm not...

43 days?! That is quite a long time to stare at each other, despite how pretty some of us might be.

What is happening for me is that you're looking more and more suspicious! Paint chips for my vote?! That's just crazy! I think you're possibly trying to mask your true scum-nature as blatant scum-behavior hoping it reduces/excuses suspicion had on you.

What do you think about RW and that vote on CSPVG making him L-2? I know you're for voting CSPVG, so I'm looking for more elaboration than "I can get behind that vote" sort of non-response.

I think it is logical to seriously consider the existence of a cop, because it is a mafia game and that is a pretty standard role, and therefor no-lynch should also be seriously considered. I find this true for most games and this game is only slightly different because of the mention of cops in the OP. In your opinion, does the mention of cops in the OP make the existence of cop(s) something to consider more or less seriously than you normally would in a mafia game?

Any game I go into I don't assume any role will be in it, that's a quick way to overthink a situation and do the wrong thing. Does the mention of cops in the flavor make me consider it more likely a cop is in the game, not really. The chance of a cop in this game is the same as any other game, so the odds are high. But I'm not going to assume there's a cop or any other role in the game.

Any besides that, there is no guarantee a cop will get the chance to reveal. He could die tonight to scum or an arsonist. I'd rather take the investigation into our own hands.

Besides, it would be a poor game if town would win by sitting back every time and letting the power roles reveal information. A good game should be making sure this does not happen. The game is about deduction. Copping out and just saying "No-lynch" with no one publicly taking any sides, leaves us with nothing to work with tomorrow. Day 1 information may be weak, but after a few reveals, there usually is at least something useful to look back upon.

But lynching someone is just so mean! Why do you want to be such a mean person, RWarehall?

Ah, now I realize why all this talk about voting no lynch. It's all the delayed double voters that wish to reach the day when they can actually use their power.
See? I figured it out. Now to see if we'll be able to reach day 25 or not...

And the best thing! If they reach that day, they can vote to double "No-lynch"!

I will never be in favor of a no lynch on day 1, it is a bad move for town. And just because the odds are high that a cop might be in this game does not mean the odds are high I'll consider a no lynch. There are too many circumstances that can occur where a cop gets a read wrong or is insane.

This is a statement that just begs for a "Challenge Accepted" reply, though not sure what setup would cause that, and whether said setup would be considered bastard or not.

Hm, time to do some pondering...

So....Meanness indicates lynching is largely egregious right??

No lynch would help us reach new heights of ambivalence.

This in no way absolves RWarehall or his meanness.

This is why nobody likes you, trentonlf. You are just such a jerk!

...

Actually, everyone likes you. Forget I said anything.

You're pushing hard for CSPVG. Is it something about CSPVG specifically? I find it rather ironic because it's this same type of push (for Dessimu) that was partly responsible for CSPVG getting lynched in the last game.

I'd be more suspicious of this if I didn't find you likely town after your announcement of the double vote. Even if everyone has one of these in there PM, seems like a risky move for scum to announce it out of the gate.

Catching up, for now:

Unvote RWarehall

Something to strive for, indeed.

unvote


Uhm, is there an error somewhere here?


This is normally true, but do keep in mind bler's warning that this is not your everyday game and we'll probably have to break the status quo to succeed. Of course, this may be a misdirection (the "at least one bastard mod" thing) and it really be your everyday.


Foiled again! My dream to have game days shorter than RL days so we can fit in the 2-3 weeks estimation is nothing but a mirage...


But seriously,

vote hunter, because his defense against flub's arguments felt like reflecory deflection of someone who has been pushed in a tight spot and doesn't know how to get out.