The only logic is if you are scum and want to get rid of some none-scum. Lift already established that we can't be scum.

He still supported a policy lynch of one of us iirc, to quell the concerns of those who are still suspicious we might be scum.

As for that, I am willing to take the hit IF we first lynch someone else and try for scum that way. If we don't hit scum I will gladly await a lynch the next 'day'.

Also, if we have a PR cop/investigator I wonder(if they checked into us) why they haven't dropped any info yet. I mean I would think they'd either check us or one of the ones who want us lynched out last "night", given all the talk about us the past few irl days.

Of course, if they checked into someone and they turned out to be town(or if they chose Lift last "night") then I can see why they'd keep quiet.

==============================
As for me, I am going offline again for 15+ hours.....if anyone wants a claim(name/fluff text/etc) I will do so when I return if anyone wants it for some reason....if I haven't been lynched by then, that is.
===============================

BTW OP/Joe: When is deadline again?

You keep coming back to this again and again. Sure, if you're both alive on the final day, then it's an easy town win if you are both masons.

However, what you dont seem to understand is that you're not confirmed.

You need to look at the numbers from an outside perspective, and assume everyone, including yourself, is unconfirmed. From there, you pick someone to eliminate who will have the least impact to town.

This is why I've been detailing worst case scenarios.

If we lynch yourself or blotunga, then the worst case scenario is 4 town, 1 scum on day 5. If, as you point out, the other mason is eliminated during the night, then we've only lost two town who dont have any useful power role.

If we lynch someone else, then the worst case scenario is losing a town PR by mis-lynch, then another during the night and ending up with 3 town and 2 scum on day 5. Even if you are telling the truth, and it is 2 masons, 2 more town and the remaining scum, left at this stage, then it's not going to be too difficult for that remaining scum to manipulate the vote considering the doubt surrounding your roles. You would both be under scrutiny again, and likely to be the subject of the lynch. If confirmed, then the other would likely be taken out at night, and lit would all be pot luck with the 3 remaining players on day 6.

I am coming back to it becauseit makes more sense than giving scum basically the chance to get ride of 2 town on a silver platter. I see the small but somewhat decent odds of hitting scum from the rest of the player pool to be the better option from my POV.

As for not confirmed.....I am to blotunga and he is to me.....for me and him that is what matters most, I would think, as we know each other's alignment off the bat. Of course you are right it's not fully confirmed to anyone else...well unless we have a cop/etc and they investigated us last "night".

As to that what do you think about my supposition? If we have such a PR they would've checked into one of us or one of the ones calling for either of us to be lynched, would they not? Also any other thoughts on the same matter(of possible cops and who they targeted last "night")?


Why not hit one of the others, then, and wait for any cop/etc PR to investigate either of us(if they haven't already) or drop breadcrumbs on either of us?

As I said above, i'd gladly allow myself to be lynched without a fuss or complaint AFTER giving any investigator(if we have one) another night to check into us(if they haven't yet) & trying to hit scum from the remaining player pool. Sound reasonable or no?

I happen to think two two who can verify each other aren't entirely useless....but to each their own.

That's IF we have PRs left. I mean, why else haven't any potential cop/etc PRs checked either me or blotunga out to verify our claims yet and tried swaying the vote/subtly shifting people away from us?

Logic confirms us. There can't be 2 scum left. Even if we were neutral and it would be GR and me vs the last scum in the end, we still would lynch the scum. PRs don't matter at that point. Scum has to get rid of us sooner or later, because he knows that we never would lynch eachother. So scum's best chance is to convince town to lynch one and then NK the other.

Another argument for policy lynching blotunga or GR is that the scum have to either kill the other if one flips mason (because if the mason and the last non-mason town player makes it to the end, it becomes a fifty-fifty chance of the mason siding with the non-mason townie and lynching the scum, and the townie would definitely know who the scum is). It also means scum are forced to kill a what is essentially a mechanically weak power role what's with the lack of night chat.

How is scum killing the second mason better than scum and masons going 2:1 for example against the scum? I and GR are sure of eachother so we won't vote for eachother.

Hah, I've been writing this in notepad during little breaks throughout the morning. It's time to unleash the uberpost now:

1. No, but you're acting as if you're beyond suspicion.

2. If you really are masons then yes, the scum probably would kill the remaining mason. This will protect the more important roles, that's the entire point!

3. Right, but we don't want to grant them the freedom to try and pick them off at their leisure. ZFR must be rolling in his grave for what you just said about the odds. If we have more than one power role then of course the odds of scum hitting them are higher than town lynching a single scum. 2(or more)/7 is a higher probability than 1/7.

4. As I said before, we don't have that much time left.

Brilliant, you still haven't actually read or understood the reasoning. Lift went to great lengths to explain the reasoning and advantages to you, I won't waste any more effort on you.

I'm beginning to wonder if the only reason you're so resistant to the idea is because you have something to hide. If not scum then some kind of third party.

No. Yesterday was the time to "first lynch someone else". I do not want us to be in a situation where 2/5 players remaining are dodgy masons, it's got to be today.


That was me, addressing blotunga's somewhat absurd claim that town might not have any power roles.


_____

Now this is interesting. You've already checked out the numbers and agreed that a policy lynch of one of the masons makes the most sense, so why exactly would you be suspicious of me for that reason? It comes across like you know how they're going to flip and are positioning yourself ready to cast blame tomorrow.

Exactly! It forces them to leave the more useful town roles alone for another night.

And what if, as you mentioned in the hypothetical situation in your previous post, you and GR are third party? That's a complete loss for town, so forgive me for not finding that plan appealing. The way you completely and utterly refuse to consider the obvious advantages for town in lynching you is making me lean more and more towards the likelihood that you do not have a town win condition. If you were town you wouldn't be obsessed with surviving for as long as possible, you'd win with the team.

I'm more certain than ever, we absolutely need to lynch a "mason" today.

And I'm absolutely certain that we have our scum.

vote SirPrimalform

You're not getting that easily rid of us. Town power roles mean nothing if they don't "recognize" eachother/with town. Me and GR I'm sure that I'm town. You I have no clue about. Everyone puts you down to town, but this push to lynch one of the masons is something I can't agree with.

I do feel that blotunga and GR are town masons as the PR is only useful if revealed. (and I still don’t believe in a 2/7 scum to town)
My main suspicion is now on SPF who seems to be going out of his way to get one of the masons lynched.
But for now I'll look through some older posts and see who would lynch Lyft

No, just refusing to legitimise blotunga's theory until there is some kind of confirmation of his and GameRager's roles, maybe with a hint of trying to get him to understand our way of thinking by offering a carrot on a stick. That's clearly been unsuccessful from his latest post, so back to arguing with a brick wall for now.

Both blotunga and GameRager dont seem to care about protecting town PRs, as long as they themselves stay alive. Perhaps because they want the glory on the last day by being the only two left alive with one scum, or more likely because they do not care if town wins.

So which of you is scum and which is misguided?
Right now we have 7 players:
- SPF
- RedFireGaming
- blotunga
- GameRager
- Pooka
- LOLchan
- nmillar

Me and GR are masons, thus town, that much I know.
So there has to be 1 scum between:
SPF, Redfire, Pooka, LOLchan and nmillar.

If we lynch one of me/GR, we will have tomorrow exactly these 5 without no more information than we had before.
One of them is still scum.

That's why I see no value in "confirming" us. There can be no more than 1 scum.

My and GR's win condition is to have all scum eliminated.

I like how in all this commotion, SPF is being suspected for policy lynching blotunga or GR, but...nobody seems to point any fingers at me? It's odd, since we're both behind the idea. But the more I think of their refusal to just accept the idea, the more I lean to believing the four scum theory.

Why would we willingly march on the chopping block? And as said, there are no four scum.