My main suspects at the moment are Zchinque and Typhoon. Zchinque because of what has already been said, and Typhoon because of his vehemence against Zchinque, and the rather strange reasoning for his voting against Al1 - it seems too strange to cast the vote on your target's target, in hope of learning more about your target (Unfortunately, this sentence is on the border of making no sense...).

That being said, pazzer's sudden jump in with a vote and extraordinaire miniscule contribution makes him seem somewhat scummy, if not scummier than Zchinque and Typhoon. On Azarr doing the same, he seems to drop a bit of randomness in each post, such as "Also he smells funny" and "Who has the weirdest hat?" - this rings very confusing in my mind, and cannot fully make it up.

But as with nmillar, I am against a nolynch, and would gladly hammer someone if necessary.

Hmmm, at times my fingers are quicker than my brain...

I just noticed you didn't actually answer jess' question, at least not unambiguously.

If you could lynch anyone right now, who would it be?
Please limit your answer to one player, I am not interested in your other lynch candidates at this moment.

You.

It's simple really. As I have already said, lynching you would at least give us something to go on given your actions within the group, regardless of the result.

However, I have to weigh the significant risk that comes with lynching you, as I do not believe you are mafia. But if it came down to a crunch, I would vote for you.

nmillar, A1, Damnation:
all of you claim to be willing to vote for Zchinque, but seem to be waiting for something. I'd just like to point out that if you three actually did cast your votes, there would be nothing else to wait for. Call me impatient, but I believe this day has nothing more to teach us.

I'd also like to mention that the rather large hole in Zchinque's reasoning I pointed out in #126 is still there, while Zchinque himself apparently doesn't consider it worth a reply. For this reason alone, I'm sticking with my current vote.

Am surprised Zchinque hasn't been lynched yet. So i'd assume at least one maffia has voted for him.

I agree a nolynch wouldn't be helpful.

This day certainly has more to teach us.
In fact, it has just taught us something very relevant.

Al1 wants to lynch someone he doesn't think is scum!.

As for #126, I'll take a look at it.

Baz: That's a good point about Zch's reasoning for voting Al1. He uses a post that was made after the vote, thus it could not have been a valid reason at the time. Looking forward to further explanation.

I disagree with you for the rest though, strongly enough to do this:

Unvote
Vote: Bazilizek

We are what, 4 days into a 3 week deadline. The first day discussion is extremely important as town will start losing people via NKs after day 1, and the more opinions town give now, the more we can then draw lines to figure out who the scum are.

Scum are the ones that want to end the day early, because it limits discussion, and since they are in the light with who their team is (and who isn't on their team) whereas town does not, it is natural they would be seeking to end the day early since they know who the "safe" mislynches are, whereas town would not be as supremely confident this early in a day with only one issue to go off of, because they are in the dark and don't know anyone else's alignment. The day has a lot to give, still.

For that reason, I (currently) believe Bazilizek is scummy, and Zchinque by extension isn't on his team (does not necessarily imply town though likely is), and he's trying to force through a mislynch waaay too quickly. Seems way too confident of the read, but outside of that, the "I believe this day has nothing more to teach us." has a very scummy feel to it.

Thank you for taking my words out of context.

As I have repeatedly said, I do not think you are mafia. I have gone out of my way to not vote for you, but since you insisted upon the question, allow me to re explain my position.

Quite a few members of this group believe you are mafia, or that lynching you would yield some positive result regardless of your alignment. I subscribe to the latter theory to a degree, but not enough to cast my vote. Having said that, there are very few other leads to follow up on, in no small part thanks to you making us the focal point of discussion. At some point in the future, I may feel there is no other choice but to vote for you.

If I wanted to lynch you, I would have voted for you already. If something else comes up, about you or someone else, I may reconsider my position.

Reconsider your position, you say? You don't have a position - you're not voting.

Yes, I am calling out your fence sitting.

Now please vote. Kthxbai.

Screw that, I'm calling out your fence sitting.

@Zchinque Even though I'm voting Baz for now, I think you just skimmed over his question again.
You said you had taken a look at his #126, but no reply?

Let me summarize for those that don't like post hopping too much.. and I'll even insert links.
In Post 23 Zchinque votes Al1 for hidden reason. Al1 had two posts up till that point, both of which seemed RPish to an extent.
In Post #26 did his wishywashiness.
In http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/gog_mafia_2_sweet_gogville_high/post118#118[/url] Zchinque then explains the reason for his vote on Al1 in #23 as Al1's post in #26? Does not compute.
In #126 Baz points this out, you said you'd look at it, but no response yet? You seem to be extremely selective as to what you answer and what you think is beneath you to answer.

Did we miss some exchange there?

I didn't said I had looked at it, I said I will look at it. I'm sorry for the wait, I am right in the midst of setting up GOG Mafia #3.
Eh, I suppose that can wait. I'll get to it straight away then.

Oh, and nothing is "beneath" me to answer (well, nothing posted so far, I think), but given that currently practically all discussion is either*
-started by me
-about me
-directed towards me
-or me supposedly trying to get the attention away from me (lol)
it is likely that there will be things I don't respond to. Some I will deem unimportant, some I will feel that someone else has covered, and some I will intend to get back to at some other time (some of which I will then probably forget to actually get back to).

#126 I skipped because there isn't actually a hole in my explanation, and seeing as no one else commented on it, I figured most either didn't think there was a hole, didn't think the alleged hole was important, or didn't care.

*There are some (not many) exceptions. You, Jess, for instance seem willing to generate your topics for conversation, but as you probably have noticed, most people in this town aren't.**
**Most of the rest of you, and nmillar in particular: That means that even though some of you seem to imagine me as some moron dressed up in a funny hat jumping up and down with a sign that says "Look at me! Notice me! Talk about me!", it is wholly possible to, you know, bring up other topics.

Thanks for the reply, and I'd like to say what I typed sounds a lot harsher than what I had meant to convey.

Anyway my quote tagging is also fail. We need a preview feature please! :P

Here's the famous #126 in it's entirety.

Oh, but it does. I encourage everyone to look over my entire post history. It is really quite fascinating reading material, if I must say so myself. I prefer "carefully slipped into the conversation", but otherwise quite correct. An undeniable fact, my good man. The lack of timestamps is rather annoying, I agree. I did. In fact, I believe I still am voting for Al1. Seems it was a good vote, that. Ah, yes, he did. And a very fencesitty post it was. I remember it well. What rationale?
I guess you mean (correct me if I am mistaken) that I have said that the rationale for my vote in post #23 is Al1's fencesitting in #26. This would indeed look rather bad for me.
Except, of course, that I have said no such thing. (oooh, delicious deja vu) It's not only fine, it is a very valuable strategy. You are quite correct. After all, we, or at least I, can not with certainty tell what the outcome of something will be before it actually happens.

Now, you see, I have not yet explained my reasons for voting Al1. At the time of voting that is, my reasons now are quite different - general fencesitting, preferring to lynch someone he doesn't think scum.
Of course, by now my actual reasons for voting Al1 (I must stress, again, at the time - my reasons now are quite different) will seem rather anticlimactic.

So, I have never said that my vote was made due to him being wishywashy on the question of mass claiming. (Please, look over my posts to confirm that this is correct)
The one who claimed that was the reason, was Jess - here:

Now, why did I actually vote for Al1 when I did?
Oh, not all that much, really. His second pots seemed a bit off, and read rather forced to me. There is also a touch of fence sitting in it ;)

But then why the rather assuredly tone in my vote? After all, what I said when voting was this:
Well, frankly, why not?
By sounding very assured and confident, Al1's reactions (oooh, there is that word again) to the vote are likely to be much stronger, one way or another, than if I do it really wishywashy. Compare to how many votes in GOG Mafia #1 were worded - "I don't really want to vote for you, because you might be town, but we need to get the game forwards. Please don't be angry :( *runs away crying in a corner*" (paraphrased and totally hyperboled).
While both votes count the same towards a lynch, one is much more threatening than the other, and is more likely to get the scum nervous. And nervous scum make mistakes.

Had that still been all, I would not have kept my vote on Al1 for all this time, but his play since then has been consistently anti-town. Meta-analysis can be a very valuable tool, and I for one will use it whenever I find it relevant. When that happens, you and anyone who are unfamiliar with the out-of-game content will have three choices:
-Look up the source material and draw their own conclusions.
-Don't look up the source material and ignore the argument presented.
-Don't look up the source material and take the argument presented at face value.

@Jess: I agree, preview option would be dandy.

during my day off yesterday and enjoying the sun, I rethought the whole situation.

We still know nothing at the moment and I do only have 2 thoughts at the moment.

Zchinque: He rushed against A1, maybe he knows something. In this case, A1 would be Mafia and if he got lynched, Zchinque might be killed at night. I think he is experienced enough to not reveil his identidy in this way on Day 1.This is the reason why I think he is not a day cop and does not have a clue at all. I think, he just want's to lynch somebody to not give the Mafia an ahead start.

A1: I don't really think, that he is Mafia. We can Lynch him, then we would know 2 things:
1. If A1 is Mafia, Zchinque could be a Day Cop and 99.9% be killed during the night.
2. If A1 is no Mafia, Zchinque would become a new target, as most of us would think that he is Mafia.


So, here we are... no idea at all, everything could happen. As I don't think that Zchinque is a Day Cop I consider him as Mafia, trying to convince us that A1 is Mafia.

Because of that, I redo my Vote: Vote Zchinque

But trust me, I would be very sorry if you are not Mafia and got lynched innocently.

Regarding Typoon45, I absolutely have no clue yet.

Two things...
First, it amuses me that you think I'm experienced enough to not reveal myself as a hypothetical day cop, yet you seemingly have no problem believing that I would lynch off someone completely at random at the start of day 1 to avoid "giving the Mafia a head start". What do you mean by that, by the way - giving the mafia a head start?

Second, you are aware that there has been ~150 posts since I first made the vote right, and that my reasons for voting at that time are hardly my reasons for keeping my vote on Al1 now?

And as an aside, I don't know how many mafia games I've read over the years, but it's been quite a few, and I have as of yet never encountered a day cop in a game with regular day/night cycles. It's not a common role.