Let me say it again about lying. Once someone flips, if he is town, we can take all their statements as true. If a townie has lied about one thing, it does cast doubt on everything else they may have said. So instead of being certain that they did tell the truth, we doubt them.
The opposite is true for scum. If someone flips scum, we do need to re-evaluate all their statements, since we don't have a way of verifying their validity.

I agree to a point, but if someone was town and lied can you still take all their statements as true? If yog's is town cop and gets lynched and flips town PGO or town vanilla what then? Can we still believe everything he said would still be true if he lied about that from the start? You are correct when you say town should never lie, but BlueMooner was suggesting maybe yog's was lying about his role and that was not a bad thing.

I thought I said the opposite in my post. That all their statements are now doubted.

I already answered BlueMooner a few posts back.

I totally missed the doubt part in your original statement, sorry about that. I was not disagreeing with you, was just asking your opinion. I see now you already answered everything I asked before hand, so I'll just walk away now and pretend I never asked you to begin with....

Of course I am. It's Day 1.

That was my point. You do realize that a reactionary vote as you called it is exactly what OMGUS is, right?


We shouldn't lie if it can be helped but saying a Townie would never ever lie because that's part of being Town is an overstatement. I have lied as Town when the situation called for it and I believe I will lie again if necessary. The thing is there are lies and lies. If you lie just because, without whatever well-thought reason behind it, you are going down for it. But in rare (maybe even not that rare) situations a tactical lie may be entirely helpful.

If I'm not mistaken I lied as Town in my very first mafia game here. I was a form of JOAT with 2 actions - a vig kill and a role-block. It happened so that I wasted the kill on the very first night and killed our Cop, too (when I go I go hard!) :D I lied on the spot that I was a 1-shot Vigilante, so basically a Vanilla and the remaining role-block was used in the end game and was a cornerstone of taking back an almost lost game.

I'm sure there are other similar example. TL;DR - you shouldn't lie if that isn't absolutely necessary and especially if there is a way for someone to expose you (like what happened with Trent last game), but that doesn't mean a real Townie would never ever lie under any circumstance. (By the way this is a generalalised view, it's not in context of whether or not yog is lying, since I have no way of telling whether or not he is being truthful).


I still don't know what Yog is doing, but I can come up with at least 2 scenarios on the fly in which his actions make sense. If I try harder there will probably be more. And because of them I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt at least for Today, since Tomorrow he'll have to address the IOU he gave Today anyway.

So, now that things have calmed down and everyone is back to being friends with everyone you are going to vote for yog again, right?

Wrong. Yo're not voting back for him right away. Also, you say most likely which suggests you may not vote for him after all. I wonder why not re-vote right now. Pressure levels are back to normal, we are having fun, so no point in not going through with your original since it was an actual vote rather than OMGUS. Or am I wrong?


You should remind yourself of that next time you hear rocks tumbling down and pull out your weapon :P

OK, let me rephrase that: those are the only reasonable choices. Of course it would be theoretically possible, that you were forced to claim by the mod or by someone holding a gun to your head. Or you could have been temporarily replaced by some evil clone from an alternate dimension, who was out to ruin your play and make things difficult for town. But those are too unlikely to consider. So yes, there are really only the two options I mentioned. If you have a third option, let's hear it.

To answer BlueMooner's question: trent and JMich basically already answered that. I also think that lying always has bad consequences for town and that therefore the 'lynch all liars' tenet is in place for a good reason.

Well, I'll try to read through the thread and check whether I missed something.

Lesson learned on that one I assure you LOL :-P

So first of all, sorry for taking so long to post, I've been following the thread closely, and I also had time to post, but just nothing meaningful to say.
I really do want to cast my vote as soon as possible, so there's still time for the votee to defend and turn it around, but the problem I have is that I don't have a good reason for voting on anyone. (was drafting posts yesterday and throwing them away for lack of original reasoning.) But then again I do believe the argument against no-lynch on day one is a good one, so that's not an option.

The easiest target might be Yogsloth, but I don't believe him being scum, so I don't want to vote for him now. (tomorrow things might be vastly different)

As for all the others there's just no good reason beside maybe lurking accusations but that ship seems to have sailed...

Looking at the current wagons:
next up would be Adaliabooks for his RNG vote, but it's not that good a reason for me and also he was the day 1 lynch last game already and I think he paid enough for that sin/conviction of thinking any vote is a good one as it moves the game forward and puts pressure on people...at least let him play to day two this time (And yes I understand you shouldn't judge someone on what he did in a dream/last game, but I at least want to cut him some slack this time.)

no-lynch is not a good option, because it might mean this horrible day 1 thingie just keeps going on...

AgentCarr16 by Adaliabooks for going strongly against Lift and then backing away, also doesn't warrant a vote from me...

CSPVG - as said above the only thing for that was going against lurkers but by now he's not the lurkiest person anymore :) (oh no is it me? hopefully it's not me, by now ...)

That leaves Hijack and Bluemooner and that is I think were I will chip in. I don't feel strongly for the case Bluemooner made for going after Hijack in the fist place at all, but I think he defended it pretty well in his last few posts and in the beginning it wasn't even a vote but only a question
(albeit a not very good one: )
The reaction of Hijack was pretty strong and included a (maybe OMGUS?) vote as far as I see it:
At first I didn't care much about that exchange because I thought it was only HijacKs Style to lash out when "threatened" but now quite some time later after Bluemooner explained his motivation
he still see's this as scummy
and this doesn't sit well with me.
There's bound to be people that feel scummier even to HijacK. What about Yogsloths play? You said he might just be vanilla which would imply him lying, but I didn't really find a definite post of you, where you take a stance either for or against yogsloths play so far. (maybe I haven't looked good enough)
Still I'm quite reluctant to vote for you since when rereading your posts I find you post very different than last game and that makes me wanna think you may be town this time around.
Only that you are quite aggressive whenever you are personally "attacked". That's probably just a streak of personality and not a play focused on self-preservation. I don't know. But it makes me reluctant to even consider voting for you for the fear of the backlash and that isn't a good thing. As soon as I realized that, I kind of decided to vote for you sooner rather than later and get it over with and out of my system. ;)

So sorry Hijack for I might just be stupid here (again) but here it goes.

Vote HijacK

Sunday noon vote count:

3 Yogsloth (Trentonlf, Flubbucket, Lifthrasil)
3 HijacK (BlueMooner, Yogsloth, McHack)
2 Adaliabooks (Krypsyn, JMich)
1 No-Lynch (AgentCarr16)
1 CSPVG (Cristigale)
1 BlueMooner (HijacK)
1 AgentCarr16 (Adaliabooks)

With 16 players alive it takes 9 votes to kick someone off the island and 8 votes to "no-lynch".
Yogsloth and HijacK are closest to leaving at L-6.

Not voting: HypersomniacLive, Dedoporno, Sage103082 and CSPVG

Deadline is in 1.5 days on Monday night Sept 14th at Midnight EDT (UTC -4 which is Tuesday 4 am UTC)
[Extended due to Holidays, Vacations, 16 players and its the first day]

***Of course you can always vote someone off before that***

Bagatha Chrustie here...
Apparently this morning we have some movement...
Seems Hijack has started to build a wagon...
Is it the fiasco over the immunity idol?
Personality conflicts?
Envy over Hijack's ability to garner the attention of the ladies?

@Hijack Why do you feel that a new player, BlueMooner, asking about No Lynch is worse than a seasoned player, agentcarr16, actually voting for No Lynch?

@agentcarr16 Were you never given 'The Speech' that all new players usually get about how terribad a No Lynch is considered by most?

@Sage103082 Hi.

If I'm not mistaken agent was present in game 28 where the so called "Speech" was given to bler and was discussed extensively afterwards. Can't recall if we went through it in the previous game, but D1 usually goes through the same basic discussions every time, so I wouldn't be surprised if we did.

It wasn't directed at me, but I heard it, three times I believe. However, this is a deliberate choice, with all the possible consequences in mind. Lynch me if you must :)

I thought so.

You just wanted to give me a headache, didn't you?

I think I'll try ibuprofen first.

OK, I went back through the thread a bit, but I don't find anyone more suspicious than Yogs grand opening. HijacK is adverse to some, but he basically is back at his usual self. Last game he was scum and that was the only game where he was actually nice and mellow. So I'll trust an agressive HijacK more than a friendly one.

agentcarr seemed towny to me at first and the majority of his posts still do. He misunderstood something I said, called me out on something he saw as scummy and voted, which is OK. After clearing the misunderstanding, he retracted his vote. Also OK. Adalia criticized him for the quickness of the mind-change. But if it really was just a misunderstanding, that mind change is understandable. Of course it might also be scum realizing that a pretended suspicion isn't believable enough to go anywhere, but I didn't think so at the time.
But then he raised two flags: using FoS (which he retracted when called out on it) and worse, actually voting no-lynch. Especially the last one still seems scummy to me on Day 1. agentcarr, would you care to explain once more, what possible benefit for town a no-lynch on Day 1 is supposed to have? Especially if the benefit is so big, that you, being aware of the possible consequences (you get lynched), still take the deliberate choice to vote no-lynch? You must have a quite strong reason to do so.

With the deadline drawing closer, if we can't agree on anyone else, I would also agree to lynch a lurker. Eg. CSPVG. Or cristi, who, while not being as rarely here as CSPVG, still feels off to me. But those are weak reason and I would prefer lynching Yog, since I still think that he did lie in his claim and therefore is most likely scum.

It's times like this that I loathe the "no betting" rule :(