4 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

@LTD room in the self-imposed-exile club after things wrap up?

Ok, that's just hilarious.

1. Again, it's not about a no-lynch was ok. I wrote my stuff on d2 arguing about if what Gink did was right or wrong on d1. The discussion was not about Rav or no-lynch. The discussion was about why Gink disagree with your train on Rav. Gink didn't suspected about you cause you chose Rav over a no-lynch, he suspected you cause you chose Rav from the beginning and didn't take the time of a second guess during the whole day. But again, better we move on from the Rav affair. It is done and even Gink is dead. My point on d3 is that you keep saying I said what I didn't.

2. It's basically covered by point 1. I'm not complaining about d1 result. I'm pointing out you're lying about what I've said and also bringing back the discussion about lynch vs no-lynch which is not my point at all cause we agree about that.

3. I played enough to see Mad play that card so, I guess you're right, I'm just picking the weird choice.

Also, why do you end arguing in such a confrontational way with whoever point you out this game? First Gink, now me.

This Jabba/ovi argument seems pointless to me, I'm gonna ##vote @Madaghmire

Which I really should have done D2, but it's even more apparent now. Even Pod is annoyed at his lack of participation.

I have no issues with people voting me for lack of participation. Gink seemed really sure Bertie was part of the scum team tho, and Gink is dead now. So, for the time being, since I’m not sure what to make of the Jabba/ovi mess, I’ll

##vote bertie

3 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Me: Town, which is good since apparently I can’t be killed even when I jump on my own train. Surprised I woke up.

Big yes, I was half expecting to wake up to you dead... Interesting why not, but your gambit is just too ballsy for scum imho

3 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Ebon why did you town-read Gink so hard? Was it fundamentally just gut?

Last two games of mafia I played with Gink, 1 town 1 scum, this was overwhelming one of his town games just from reads of his play and tone.. I also play with preyer so I'm hoping a probe into him today will help me get a more solid read on him

2 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Huh. Could have fooled me.

Also, realized I never addressed this. So now I did.

nice spot

@GhostofNobodyInParticular

@Lord Preyer

@FortyInRed

your reads, please.

20 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

@GhostofNobodyInParticular

@Lord Preyer

@FortyInRed

your reads, please.

I was planning on starting this day voting for Gink, but he's dead. Maybe Ebon?

Also, I may have accidentally killed Gink. I was given a sticky fruit N1 that I was told I wanted to get rid of. I gave it to Gink last night.

44 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

I was planning on starting this day voting for Gink, but he's dead. Maybe Ebon?

Also, I may have accidentally killed Gink. I was given a sticky fruit N1 that I was told I wanted to get rid of. I gave it to Gink last night.

lol. plans to start voting my top town, gink confirmed town, now me.... hmm

@The Jabbawookie don't tag me in your sado-masochist stuff.

Thanks!

Still analyzing....

Feel bad for Gink now. Maybe I read into that too much and was trying to find facts to affirm my opinions rather than basing my opinion on the facts.

Anyhoo, Jabba seems more confrontational this match, which is interesting. Not sure if that's because his role dictates that play style or perhaps because I'm reading too much into it.

Rn my top suspect would be Jabba for that reason but being willing to die and even voting for yourself is pretty town (or 3rd party?) So honestly idk. I'm going to sit back and brood a little more.

5 hours ago, Bertie Wooster said:

This Jabba/ovi argument seems pointless to me, I'm gonna ##vote @Madaghmire

Which I really should have done D2, but it's even more apparent now. Even Pod is annoyed at his lack of participation.

So this is a principal vote?

Seems like a waste to me. Also, you seem little quick to dismiss the points Ovi raises...

Principals can have principles, but not vice versa.

{I'll stop interfering now}

43 minutes ago, FortyInRed said:

So this is a principal vote?

Seems like a waste to me. Also, you seem little quick to dismiss the points Ovi raises...

It's not really a principal vote, I just can't help connecting some unusual occurrences:

1. Despite D1 being very short, N1 was really long. Perhaps Pod was waiting for someone to submit an action. We don't know for sure why.

2. There was no NK night 1.

3. At the end of D2, Pod expressed a strong warning to Mads for not participating. This is highly unusual--I don't think I've ever seen it in a game before, despite playing many games in which someone is more quiet than the other players. Was this Mad's second offense?

Draw your own conclusions. I think it likely that Mad has a scum NK ability and didn't use it N1 due to being inactive.

As for Jabba and ovi--Jabba misrepresented ovi, and now ovi is misrepresenting Jabba. I'm not sure either of them did it deliberately. It could be just a town fight.

3 minutes ago, LTD said:

Principals can have principles, but not vice versa.

{I'll stop interfering now}

Yeah yeah autocorrect.

6 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Also, why do you end arguing in such a confrontational way with whoever point you out this game? First Gink, now me.

Yeah, I got kind of wound up by Gink (because I felt pushed for trying to ensure one of our weaknesses didn't bite us in the backside yet again) and I'm kind of fed up now.

I'll be popping in to vote, but won't be so gung-ho about the trains anymore.

12 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

It's not really a principal vote, I just can't help connecting some unusual occurrences:

1. Despite D1 being very short, N1 was really long. Perhaps Pod was waiting for someone to submit an action. We don't know for sure why.

2. There was no NK night 1.

3. At the end of D2, Pod expressed a strong warning to Mads for not participating. This is highly unusual--I don't think I've ever seen it in a game before, despite playing many games in which someone is more quiet than the other players. Was this Mad's second offense?

Draw your own conclusions. I think it likely that Mad has a scum NK ability and didn't use it N1 due to being inactive.

That's actually a very interesting idea. A lot lines up, really.

The weird thing would be not seeing an N2 scum kill, if GNIPs really did kill Gink.

6 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

I was planning on starting this day voting for Gink, but he's dead. Maybe Ebon?

Also, I may have accidentally killed Gink. I was given a sticky fruit N1 that I was told I wanted to get rid of. I gave it to Gink last night.

What? THAT SON OF A *****!

8 hours ago, Bertie Wooster said:

So when @Madaghmire is absent from the game, no night kill. When he comes back, Gink dies. Hmmm.

8 hours ago, Bertie Wooster said:

This Jabba/ovi argument seems pointless to me, I'm gonna ##vote @Madaghmire

Which I really should have done D2, but it's even more apparent now. Even Pod is annoyed at his lack of participation.

2 hours ago, Bertie Wooster said:

It's not really a principal vote, I just can't help connecting some unusual occurrences:

1. Despite D1 being very short, N1 was really long. Perhaps Pod was waiting for someone to submit an action. We don't know for sure why.

2. There was no NK night 1.

3. At the end of D2, Pod expressed a strong warning to Mads for not participating. This is highly unusual--I don't think I've ever seen it in a game before, despite playing many games in which someone is more quiet than the other players. Was this Mad's second offense?

Draw your own conclusions. I think it likely that Mad has a scum NK ability and didn't use it N1 due to being inactive.

As for Jabba and ovi--Jabba misrepresented ovi, and now ovi is misrepresenting Jabba. I'm not sure either of them did it deliberately. It could be just a town fight.

I don't really care if people want to vote me off for losing track of the game. As I said, I lost track because work picked up. But this sure looks premeditated to me. Like "hey when Gink shows up dead tomorrow we're gonna need to have a fall guy, lets try get them to hang Mad, it should be easy since he might not even show up to defend himself" kinda premeditated.

2 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

That's actually a very interesting idea. A lot lines up, really.

The weird thing would be not seeing an N2 scum kill, if GNIPs really did kill Gink.

Interesting, I agree.

1 hour ago, Madaghmire said:

I don't really care if people want to vote me off for losing track of the game. As I said, I lost track because work picked up. But this sure looks premeditated to me. Like "hey when Gink shows up dead tomorrow we're gonna need to have a fall guy, lets try get them to hang Mad, it should be easy since he might not even show up to defend himself" kinda premeditated

Pod said he would kill you if you didn't show up, so we'd be dumb to vote you if you weren't around to defend yourself.

That's not the final word though, because you're still low-hanging fruit in terms of pushes scum could plan.

5 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

That's actually a very interesting idea. A lot lines up, really.

The weird thing would be not seeing an N2 scum kill, if GNIPs really did kill Gink.

My bet is he didn't.

10 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

I was planning on starting this day voting for Gink, but he's dead. Maybe Ebon?

Also, I may have accidentally killed Gink. I was given a sticky fruit N1 that I was told I wanted to get rid of. I gave it to Gink last night.

Now I think about this, it makes no sense to me.🤔

12 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

My bet is he didn't.

Entirely possible. It's a weird lie though. The easiest explanation I can think of is a variant of the "scum-to-vig" claim that removes the responsibility of killing Gink. But the claim was unprompted and we would have assumed Gink's death was just a scum kill, so that seems unusually bold for GNIPs' playstyle.

I think we could make a reasonable case for flipping him right now, since if he's telling the truth scum can't or hasn't killed for 2 nights in a row. That would not only be worth knowing imo, but would lessen the potential loss a bit.

On the other hand if we don't flip him and another night kill happens; if so I think he'd have some explaining to do after 2 uneventful nights by his account.

At this point, we might also want to consider the possibility of a cult. We started with a pretty big setup, and the game is sheep/lemming themed, i.e. blind obedience.

4 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Entirely possible. It's a weird lie though. The easiest explanation I can think of is a variant of the "scum-to-vig" claim that removes the responsibility of killing Gink. But the claim was unprompted and we would have assumed Gink's death was just a scum kill, so that seems unusually bold for GNIPs' playstyle.

I think we could make a reasonable case for flipping him right now, since if he's telling the truth scum can't or hasn't killed for 2 nights in a row. That would not only be worth knowing imo, but would lessen the potential loss a bit.

On the other hand if we don't flip him and another night kill happens; if so I think he'd have some explaining to do after 2 uneventful nights by his account.

At this point, we might also want to consider the possibility of a cult. We started with a pretty big setup, and the game is sheep/lemming themed, i.e. blind obedience.

The fruit doesn't kill the guy who receives it. Ghost received it, isn't he? He is alive.

1 minute ago, ovinomanc3r said:

The fruit doesn't kill the guy who receives it. Ghost received it, isn't he? He is alive.

He said he was given it but was told to get rid of it. So like a time bomb?

That's what I mean by variant of a vig claim. Unintentional perhaps, but if it's true it seems like decent odds the fruit caused the kill.

Don't saying it doesn't worth the test, but, I dunno, makes no sense.

Let's think: Ghost doesn't know what the fruit does. He gives it to Gink, Gink dies and flip town. He claim the chance of being responsible. Why?

1. He is town and want to point out that maybe Gink dead is his fault to avoid us following the wrong direction. Problem here is that the fruit is obviously harmless, or at least it doesn't kill people, so he should know he didn't kill Gink.

2. He is scum and claim the dead openly. The only point for this is to justify he visiting a dead guy just in case there is a tracker, watcher around. But even in that case, why the need to claim now. The good move would have been after the tracker/watcher claim.