PHOENIX MAFIA: ONLINE TURNABOUT

Ninja'd, and oh yeah Puddor and piano don't technically count, sorta, so ten players. Two mafia players among ten seems plenty reasonable.

If the original post was iron clad, then we have four mafia, and in a game of 10 killable players, that seems way overpowered to me. Also, I suspect that our defense attorney may have a role pm that gives more info than mine. Puddor certainly seems to have powers I don't. Maybe her PM actually came with a scum count.

author=wildwes
Ninja'd, and oh yeah Puddor and piano don't technically count, sorta, so ten players. Two mafia players among ten seems plenty reasonable.

It could be, but people are stating it rather matter-of-factly.

Lockez, do you have anything to say in response to my earlier post addressing you

author=pianotm
And here I was worried about the framer. I forgot about the mastermind. Well, damn. If we have four scum and one of them can turn town into scum, that's total overkill.

Actually, the OP said that there'll be one to four mafia players, so we don't necessarily have four, just four or less.
Hm, maybe that implies that the Mastermind can only convert players until there are four mafia members, then can convert no more players? Or maybe I'm over-analyzing this.

I think I'll wait until we get closer to the end of the day before I jump on any bandwagon, just to see if anything will turn up, or if we will figure out where the two mafia thing came from, because I admit, I am curious about that.

I'll admit that I'm assuming there's two scum because of the player count. Three is possible, but based on numbers I have estimated two. Neither me or the piano count as town members-- if everyone else dies, the town loses (because we can't be lynched. We get to witness this whole thing to the end, trainwreck or not.)

My time zone is so god-damn whack, I came back to eighty notices today. Fun times.

Anyway, like I said, if we lynch today and get a townie and someone is nightkilled or converted tonight (if there is, indeed, a mastermind) we are down to at least one scum and seven town, or at worst three scum and five town. All we literally get 'information' wise is this:



- we've killed a townie, or killed scum (and at this point I think CAVE is town, but that's based on current events)

- LockeZ pushed for a day one lynch when it wasn't actually going to be helpful.


If CAVE does turn out scum, he's shown almost zero allegiance to anyone.



Deducing who the rest of scumtown is based on a CAVE lynch is nigh impossible. Frankly, unless CAVE is actually scum and that gets us an advantage, lynching him is useless.

Yellow Magic thinks Liberty might be less invested in this game than previous ones because she has a boring Citizen role. She strikes Yellow Magic as the type who'd rather take the front lines than sit back and watch.

Regarding CAVE_DOG: Most people he's picked up as scummy, in particular LockeZ and wes, Yellow Magic thinks are scummy too. Which may mean he is pulling Yellow Magics strings. Yellow Magic is a bit paranoid.

Yellow Magic also thinks we should lynch LockeZ already because the bandwagon on CAVE_DOG has been pretty suspicious to say the least.

What hotseat? Cavedog made a pretty intelligent post explaining my motives, but there was no accusation. Nothing he said about me in that post was negative. He just reworded what I'd already said, explained why all of my reasoning made sense, and then inexplicably ended the post with #lynch lockez

If you don't think the list of people who voted for and against lynching Cavedog is going to be useful information when combined with the knowledge of whether he was scum or not, then I don't know what to tell you.

I mean, I don't blame him. His self-preservation instinct is kicking in, so he's latching onto the only non-attorney other than himself who's being remotely aggressive, in an attempt to get the bandwagon to hit anyone at all other than himself. But his logic is nonexistant. "LockeZ knows his logic isn't ironclad, but is using it to justify a bandwagon anyway, therefore he's scum." No shit, genius. Of course my logic of who to lynch on day one isn't ironclad.

author=CAVE_DOG_IS_BACK

author=Yellow Magic
Quotefail, but tl;dr LockeZ is suspicious and needs lynching as per above vote^

##lynch lockez

I will post case on someone else later (i promise) but I think lockez is fine for now.

He's excusing himself/several other players from scumhunting for meta reasons for the purpose of taking out 'dangerous players.' But I think lockez knows this logic isn't really ironclad.

The thing about taking out someone like yellow magic, is that yes, he can be crafty as scum, but also valuable as town. If you wanted to use meta reasons to lynch, the optimal plan would be to lynch someone who is very hard to read all the time, but doesn't do much as town (a "despite," for instance.)

I feel like lockez knows this and is just using it as an excuse to form a bandwagon on a high value target, (or a zero-value target: me).

My opinion of him may change if he actually starts looking for bad guys.

This is the post in which Cave Dog votes to lynch LockeZ. If there's anything predictable about Cave, it's his unpredictability. Inexplicable is a word I would usually immediately associate with Cave, but this post is anything but inexplicable. It's well reasoned, to the point, and even gives you a way out. You know Cave has voted for you. Cave has called for lynches before without actually contributing a vote. This is the only post in which he votes for you. You know he's voted for you, so it's safe to say you've seen it. Yet you say that Cave reworded what you said and then "inexplicably" voted for you?

Let's point to where Cave is right.

You immediately targeted YellowMagic based on how dangerous he is a deceitful player.

When I objected to Cave, you switched your vote to Cave on essentially the same premise.

At no point have you actively scumhunted but you are the most vocal advocate for prolynching and you call for the bandwagon. Any instance you may point to of scumhunting is simply bandwagoning for either YM or Cave, whom I'll admit, either of which could possibly be scum, but neither of which have shown any firm signs of such.

These are all points that Cave brings up over the course of his argument, and your defense is that his vote is "inexplicable". Okay, then.