AWKWARD ZOMBIE

Of course lynching a villager does make things faster for mafia. And I don't doubt that there wasn't at least another mafia besides Crisp in the votes yesterday.
Buuuut, well you see that people who vote get suspected and mafia wouldn't want that to happen to (a lot of) them.

Your reasons for voting Tammerath seem good enough. People who only drop into the thread to place a vote look suspicious because it seems that they know who to vote for from somewhere else.

Wait, that was double negative. "I don't doubt that there was at least..."

Call me too accusatory (especially since I already had a slight suspicion towards you, D-Vid), but why are you trying to cover for the people who voted for Slob? Of course not all of them would be mafia, but it's our only sure starting point and we should be trying to find out which of those who voted is the most suspicious, not trying to wipe out suspicions from their actions.In fact, that's the kind of thing a mafia member would want to do to redirect our suspicions away from them.

I'm not sure about anything, but I'm very leery of D-vid now. Looking at this past discussion, he has been "voicing a lot of possibilities" but not really pointing us in any direction of who to go after. It seems strange to me.

Kamak has already pointed out that D-vid has been acting strange.


Again, not sure of anything yet, but I'm thinking hard about this.

I should've specified more, I didn't really want to rehear why you think tam is mafia. I just wanted to iterate the issue with having to suspect people on at specific day. We didn't really have anything conclusive, but we still had to lynch somebody.

I guess I'm just bad at saying what I think.
I was just against suspecting people just because they voted to lynch [insert innocent person here].
Mostly because at the very best it would have been 5 mafia vs. 3 town in that vote, more likely the other way around or worse.
So if you suspect everyone who lynched [innocent person] you automatically suspect at the very least 3 innocents.
If you have other reasons to suspect someone then that is great and better.

Why I haven't pointed you in any direction myself... well this day (day 3) I have been kinda busy trying to explain myself for the last days so I didn't really have time going back and analysing what everyone said. And day 2 everything was kinda dragging on and going nowhere with all investigators dead and no one having any idea what to do so I honestly had nowhere to point that would have had any substance. So I rather list possible situations, some less likely than others.

Oh God I'm so late to the party. I'll just leave this here.


I don't think I said that I wanted to pick from people who were inactive. Least, I didn't see that I said so. Besides we needed to take a chance to see if we could lynch a mafia. Our odds were bad, and so far we've only got one down. I went undecided, because Reyo's reasoning confused me but I could kind of see where he was going with it, so I assumed he was a townie looking for concrete answers and townies with power roles he could trust.

Well things worked out, so undecided. What day do we have until to work out a possible lynch?

The 29th of January. I don't want to rush you~

The conundrum here is that whenever someone is lynched, the voting process must include some sort of bandwagon. So the mafia has one of two choices: to hop on the bandwagon and try to accuse those who avoided it of "laying low", or if the lynched person was town, to vote otherwise and after the fact blame the bandwagoners of trying to push the vote through.

As for my personal thoughts, it seems to me that Reyo's posts have been extremely defensive in nature. Perhaps he is a townie that might have made an error in judgement in suggesting the gunsmith reveal him/herself. On the other hand, he may be trying to hide something.

No vote yet from me, though.

I think if we vote, we're going to have to provide a good reason. Bandwagons are sort of inevitable, and whoever votes in one will have to accept the chance of putting a target on ourselves if the person winds up being innocent.

While being aware of this - Since I have enough reason to believe that D-vid's actions are consistent of those of a mafia member - I'm going to go ahead and vote Lynch D-vid. This vote may change, still.

I explained earlier why I was suspicious of him. I also want to point out that today, when we have some evidence and reasoning, he is very reluctant to go on it and questioning it constantly. The day before, however, he expressed that he wanted to "get the day over with", and was willing to lynch Slob on reasons of inactivity alone, no questioning or dragging the day along like he appears to be doing now that him (and possibly some other guilty members?) are targeted. Kind of strange that he would shift strategies like that, unless he had some ulterior motives.

Yesterday, after more than half the time limit was over and absolutely nothing happened except a single vote that was later even taken back by runes I felt the need to do SOMETHING to not make the day a no lynch day. Which landed me on a suspicious list.
So obviously I would not again just vote for someone the next day.
I really don't see how I'm "behaving like mafia" because of that.
Seriously, I vote for someone and it's suspicious, I DONT vote for someone and it's suspicious, what am I supposed to do?
You said you were suspicious of Tammerath and pointed out why, and voted for him yesterday.
Looks ok.
Vote Tammerath.

Now spin that around to make me look suspicious again.

If anyone else has anything to add I would love to hear it. My vote still stands, but I would like the whole story here.

I'll get with that Tammerath Vote

I just seriously didn't know what to do. I voted for Slob because the third day of our 5 day time limit was soon over. And voting someone at all is still better than letting the day end with a No Lynch. I hope you agree with that.
Then I somehow got suspected because of that. Which sucks but is kinda understandable.
So I explain myself and only get suspected because of the stuff I explained again while the persons I explained it to are either ignoring it or just not writing anything about it in return, plus I get suspected because of the exact opposite too.
You have your reasons to suspect people, based on things they said, which is okay.
I worked with the approach that I know from past games that some mafia members will always barely write in the thread maybe not even vote and tried my luck with that.

So I'll just sort the thread by poster and read all their posts in succession now.

People barely talking list:
Ungeheuer: one vote saying No Lynch on Day 1
Well and that's that. Everyone else who barely talked is dead.

People who talked but never actually decided to do anything I guess? List:
Alec who mostly did smalltalk
Angelic who never really seemed to be able to decide
Crisp who turned out to be mafia had like 4 posts in all, voted on the bandwagon, rest was mostly smalltalk. I could have put hir in the above list
Tammerath who joined the bandwagon too and barely talked during day 2 before that

Runes was active, but what got my attention during reading through all the posts was him voting for Slob, then going back to undecided, then joining Turbo voting for Alec, then back to Slob when he got more votes. Then voted Alec on day 3 again. And now switched to Tammerath after I put a vote on him.
I think I'll have to switch to Need Runes4 now seeing as he seems to vote for whoever as long as it kills someone.

I brought attention to a mafia member, crisp. If I'm mafia, then I'm a really bad one. I'm pretty sure I'm going to die tonight, though.