Game 19: Star-Crossed

Lara C. wrote:

Sylvester S. wrote:

Lara C. wrote:In my head, right now, scumlist is Mateo>Katie>Sylvester>Yosuke>Misato>Forrest>Clark>Myself

That is a rather convoluted reads list. I mean, look, Mateo is your top lynch read. He's said only one thing:

Mateo P. wrote:Hi everyone
Lynch Sylvester S.
He's probably not even sylvester stalone and also he did math

I don't like him myself, but that is completely personal and not part of the game.

Katie, I suppose, a weak case could be made for at this point, what with the random stuff she said pre-game, and the martyr-ish attitude the two times after she got FOSed, but I'm just gonna chalk this up to a chick fight for now.

Spoiler:

Sylvester? He reminds me of my third grade math teacher; lynch him. Lynch him. Lynch him! This is for everything, Ms. Johnson!!!

Yosuke's activity can be summed up as thus:

Yosuke D. wrote:confirming

So I think there is cause for concern there.

Your read on Misato is interesting, considering the differing opinions you have on the value of lynch today. You were all for it in the beginning (#ifeelpersecuted), and even held onto it after me and Katie explained why this is A Bad Idea:

Lara C. wrote:While I follow the logic on pushing NL, this isn't classic. Mafia won't necessarily kill tonight, so we can lynch without fear of coming closer to MyLo/LyLo tomorrow. In fact, Even in 2v4 at day, we can probably still mislynch and win the game (although the odds are 33/67)

Side note: This is why probability is important, kids.
She responded, saying:

Misato O. wrote:So basically, I don't trust the concept of "LOL THEY WON'T GET THE KILL THROUGH, LETS LYNCH" On mylo.

Buuutttt, It's not mylo. I think we should nl today, since we have very little info, and lynch tomorrow or the next day.

She's going for the option number 3 I described earlier.
Then you responded:

Lara C. wrote:I'm not saying use it as a strat - I'm saying it's possible. You will have to lynch on MyLo though, because if you NL, mafia gets kill and it turns into LyLo - or they don't get the kill and it remains in MyLo.

I disagree with NLing today, just because I think we could get some information based on reads/etc, but I'm fairly impartial right now.

Which either indicates you Do Not Understand, or you have a bias you can't seem to overcome for now.
Overall, no idea why the low read on someone you part ideologically with.

Forrest Gump--

Forrest G. wrote:The "announce the kill before MyLo" was a pretty obvious thing. No softclaiming kills? This changes the way I thought this would play out since I expected scumhunting to be centered around that.

I agree with Lara C. on the mathia part.

2 days deadline? Not fun.

He has the Katie-esque "announce the kill is obv" --> "I'm so townie" hindsight bias, little cause for concern there, and he agreed with you. That's all he ever did. I'm taking a wild stab here; did you rank him lowly on your scum readings because he agreed with you? I mean. He's lurking >.>

Clark is Clark, no read but the at least he tried thong.

And You are You.

Overall: I predict Lara C. + Katie P. + Sylvester S. will be the power trio for this game. They shall henceforth be referred to as LarKaVester. I also predict one of these individuals will be the target of the Mafia night kill, when it hits, assuming we don't stupidly lynch on PMyLo.

Mateo is #1 on my lynch list because of the fact that he just has that sole post;

Katie as a weak case is just that  - there wasn't much else I could do casewise;

Sylvester gets 3 because he's trying at least, but in a way that isn't townie;

Yosuke obviously needed a sub, so let's chalk her #4 spot up to lurk/inactivity;

Misato is #5 because she offered up great ideas, that while I don't necessarily agree with them, are town-lead-y in a way, so again, at least she's trying;

I do agree that Forrest should have been much higher than I put him - I simply skimmed posts when making my list. After rereading, he should definitely be at 2 or 3;

Clark, again, not much to go off of, but seemed pretty town from what he's posted so far;

And of course me. So right now, I'd be all for lynching Mateo or Forrest.

Yosuke D. wrote:FORREST II DO YOU SEEK TO CONTINUE THE ENDEAVORS OF FORREST I OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE USEFUL
PLEASE ANSWER THIS WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR
THANK YOU

Yosuke D. wrote:I APPRECIATE THAT FORREST, IT MAKES MY JOB A LOT EASIER
I'D ALSO LIKE TO HEAR WHY FORREST SHOULD BE AT 2 OR 3, EVEN IF IT IS FAIRLY SELF-EXPLANATORY

Mateo P. wrote:even tho i gave a perfectly valid reason (he's an imposter!!!) about why i lynched sylvester on day 1, people seem to think otherwise so ill explain more. most of what I'm about to say has already been reiterated like 100 times by everyone but whatever. first off: mafia is a game of psychology. we all have our own views on what a scummy play is. as a result, plays become very open for interpretation and to reach a general consensus on what is scummy and what deserves a lynch, there has to be either a shared perspective on the play from the majority of the players, or simply just fact we know to be true (which is not present in this setup.) having said that, it is extremely hard to have an equal view as i stated before, we all have different interpretations. we have trouble enough agreeing on a lynch in these kind of setups, we can't afford to argue every time someone requests a teit be added to someone. mafia is just too open ended for a system like that.

one thing we've done reasonably well (compared to game 20 and 21 lol what a bunch of noobs) is that there hasn't been that one person that takes over and leads everything, the discussion for the most part has been contributed to by several people. I think the key for us to win is to abuse the fact that town and mafia are on equal ground in regards to communication. If we can all contribute (hypocrite i know) and actively respond to one another, it will be painfully hard for both mafia to decide on a person that stands out a lot as a target.

Katie P. wrote:Omfg I'm so pissed.

Can someone explain how multi-quote works?
I just spent 10 minutes going through them all and only the last one quoted ;-;

Katie P. wrote:Basically what I wanted to say was those caps are very annoying to read big paragraphs of Yosuke. And I can't keep a straight face when I see your name.
Also, a lot of Sylvesters math posts are actually complete shitposts and don't help us at all. Like his things on peits or something. Stop using math and scumhunt the normal way.
Also Lara, when you accused me of saying something without backing up the info. Then in that post you say

"I have a slight distrust of Sylvester"
Though I do agree cos math shitposts and stuff. You failed to say that. So you are being a hypocrite. There were a few other nit picks i had for people. But that's the main stuff. Katie Perry OUT

Lara C. wrote:

Sylvester S. wrote:Okay, so I screwed up by saying that stupid "I predict someone from LarKaVester will be killed" thing. It really accomplishes nothing but encouraging the Mafia to target one of us >.> That was just stupid... Sorry. But hey, nobody died, might as well comb this information for all it's worth, still very sorry, which leads me to...

What if one of LarKaVester is scum?

Let's say Katie and Clark are mafia. Both are active and (probably) would have seen me send out this blaring alarm "KILL LARA OR SYLVESTER". Let's say both saw it (100%) and know, for a near fact (90%), that the other saw it. What's the probability they count on the OTHER one following this sign?

Katie says to herself, Hmm. Will Clark decide to follow this? I mean, if I follow this and choose Lara, then there's a chance he, too, will follow this signpost and target either Lara or Sylvester--50-50 he targets the same one I do. Clark tells himself the same thing.

So I'd say there's a 90% chance they both see it, a 2/3 chance they both decide to follow it, but then by pure luck one targeted me, the other Lara. Doesn't matter who targeted who. So, if we assume that one of LarKaVester is Mafia, and we know for a fact the kill did not go through, then that means...
10% chance one or both of them did not see it and it was just a random miss,
30% chance they both saw it, but one or both of them decides not to follow it, and it was just a random miss,
60% chance they both saw it, but missed by one targeting Lara, the other, Sylvester (lé sexy beast me)

All of this seems realistically likely.

What if two of LarKaVester are scum?

Wait, first of all, I'd just like to say that if I were mafia, the "One of LarKaVester will die" would likely have been considered a soft by aj, and the post deleted and I subbed out. Nothing about town softing, right?

ajhockeystar wrote:Before I start the game, it has been told to me that this game has a game-breaking strategy for mafia that involves them announcing a kill in mylo prior to hammering. So I'm just announcing this rule publicly - mafia aren't allowed to announce or softclaim their kill to their partner.

Weak evidence, I know, I screwed up anyways. So I'll make it up by doing two explanations for this one.

Lara and Sylvester are mafia. Sylvester, being an arrogant turd, will definitely follow his plan and target Katie. There is literally no incentive for him not to. Literally. Lara, knowing Sylvester is Mafia, has a 90% chance of detecting his soft in the first place, because she'd cling tight to her man. Would she follow the soft after detecting it, and target Katie? Again, there is little reason for her not to, unless she feared repercussions for her and Sylvester as being the only surviving members of LarKaVester which could become a Big Problem later on. I'd say, oh, 2/3 chance she would follow the softing? But we know for a fact there was no kill, so...
10% chance Lara did not detect the soft and just chose randomly like a n00b,
30% chance she saw it but did not follow it, because she wanted to keep LarKaVester alive, probably for a lynching of Katie on PLyLo,
60% chance she saw it and targeted Katie--whoahwaitwhat
60% chance something else entirely happened?

It doesn't really compute... It's realistically something like:
10% chance Sylvester is not an arrogant turd and does not target Katie and it was either random miss because Lara did not follow the soft or definite miss because Lara followed it
10% chance Lara did not detect the soft and just chose randomly like a n00b,
80% chance she saw it but did not follow it, because she wanted to keep LarKaVester alive, probably for a lynching of Katie on PLyLo

Ehh, none of that is very likely IMO.

So what if Lara and Katie are Mafia? Well, again, 10% chance one or both of them did not see the claim, 2/3 chance they both decided to follow it... But again, we run into the roadblock of why nobody died then.
10% didn't see it blahblahblah
30% didn't follow blehebleheblhe4
60% chance saw it targetd Sylvester blalmalmalallalalllama

Which realistically translates to:

20% chance did not see it
80% chance one or both of them saw it but did not follow it, because they wanted to keep LarKaVester alive, probably for a lynching of Sylvester on PLyLo

That is more believable, I'd say, than the above, but still not likely.

If none of LarKaVester are scum?

Figure it out yourself. Spoiler: nothing to figure out besides where you started.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tl;dr
It is more likely that one member of the mafia is in LarKaVester than both are, because outcomes where nobody died last night occur more frequently and easily when only one is mafia as opposed to if two are. If both mafia are in LarKaVester, you have to assume something freaky like one of them purposefully did not want to kill. Also, because Sylvester is the mastermind behind the soft, and nobody died, it decreases the likelihood that he is scum slightly because he would have followed his plan more often than a non-Sylvester scum would have followed it.

In other words:
"Chance none of LarKaVester are scum" > "Chance one of LarKaVester who is not Sylvester is scum" > "Chance Sylvester is scum" > "Chance Lara and Katie are scum" > "Chance Sylvester and one other LarKaVester are scum"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please try to understand this. Read it carefully. Actually, this is a life lesson in priority management. No, seriously. So even if you disregard me completely on this theory by itself, just try to learn something from it.

Slight FOS on Katie and Lara for being in LarKaVester and a lesser FOS on Clark for hammering nl.

Reading through this, and reading that end paragraph, I'm really, REALLY starting to think you're scummy. Also, the town softing kills and not dying for them=confirm is invalid, I already talked to AJ about it. With your very last sentence, Slight FOS on Katie and Lara for being in LarKaVester is the stupidest thing I've seen this fame so far. You're saying we're more likely to be scum because we're members of a list you grouped us in, based solely on how we posted day 1, followed by nobody dying in a game where the chance of a death is 1/36, far lower than if one or both of us had been scum. Also, please, try to actually scumhunt instead of using math - arbitrary numbering of people's human, illogical actions will not help us win.

Time to explain my "convoluted" lynch list.

Yosuke D. wrote:

Sylvester S. wrote:Teit post

THIS IS SUCH A TERRIBLE IDEA AS EXPRESSED BY LITERALLY EVERYONE ELSE EXCEPT MAYBE MISATO
IT MAKES IT SO THAT WE CAN HIDE BEHIND MATH AND PREVENT SUBJECTIVITY, WHICH IS ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO FIND MAFIA
THERE ARE ONLY THREE KINDS OF PEOPLE WHO TRY TO USE MATH IN MAFIA
1) CITRUS FREAK
2) BAD TOWN
3) MAFIA
BY YOUR OTHER POSTS YOU ARE CLEARLY NOT A BAD PLAYER, SO ARE YOU CITRUS FREAK OR MAFIA? OR AM I STUPID AND WRONG AND YOU'RE ACTUALLY BAD?
I play Mafia with an extremely different sort of people than Pokémon nerds. (Not that there's anything wrong with Pokémon I don't judge your life choices) Allow me to posit that, there, nobody is ever considered a sure-fire Mafia until LyLo. We literally go 4-12 games NLing all the way until a string of LyLos happens and then all Mafia are successively lynched. This theme is especially generous in that wise.
I am not Citrus Freak, much like how Elon Musk is not a kid in the back yard paying with a model rocket.

Lara C. wrote:Can we lynch Sylvester for trying to Math instead of Maf?

I AGREE WITH THIS BUT WHY DIDNT YOU ACTUALLY LYNCH SYLVESTER UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE HAD? SEEKING SECURITY, PERHAPS????
Why agree with this? Subjectivity in data is more emphasized when compulsed to have their actions revealed. If not, why even bother subbing people in the first place? Why is the second Forest Gump any better than the first, just because he promised activity?

Sylvester S. wrote:It's not math, it's a clever way of tracking scumtells without losing them in translation.

NUMBERS = MATH
MAYBE THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY TRUE BUT YOU'RE USING NUMBERS TO DO SOMETHING WHICH IS BASICALLY MATH ANYWAYS
Even if numbers = math, talking =/= speaking. My question is, does a talker who leaps to criticize Mathia demonstrate a flaw in Mathia, or the themselves? If you want to completely disregard Mathia, fine, wipe it from your mind, but do not ignore the comments people make about it.
The only salient comment made about Mathia so far was Yosuke saying "it obscures subjectivity", and Lara commenting on how we'd all have different interpretations of slips.

Misato O. wrote:Ok so, I want to hear more about this mathia strat.

If 12 is to a 50/50, can we deduce a sensible number for a 75/25 or so?

THERE ARE MANY POSITIVE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MISATO AND SYLVESTER AND THAT SEEMS WEIRD TO ME
Misato had an open mind. If someone is scum, what do they have to benefit from aligning herself with an alleged "Citrus Freak"? Mafia recoil in fear from the new and untested. "Keep things the way they are" is their rallying cry because they are experienced in the banal arts of human deception like lurking.
I MIGHT ACTUALLY BE WRONG ABOUT THAT BUT FROM WHAT I REMEMBER THIS IS TRUE

SYLVESTER WHY DID YOU MENTION MISATO AND CLARK OUT OF ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAD TALKED PREVIOUSLY?
I notice I am confused. Could you explain? Sorry >.>

Mateo P. wrote:Hi everyone
Lynch Sylvester S.
He's probably not even sylvester stalone and also he did math

Edit: Bold fail, had permission from aj

BY THAT POINT NOBODY WAS RANDOM LYNCHING, WHY DID YOU PROVIDE SUCH POOR REASONING EVEN THOUGH I AGREE WITH IT????
Random Lynching is easy, making an effective judgment is hard. Because sticking to tradition and promising to help in the future is far easier than actually thinking right now and doing something right now. Because he's not even Sylvester Stallone.
And BTW it's *she

Lara C. wrote:Lynch Sylvester S.

Honestly, you shouldn't need math to scumhunt. It should be entirely based on tells, and it seems to me like the number of teits assigned is relatively arbitrary based upon however scummy you personally think an action is. So to me, something like a freudian slip would be worth 5 or 6 teits but to everyone else it may be worth only 2. SO I think math is the wrong way to go, and you bringing it in is trying to draw our attention away from actual scumtells and reads that could find a scum BEFORE they manage to kill us.

THIS IS A COMPLETELY FAIR POINT AND I AGREE WITH IT
It is a completely fair point.

Katie P. wrote:Ayy we started.
I WAS going to suggest keeping an eye out for people trying to softclaim kills, but that's not allowed, so idc tbh

Lara C. wrote:

Katie P. wrote:No pun intended

No pun intended on what? Also, I'm a tad FoS on you, solely because I feel vanillagers wouldn't have even thought about mafia SCing kills.

I DISAGREE
ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO FIND SCUM IS BY PUTTING YOURSELVES IN THEIR SHOWS (AS TOWN) AND TRYING TO THINK OF STRATEGIES THEY WOULD USE. AS SUCH, STATING POSSIBLE MAFIA STRATEGIES ISNT TOWNY OR SCUMMY, AS I SEE IT
Even more important than thinking about individual scum actions, I suggest everybody takes two people, analyzes their personal interactions, and comment whether it smells of town talking speaking with town, town speaking with scum, or scum speaking with scum. They have no private communication; either they completely ignore eachother, or the speak publicly but with enough fake wink-wink "we're awesome" saltiness as to not be suspicious.

Sylvester S. wrote:I am woman, hear me roar a song of bae-s (Bayes) crap that wasn't funny

FEEL FREE TO USE YOUR SYSTEM TO SCUMHUNT, ITS JUST NOT A GOOD THING FOR EVERYONE TO USE BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS ALREADY OUTLINED
^^^Aww yeah math for me^^^

Katie P. wrote:Suprise suprise, good old me being FOSed already
I dont have much to say rn, but we will say as the game progresses

THIS IS HONESTLY COMPLETELY FINE, UNLIKE WHAT THE BELOW vvvvv SAYS

Lara C. wrote:

Katie P. wrote:Suprise suprise, good old me being FOSed already
I dont have much to say rn, but we will say as the game progresses

My FOS on you is probably the slightest FoS possible. It's Day 1, so town is scrambling to pick up on anything. Because other people have so few posts, I'm going off just what I already have, so right now I FoS you above all else. Are you mafia? No, probably not, but until we get more posts you're the closest to it fmpov.

What's bad about that? Lara seems a bit aggressively... passive here. That's good, I think? On the opther hand, I put a slight FOS on her and she flips out. Why the difference between her reads on others and others on her? Does she think herself non-discussable?

Forrest G. wrote:The "announce the kill before MyLo" was a pretty obvious thing. No softclaiming kills? This changes the way I thought this would play out since I expected scumhunting to be centered around that.

I agree with Lara C. on the mathia part.

2 days deadline? Not fun.

THIS SEEMS TO BE USEFUL BUT UPON LOOKING AT IT MORE CLOSELY THIS IS LEGITIMATELY JUST REPEATING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID AND/OR FILLERING
BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD!!!!!!
So we agree 1st forest gump is a n00b, that says nothing about second one. Is this scummy fillering, or stupid town fillering? There is a difference.
Wait, it's actually both  

Sylvester S. wrote:

Katie P. wrote:So. There's a 1/4 chance we hit scum, which I don't think is worth lynching for. NL?

I agree. As in a normal game of Mafia, we should NL and scumhunt on MyLo; I predict we'll have three of these PMyLos until Mafia lands a kill.

Either we can have 1) two consecutive days of lynching, 2) a few days scumhunting and no lynching followed by a lynching day after Mafia lands a kill, or 3) any moldable, but risky combination thereof.

IMO I think option 1 > 3 > 2.

I DISAGREE WITH NLING AT THIS POINT ONWARDS UNLESS LYNCHING REALLY DOESNT GET US ANYTHING OR WE'RE IN MYLO
LYNCHING IS THE BEST WAY TO GET INFORMATION BY USING A CONFIRMED TOWN OR MAFIA'S INTERACTIONS WITH OTHERS TO HELP FIND SCUM
THE ONLY REASONS WE SHOULDNT LYNCH ARE 1) MYLO OR 2) WE HAVE NO IDEA AT ALL AS TO WHO COULD BE SCUM
Talking is the best way to get information. Tell you what. Let's meet in the middle and say lynch after Mafia makes its first kill. That will give us even more time to talk, maybe another day, and make the lynch reveal oh so more valuable. It'll be 2-5 then, after lynching, 2-4 which is PMyLo if Mafia misses that night. Sound good?

Lara C. wrote:While I follow the logic on pushing NL, this isn't classic. Mafia won't necessarily kill tonight, so we can lynch without fear of coming closer to MyLo/LyLo tomorrow. In fact, Even in 2v4 at day, we can probably still mislynch and win the game (although the odds are 33/67)

WE REALLY SHOULDNT RISK IT AT ALL AND THE FACT THAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING THIS IS SOMEWHAT FRIGHTENING

Misato O. wrote:No lynch

So basically, I don't trust the concept of "LOL THEY WON'T GET THE KILL THROUGH, LETS LYNCH" On mylo.

Buuutttt, It's not mylo. I think we should nl today, since we have very little info, and lynch tomorrow or the next day.

I AGREE WITH THE NO LYNCH ON MYLO AND THEN IM EHH ON THE NL ALTHOUGH IT WORKED OUT QUITE NICELY
'Ehh' is the title of the biography of any game of mafia.
EHH: How eight people, kill off pretty much everybody in the town in an attempt to get rid of two bad apples, and then finally come to understand that violence is always the answer and mass suicide solves all the problems so let's Lynch <super active person> and hope there is a cop in this setup

Lara C. wrote:

Misato O. wrote:No lynch

So basically, I don't trust the concept of "LOL THEY WON'T GET THE KILL THROUGH, LETS LYNCH" On mylo.

Buuutttt, It's not mylo. I think we should nl today, since we have very little info, and lynch tomorrow or the next day.

I'm not saying use it as a strat - I'm saying it's possible. You will have to lynch on MyLo though, because if you NL, mafia gets kill and it turns into LyLo - or they don't get the kill and it remains in MyLo.


I disagree with NLing today, just because I think we could get some information based on reads/etc, but I'm fairly impartial right now.

Unlynch Sylvester S, No Lynch

HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE WHILE BEING IMPARTIAL
LOGIC ERROR LOGIC ERROR LOGIC ERROR
Logic is all about being impartial while leaning to one side. Disagreement does not mean you can't change your mind.

Clark the Conductor wrote:I really really don't understand that mini bandwagon on Sylvester S, yes his idea was pretty bad but at least he tried.

No lynch for now.

THIS IS FAIR BUT THERE ARE REASONS FOR THE LYNCHES (WELL, THE SECOND ONE AT LEAST), MAKE SURE YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THEM BEFORE YOU MAKE A JUDGMENT
Similarly, I propose we not make judgments about math before we understand what Sylvester is talking about.*
...
...
...
........
*Completely joking chill out

Katie P. wrote:what do you want me to do?
just post CATS
CATS
CATs
CATS
not post at all, then i can guarantee you would call me out for lurking, so im asking you this. Would you like me to lurk, filler, or find anything scummy i can find?

JUST DO THE LATTER, IT'S FINE IF YOU CAN'T ALWAYS GET SOMETHING, JUST CONTINUOUSLY TRY TO DO SO
There wasn't much to do before D2 started.

Lara C. wrote:

Katie P. wrote:what do you want me to do?
just post CATS
CATS
CATs
CATS
not post at all, then i can guarantee you would call me out for lurking, so im asking you this. Would you like me to lurk, filler, or find anything scummy i can find?

No, I wan't you to call out anything scummy you can find - and then give us why you think it's scummy or back it up. Just saying "Mini defense by Clark? XP" does nothing unless you give insight as to why it may be said.

WHILE THIS IS FAIR AND THE INTENTION BEHIND IT IS GOOD YOU SHOULDNT TRY TO FORCE EVERYONE TO CONTRIBUTE BECAUSE LET ME TELL YOU THE ONE THING THAT DOESNT WORK IS THAT
EVERYONE SHOULD JUST BE DOING THEIR BEST TO CONTRIBUTE AND NOT PURPOSELY BE LAZY AND EVERYTHING WILL BE ALLLLLL GOOOOOD
There is a difference between activity and useful activity. Useful activity: Yosuke. Non-useful activity: Forest Gump #1.
Yes I know I'm a hypocrite let's move along then move along

Sylvester S. wrote:
Still alive! I thought I was dead after the predicted LarKaVester kill. And you guys totally lied and said it wasn't hammer >.>

WHY DO YOU IMMEDIATELY BELIEVE WHAT OTHERS SAY WITHOUT CHECKING
THIS IS A MISTAKE
DO NOT DO THAT
Of all the people you claim "immediately believes what others say", you chose me because....?

Sylvester S. wrote:
Also, why not just use a system of "lynching" until PLyLo where we do fakelynch ajhockeystar so we get our point across, without actually voting. Sound good?

NO
WHY, THAT'S COMPLETELY USELESS
WE SHOULDNT BE CONTINUALLY NO LYNCHING SINCE WE'RE GOING TO GET VERY LITTLE FROM DOING SO
JUST LYNCH PEOPLE AND UNLYNCH TO NO LYNCH IF YOU REAAAAALLLLLYYYYY WANT TO NL
IF PEOPLE HAVE NO LYNCHES ON THEM THEY WONT BE NERVOUS AT ALL AND THERE'S LITERALLY NOTHING GAINED FROM DOING THOSE FAKE LYNCHES UNLESS THEY'RE GOING TO BE FOLLOWED UP ON
You literally just proposed exactly what I did except with two steps instead of one.

Sylvester S. wrote:
Slight FOS on Katie and Lara for being in LarKaVester and a lesser FOS on Clark for hammering nl.

I READ YOUR WHOLE POST AND STILL THINK THAT IT DOESNT MAKE ANY SENSE
FIRST OFF, KATIE MAY HAVE BEEN ACTIVE BUT THERE WAS NO ACTUAL REASON TO TARGET HER WITH THE NIGHTKILL SINCE SHE DIDNT ACTUALLY DO TOO MUCH
YOU AND LARA? SURE. WHAT PROBABLY HAPPENED (ASSUMING YOU'RE BOTH TOWN, WHICH I DOUBT) IS THAT EACH SCUM TARGETED ONE OF YOU
THE FACT THAT YOU KEEP BRINGING KATIE INTO THE MIX MAKES ME FEEL LIKE IF YOU'RE SCUM YOU WENT AT HER WITH THE NIGHTKILL
I just stupidly grouped the most active people into a meaningless label because literally everybody else was refusing to contribute at that point; best to hoist up the actives as a standard.
An, uh, how does me talking about Katie suggest "I targeted her with my nightkill"?

FOR NOW I AM LYNCHING SYLVESTER S. BECAUSE HE'S THE SCUMMIEST AS I SEE IT BUT THIS IS LIKELY TO CHANGE, AND IT PROBABLY WILL

Katie P. wrote:Also thanks YOSUKE D. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE HELP WHEN I GET TO A COMPUTER I WILL DO THAT

Yosuke D. wrote:BEFORE I RESPOND TO YOUR POST I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT I THINK BECAUSE YOU QUOTED MY LYNCH ON YOU YOU ARE TECHNICALLY LYNCHING YOURSELF
AJHOCKEYSTAR CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG

ALSO ALL OF YOU SAYING THAT YOU LIKE ME IS DISGUSTING
I AM A SMALL CHILD AND YOU SHOULD NOT BE HITTING ON ME

ajhockeystar wrote:

Correcting you, you're wrong. I always ask people to not post lynches like this Lynch name in the middle of text since it's hard to pick out, and instead like this:

Lynch name

So yeah. Either way, quoting a lynch doesn't count as an actual lynch.