Daniel Blackworth

@andracass I understand how it's your second game yet, however, I still find your previous behavior untowny, although that could turn out different in later parts of the game. I'd like to know. What do you think of certain players? Any particular behavior which stood out to you? Anyone you think is towny? Also, just for posterity, the fun is far from over. Essentially, mafia is fun because of the way you try to find out people's motives and intentions, and the struggle in doing so. @Alaris Are you willing to place a vote on either? Also, Paul probably didn't read the phase post. Not everyone reads it as I sometimes just look at who dies depending on the game. Did you notice anything from the first day? Anything that feels off based on tone, wording, or other factors from other people?

@andracass To sheep means to follow something without any good reason to. Also, you could start your own discussion instead of simply reacting to something.

@purplecicada Could you expound more on what you think about Andracass and Cataline? Rereading Day 1, I have updated my reads. Due to the minimal amount of activity, it's hard to glean alignment-indicative notions, but here's what I have at the moment: TOWNIEST Paul - From D1, their first post was somewhat suspicious to me because they immediately OMGUSed Zero, but their response to Zero's vote is natural in his next post where he simply denies being mafia. I feel like if he were mafia, he would have reacted more defensively and not just dismissed it. I also like their initiative to look into the deaths today and it's more or less one of the few serious posts as of yet. Purplecicada - Their ideas are vague and there's a lack of elaboration especially with regards to what should be done or what she observed, but I feel that it's genuine town behavior from her part. Mafia!Nicki tries harder to appear that they're contributing when they're not. Candy - She's had only a few posts and from what I've seen, she gave a bit of insight on the Psychologist while the other post was mostly filler. I'd be inclined to think it's scummy but given the volume of posts and her behavior in a certain game, I'm inclined to think she's town, though not that high. ZeroPassion - His early vote spurred some responses and when asked, he more or less said that it was random. He gave some thought on Knightly and interacted a little. I feel like all of those are natural, so town-ish. Cataline - Her innocent and seemingly ignorant behavior comes off to me as a mix of suspicious and not suspicious, mostly because she tries to encourage activity, but isn't doing much of her own. But I'm going to judge it as non-suspicious because it seems natural of Cat who hasn't played much in a while. Sosobean - I can never read this guy, so ??? Walpurgis - She's done relatively little in this game aside from unexplained votes and saying that she has a hard time of keeping up with the game. I feel like she could do better even with a hard time of keeping up, so I'm inclined to suspect her because she could fake things to appear low profile. Alaris - He gave some explanation to Detective/Psychologist, but had little to say afterwards and mostly joke-posted today. Town!Alaris is more vocal and tonally serious, so he feels off to me. BokChoi - He said that there's nobody to lynch because there's nothing to defend or accuse, but that simply seems like he's trying to not contribute anything and even with two deaths already, he simply reacted jokingly, without any note of him trying to defend or accuse despite his earlier statement. Andracass - Andracass feels tonally... off. I've only played with her in one game, but her behavior is heavily different. She hardly shared anything even some thought to Detective/Psychologist while her D2 is mostly non-serious. Being non-serious isn't inherently suspicious, but going by what I've seen in the other game, there's a lack of motivation and initiative to solve the game from her. I also didn't quite like her most recent post because she appears to be defending an unjustified vote and encouraging discussion but not starting one. WOLFIEST Still four wolves on the list, but I can't remove anyone from those I suspect yet. Going to throw a vote here. [Eliminate] Andracass

@andracass Bean never sheeping anything though. I'm not sure if you're being serious about the "great idea of voting for the person who admitted to murdering", but you defending that vote is weird because there's no actual basis for the vote other than the apparent "admission" which is most likely a joke. You can spur discussion in your way too and not just responding to something.

Continuing on, the second point of discussion is the behavior of everyone today. A lot of the posts are pure-filler. The first few posts are borderline excusable and I'm willing to give a pass to that, but the subsequent posts are still filler. This includes Sosobean, Alaris, Bok Choi, and Andracass. I can probably not suspect Bean because he's random in every game and there's honestly no way for me to read him, but the other three are suspicious because they're not that type of people as they are more analytic types. I'm not sure what to make of Lia's unexplained vote yet again. Andracass sheeping on that and acting semi-random is suspicious along with Cataline's act of innocence, as pointed by Nicki. I'm inclined to townread her for pointing that out even if she didn't substantiate it or pursue it. Paul's initiative to start discussion is good. I'm also inclined to townread this; going by how Paul behaves, his town counterpart gives time to look into things and he's more contributory as town. Purely for D2, here are my temporary reads: Town: Purplecicada, Paul Weak Town: Walpurgis Mafia: Alaris, Bok Choi, Cataline, Andracass I'll go over Day 1 again to follow-up on these reads because there are only 3 mafia and they can't possibly have flocked in the thread all at once.

RL matters took me a bit of time, but I'm here now. The first thing I'd like to talk about are the two deaths for today. I'm inclined to agree on Paul's take on the matter with how the mafia kill was Knightly while the vigilante kill was L'Belle. The basis for this is that arguably Knightly was towny from my interaction with him and he also gave some thoughts on players while L'Belle merely sheeped on my opinion and did little, probably this earning the suspicion of the vigilante. If this was so, I assume the kill was probably directed to either (1) protect mafia as Candy and Zero were suspected by Knightly and (2) frame Candy and Zero. I find (1) unlikely because it wasn't a solid suspicion nor were either in danger of being lynched; (2) is more likely, but it seems like a weak attempt to frame anyone. One thing is bothering me though. The phase post seems to suggest that Knightly was the vigilante kill. Going by the way it was described, the Warden gave out a knife to someone which killed Knightly. I feel like this could be a knife given by the Warden to the townies, so that they can stand a chance i.e the vigilante. What are your thoughts?

I've been preoccupied with Fire Emblem Heroes as of late but now that I'm out of stamina I'll be giving my analysis on things in a hour after I settle certain matters.

@Cataline You could talk about how you feel from independent posts. Like, you can read people based on the tone they speak in to see if they're being genuine or not. For example, from your post, I'm inclined to townread you because I feel like you have a genuine concern for the game, but just don't know what direction to take. @L'Belle Anything else you want to talk about? @Bok Choi Just because nobody's died yet, doesn't mean that there's no one to accuse or defend or no one to lynch. This is concerning because lynches are almost always never based on night kills and are more primarily on day play. @Mr. Knightly I like that you're making observations, but it's more or less NAI to me. I have some questions: why do you think someone would be suspicious for voting for no reason? What is Dive being Dive? Why do you think Candy is mafia?

@Psychic Sheep You contradict yourself. He was Mafia in Mafia: What Lurks Below and you were playing with him until near the game ended.

Additionally this, @L'Belle Why did you not respond in any way to my vote? It's not necessary, but feels weird. Also, why did you simply say you agree and not really say anything else?

@ZeroPassion Why Paul out of 12 other players? Did RNG call him forth? @andracass Why did you just start out with voting without any context? @Walpurgis Why the immediate vote on ZeroPassion without asking him or saying anything about the vote? @Cataline Why did you just suggest for everyone to talk, but not generate discussipn yourself? @Bok Choi Same question with Andracass @Psychic Sheep Why Knightly amongst 12 people too? @Paul25 Why OMGUS them? I think those are some important questions to ask.

On the Detective / Psychologist discussion, each option has it's particular positive effects and drawbacks. Detective is a role which checks if someone's committed murder and is best utilized late-game where certain players (mafia/vigilante) have already committed the night kill. As for the Psychologist, it is a role which checks if someone's capable of murder, but hasn't committed it yet. I believe it is best utilized early game where certain players (mafia/vigilante) have yet to perform a kill. I think going from that Psychologist is better because the chances of it being utilized is greater rather than Detective which may die before it can get a result. [Vote] Psychologist

@purplecicada I assume it was random, considering that we don't have any info pre-game. I don't really like those who have indicated no lynch even as a temporary vote. I think it's best for us to try to vote because it generates discussion which can help us progress in scumhunting. For now, [Eliminate] L'Belle. I didn't quite like the way they voted no lynch on a separate post. ((It's actually an empty reason lol, but consider it temporary)

YOU CAN DO THIS TOWN! CHECK THE VOTALSSS!

@Psychic Sheep On what grounds, other than saying you became rational, which as I see, is non alignment indicative? Also, do you have stronger wolfreads?

@Psychic Sheep ??? Are you scumreading him or not?

@Psychic Sheep What's strange? Also, care to explain your vote?

@andracass True. I hope that the real Hifumi didn't claim to protect themselves. @Paul25 @Corso @NickCrash @Bok Choi @LykosHand @Jace Stormkirk @Eviora @Psychic Sheep @Caimie @Walpurgis If you're Mondo, don't shoot anyone tonight unless if Candy is actually Hifumi and reveals Mafia.

@L'Belle I was the first one to vote for Candy in page 14.

FWIW Candy's uncontested claim is making me uncertain, but I'm still willing to pursue this lynch as I think it's in the best of interests, especially if Candy were mafia which her actions have shown to me, but if not, it still provides us information and reduces the number of suspects for us. I urge Mondo to abstain from shooting tonight unless if the possibility of town!Candy revealing a wolf/scum happens.

@Jace Stormkirk I know. I understand that you don't like roleclaims to take away the fun of the game and I share the same sentiments. However, you're voting for Eviora, someone who voted for Nicki. Of course, there's the possibility that she bussed Nicki, but I don't think she did, given the timing of her vote and her conviction. Even if the possibility exists, right now, we should focus on the ones who defended Nicki.

I'm not that sure about Jace being mafia; I feel like he's just being anti-town and I don't wanna risk a mislynch on him right now.

@NickCrash No I wasn't trying to intimidate you LOL. I was just confused by your wording heh. @Jace Stormkirk What do you think about Candy / Paul / Bok? Also, are you discrediting her vote on Eviora?

In

If you're asking Paul to claim, then I won't allow it. Claims should only be made as an act of self-preservation or if there's good information to be given. Claiming not for those reasons will only lead for PRs to be open in the coming nights and that's not beneficial for town.