andracass

And suddenly this is interesting again.

I'm gonna hide this in a spoiler. Since it's a spoiler.

@NickCrash You actually quoted Junko. I got a good laugh out of it.

@NickCrash Perhaps now you see why I pursued the route that I did. Have you played DR2?

So my tactics in both cases are going to be similar. Nicki claimed Mondo. Either she was telling the truth and wasn't worth voting for, or she was lying and the vigilante was going to kill her. Now you have claimed Sayaka. If you're telling the truth and Dive is Junko, there's no reason to vote for you. If you're lying, then the vigilante would know that they didn't kill Dive, and would kill you.

@Bok Choi This is looking suspiciously similar to Nicki's longshot roleclaim. Especially if Dive was killed by the mafia.

@NickCrash I would love the role of mayor, thank you. Additionally, in your notes I'm the only person explicitly mentioned who isn't killed. Hence my statement about fixation.

@NickCrash Yes, please confirm: you are claiming Sayaka?

I don't quite know what mafia member is what role yet, but i'm tempted to say that Nick is Junko. It makes sense that his slightly incorrect notes (that are also weirdly fixated on me) would point to another character being Junko.

You'll have to forgive me if I don't reference your notes. Dive is not Junko.

Why would Dive be junko? He did say to check the votals......

@NickCrash

@Mazino Divergent ...............tbh i'm a little distracted with other things right now. I think it's too early to lynch, and think that the detective would be better suited for finding killers.

Meanwhile, I'd like to do a brief show-and-tell for the town. All quotes are from Nick's large post, and italicized for readability. "Allow me to evaluate this from an outsider's point of view, because right now the situation is bizzare." You're suddenly switching tactics. Earlier you were simply pushing back at me, and you deleted a post where you continued to do that. "I don't mind that per se, but I prefer logic to stubborness and paranoia." Wow, you almost sound like me from D2. In fact, this is almost a direct quote. And, you know what? I agree. Let's watch this play out. "She definitely enjoys taking the safe route. D2 votes for Candy, D3 I can't remember if she voted at all. Now D4, and she votes for me" I voted for Candy twice. Notably, stating that you "can't remember if I voted at all" also serves to discredit and delegitimize my current vote for you. Saying "she definitely enjoys taking the safe route" also ignores the plays that I've been making. As I said, you can play the crowd. "Needless to say, the vote itself does not change things, but at least mine has some justification behind it, being that Corso's acting sheepish and following the classic mafia strategy of CWAC and blending in." Actually, the vote change does make a difference. Paul is making a sympathy play that offers no real substance in (what I presume to be) an attempt to get fewer votes or even a Makoto to push the lynch. By changing my vote from him to you, his fate is no longer quite so assured. This does, however, alter the pressure on you. Paul is on your scumread list, and your two votes would go a ways towards eliminating him....which you'd likely avoid doing at all costs, if you are both mafia. Your resistance to changing your vote was either sheer stubbornness or group defense. Pick one: you're either a hypocrite or mafia. "Cass is trying to pressure me into voting for Paul, by voting for me. Yes, I too am confused." I am no longer pressuring you to vote for Paul. I am directly accusing you. "It's obviously a declaration of scumread, which is a plus, given she never provided the list we've asked before, whereas others did." I really like this sentence. It's clever. Firstly, this is a direct accusation. "Reads" don't exactly mean a lot to me. Things happen, and I sort them out as events unfold. Secondly, "which is a plus" gives you a brief opportunity to patronize me before moving on to my favorite part: the "we've". You're managing to broaden the reach of your claim and place yourself in the town with the same linguistic trick. "However, it's not a logical step to take. Suspicion on me has began on D4 with Eviora's post claiming that I'm just too towny for her liking. Honestly I don't know how to respond to that." Your posts are excessively towny. I've mentioned some of the tricks already; I'll mention some more before I'm done here. I could even go through old posts, too. Now that I'm thinking about it, I think I've found the last mafia member. "Yet Cass decides to grab from that and without providing solid info, to do some questioning." This is the most accurate statement here. I am not providing solid info. I've stated why in another post. "And when politely asked to re-consider by reading what's been said and done so far, the patronizing begins." ...do you not know what "patronizing" is, beyond the fact that it's a thing I said you did? The reason that this statement (and others) are patronizing is because it inherently assumes that I haven't been paying attention. It's a further attempt to dismiss my accusation without addressing it. "Have I not told them that one of the deaths today is most probably a Junko? Is it too hard to evaluate such a statement? I wonder..." Again, this is the definition of patronizing. I will agree that my accusation is out of the blue, but if you seriously believe that i can't evaluate a statement then I'd suggest that you "re-consider by reading what's been said and done so far". "She believes that continuous posting will increase the pressure. It's a really interesting subject to study." You're going to have a difficult time playing this one off when the game is over. "Well, she's wrong and has locked her sights on me (meaning she can't bother reading the rest of the players), and I suppose that's on me to change it. ehh" So this is a cute way to end your read of me. You're correct that you are "in my sights". The idea that I'm unable to read the other players is invalidated by the fact that my accusation of you is also tied with an accusation of Paul. It's also a nice way to boost your own profile later. From Eviora: "She's definitely trying to scumhunt, yet the absence of posts from most players makes that hard to do." That clearly has not stopped you. "Cass and Lia have proven each other, meaning she only has to suspect the person that talks the most, and that's moi. She just doesn't have the evidence to back that suspicion up." This is a rather tenuous argument. Firstly, saying that Evi is suspecting you simply because you're chatty ignores the fact that she's been making some pretty good arguments since the beginning. This instead appears to be a dismissal of someone who suspects you, much like you did with me. Your reads don't appear to be actual reads. They appear to just be designed to curry favor towards some and dismiss others. That in and of itself would be enough for me to suspect you.

Ah, but have you pinpointed two mafia? To me, it seems like you jumped on the bandwagon for the first one and are selectively targeting Corso. I've been suspecting Nick since the middle of day 2. We've had some arguments. I'm currently going through that massive post from earlier, which should explain a lot without giving away too much. I'll also say that I definitely wouldn't be making this play if I wasn't confirmed town.

I recall that being similar to Nicki's defense from before. Care to try again?

Ooh, I like this. Can you tell me what you've contributed? That would help.

You're correct, the situation is bizarre- but that's mainly because I haven't explained it to you. You're playing the crowd well. Very well. The main issue here is this: every time you make an argument, you tacitly imply that you are town, and have recently begun making more explicit references to being town without actually providing much in the way of actual evidence. If anyone makes much of a move toward you, you start attacking them. Also, though, this isn't simply me jumping on Eviora's bandwagon. You saw where I caught you, right? Now, as I said, you are quite good at playing the crowd and convincing people to give you information. I'd almost be impressed if you weren't so incredibly patronizing. So here's my strategy. If you are town, then you will be able to defend yourself without me making a case. If I notice any inconsistencies in your argument, I will point them out and you can counter. If you are mafia posing as town (and quite well, if so), then it's absolutely necessary for you to counter my arguments since even a slight slip up would get you caught. Also, deleting posts is against the rules.

Indeed. C'mon, let's see it.

I'd prefer a defense, as opposed to the patronizing. You can construct a "defense" out of my personal style of accusation- in fact, you've preemptively done it several times now. But I'd like to hear it from you first.

It's a good strategy- getting everyone to give you all the information they have.

That's a slick deflection.

@NickCrash I'm going to make my point a little less subtly. [Vote] NickCrash

@Corso if it helps, I can confirm Bean's statement that he retracted his roleclaim.

Ah, yes, that's right, Makoto is still around.