I believe that everyone is forgetting or intentionally evading that due to rules of this game, mafia can win without casting a single vote, since majority is not needed.

A random lynch does seem like a good option, specially for this game. People against it and voting because of that are the scummiest in my eyes.

As for Ragnarokio, my vote will remain on him until he claims, but there is also another motive I think he is a comedy. He freely gave a pro-town tip when he could not say anything, that surely also win some points in pro-town behavior with me. Surely more than anyone here, myself included.

That said I want a claim before I change my vote from him, and as I want a claim it is time for me to make one of my own. It was my intention all along, due to the nature of my ability and I hope everyone will see why.

I am Shinsuke Takasugi.

I am a comedy-aligned vigilante.

All my three abilities are killing abilities. I can kill at day and/or at night. Two are very conditional, but one is unconditional and rechargeable under the right circumstances. That is reason I am putting my cards at the table now. It has a major drawback, as soon as I kill anyone, everyone will be informed I am the killer, but not my alignment.

So I am revealing myself to avoid misunderstandings later when I decide to use it.

Mafia info game. Random way less info. Targeted much better.

So in other words, you're planning on killing tonight TB.

Unvote. Vote: True

Yeah, I think this is a little more prominent than probability talk. True's saying he's pushing for claims because he's going to drop some kill action. Yet he wants us to believe he's town aligned but is pushing for a claim from another player he says he believes is town aligned. It doesn't add up. If True were town he wouldn't care what claims other town have to make because their being town would preclude them from the possible hit list. So he's either lying and doesn't believe Rag is town, he's not town and is looking to off what he believes to be town power roles, or he simply doesn't care if he's shooting town or not because of "conditions". In any of those events, I'm perfectly fine with a True lynch.

Votes:

Ragnarokio: True_Believer, NeoSilk, Fruit (3)
True_Believer: GobO_Scarlet, KoD, 15377 (3)
Random Lynch: Ragnarokio (1)
Niklor: Silly (1)
Silly: Niklor (1)
KoD: squinty_eyes (1)
No vote: Garren_Windspear, Zinger2099 (2)

If Kod and Numbers posts are not a declaration of guilt, I don't know what it is one.

It seems we won't need a random lynch after all. Proof is enough now. it is quite obvious to me that Numbers and KOD are Mafia.

Note that they didn't try to defend their votes in Raganrokio now, effectively dodging the issue, and despite being so sure he was Mafia changed their votes for me at the first sign of a threat. So numbers would you care to explain why I was defending Ragnarokio if I want a claim from him?

If I am Mafia, why I was defending Ragnarokio which gave motives for me to believe he was comedy? It he was mafia, why I wanted a claim from him?

These questions are rhetorical (but I believe everybody wants to know the answer anyway). The only explanation is simple. I am comedy and I wanted to prove Ragnarokio was one too, or at least receive a statement that later other players could use against him if he was mafia.

A claim that I don't think it is necessary now. So comedy-aligned players it is time to lynch one of them, and then I can use my ability to snipe the other.

Unvote

Vote: King of Dominaria

Votes:

True_Believer: GobO_Scarlet, KoD, 15377 (3)
Ragnarokio: NeoSilk, Fruit (2)
KoD: squinty_eyes, True_Believer (2)
Random Lynch: Ragnarokio (1)
Niklor: Silly (1)
Silly: Niklor (1)
No vote: Garren_Windspear, Zinger2099 (2)

Declarations of guilt? You're the one coming from way out of left field with ridiculous posts filled with contradicting points of "logic" that M Night Shyamalan would be delighted to make a movie based on your posts due to all the twists.

Now let's get down to the logic. You assert that a random lynch isn't needed because there is enough proof to show that Numbers and I are mafia. Ok, what is the proof? Our posts? Why are our posts proof that we are mafia?

1. Didn't try to defend their votes on Rag.

Defend our votes? Excuse my formality, but are you even reading posts? You do understand that both myself and Numbers have iterated numerous times why we were voting for Rag, right? Or did you just magically skip over those? Or, perhaps, you don't think they are valid? Whatever your reasoning may be for missing that, here is one thing you need to understand. Your point here is null. Trying to hold something as petty as "they didn't defend their votes" when, in fact, the votes were defended is just bad on your part. It shows that you need to pay more attention to what is going on/being said.

And to be clear, the issue concerning Rag, once again, was one concerning misrepresenting information to push an agenda they wanted. That is, Rag misrepresented how probability works to get those people who are uneducated into following a random lynch (this is not explicitly stated and is assumed based on the actions taken). Note, also, this doesn't include people in it for the lolz (aka Niklor for example).


2. Being so sure Rag was/is mafia.

Really? You do realize it's only day 1. We don't have a concrete, 100% idea of who is scum. What we are doing is making a viable case as to who to vote over randomly voting. In Rag's case, Rag supported Random Lynching which is fine. What isn't fine is Rag insisting and pushing the idea that based on probability town has less of a chance of nailing scum than random lynching does. This is not true in the slightest and isn't, as has been stated numerous times by Numbers, myself, and maybe others, how probability works. Rag took the success rate of a sample size and substituted that as the probability town has for lynching scum. Then Rag compared this altered "probability" to the probability that random lynching will lynch scum. That is how Rag came up with town's 18% to rng's 25%.

Problem is the 18% is a success rate. Not a probability. The true probability of town lynching scum is 25% (if you include yourself for consideration to be lynched -- it's more like 3/11 because you won't lynch yourself as town meaning if you pick anyone else beside yourself, you have a 3/11 chance of choosing scum and that is a better chance than rng's 3/12). So Rag misrepresented probability and pushed an agenda that is beneficial to scum. That is, a rng lynch, which has a much higher chance of hitting town than scum, is better for scum than town since there is no need to make connections if you random lynch and it will hit town more often than not.

So back on point. Is Rag mafia? We don't know. Is Rag scummy? Yes, for reasons already stated which are completely valid. And Rag has only himself to blame for pushing a horrible agenda with horrible logic for what reason only he knows.

All that being said, does that mean we have to stick with Rag to lynch? No. You have come off as scummy as well TB since you're contradicting yourself, intended on keeping your vote on someone you wanted to claim (and didn't want to kill) despite believing, in a stupid way, that they are comedy aligned for supporting a mechanic that isn't beneficial to the town, and claiming an intent to kill by claiming and saying you are town.

I mean seriously, where do I start?

As for your rhetorical questions:

- Explain to me why you would vote for someone you believe if comedy in the first place.

- Explain to me why you would force a claim from someone you believe is comedy in the first place.

- Explain to me why you would kill someone that you believe is comedy aligned while saying you only wanted a claim.

- Explain to me why you are going to kill despite having nothing to really go on. And no, your idea of "proof" is not something I approve of. Looking back on why you believe Rag is comedy aligned (for supporting random lynch) it doesn't take much to deduce that you think those who are against random lynching are scummy. And that shows a serious flaw in the way you think which throws into question how you are going to go about killing tonight (although you've already addressed who you intend to kill anyway).

These are just serious points of conversation raised by your actions/words.

On to your rhetorical questions which are just going to be covering what has already been said before:

1. Defending Rag/wanting a claim from him -

First off, this is a contradiction in your actions. You've stated that you believe anyone supporting random lynch has to be comedy aligned. Before I continue, let's look at this belief.

What is this belief based on exactly? It's already been covered that random voting is worse than deciding who to vote. More people support this notion too (the notion that random voting is worse than town choosing who to vote). So what is your belief based on? Because you think so? It certainly can't be for the reasons Rag stated because those have been show to be erroneous. And short of something new and groundbreaking to add that is factual, there is nothing that supports this belief of yours that is a matter of fact. With that being said...

Continuing on, you believe Rag must be comedy aligned due to your belief. As such, there is no reason to force a claim from someone you believe is comedy aligned. Never mind the fact that you can't "force" a claim from someone, unless you literally bring the person to being lynched. Given your stance, you can't accomplish this because you believe he is comedy aligned and it would be counterproductive to lynch your own alignment. So you present yourself with a contradiction wherein you are doing what exactly? Nothing beneficial. Nothing that progresses the town for the best. So truly, what are you doing other than being illogical at best, scum at worst?


2. If I am Mafia, why I was defending Ragnarokio which gave motives for me to believe he was comedy? It he was mafia, why I wanted a claim from him?


First off, the second part of this doesn't even matter. How we (Numbers and I) view Rag is our own thing. How you view Rag is what matters here. You said you viewed him as comedy aligned, so when it comes to you wanting a claim from Rag, you want it from a comedy aligned person. Not a mafia aligned person because that is not how you view him. Once more, Numbers and I view Rag as being scummy, but we don't know for sure that he is mafia 100%. Because of this, we are able to switch our perspectives as we see fit as more things happen in the game. More things such as you and your contradictions (forcing a claim from someone you believe is town aligned).

You being mafia and doing what you are doing is w/e. Or, to be more specific, it is WIFOM. I cannot fathom why, as mafia, you would defend Rag. Maybe Rag is your scum buddy. Maybe you were defending Rag thinking he would die and you'd get town pants for defending someone that died as town. Take your pick of reasons. Either way, this rhetorical question is useless in making a point. Not that you have much of a point to make anyway.

TB


Here's another explanation. You're scum and are trying to earn town pants by defending Rag, but did so in a horrible way to justify your stance. That's another explanation. Course, and I have to say this again since you have it in your statement, let's not forget that in order to get that claim from Rag you'd have to be willing to lynch him which is contradictory of your belief that he is comedy aligned.

TL;DR: You contradict yourself too many times and have crap reasoning in the way you are perceiving things despite the many times it has been spelled out how things are in this game.

@True, I've explained my vote on Rag numerous times, the last directly before your claim. You choosing to ignore it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

As for your story, it still doesn't add up. You claim to be town vig. You claim to believe Rag is town as well. You then vote for him "to force him to claim". You claim this is going to prove he is town. The act of Rag claiming does no such thing though. The only trick you have in your arsenal to prove he's town is shooting him in the face. Do you see where the problem is here?

As for why you'd defend Rag, here's the break downs: You're scum, Rag is not - You're buddying to town. You're scum, Rag is scum - You're scummates. You're town, Rag is scum - You're wrong or You're lying to gain trust. You're town, Rag is town - You think you're doing the right thing, but are actually going to end up causing more harm than good running around trying to force people to claim for no good reason.

As I point out above, your town/town story doesn't add up. You being scum makes sense if you're pushing to find town power roles. You being town and Rag being scum makes sense if you're lying, but your over-defensiveness makes that unlikely; just wrong is still possible. You both being scum makes sense if your aim was to soft-confirm Rag as town or if Rag was looking to have a reason to claim, but is less likely. As I said before, there's a few possibilities on how things could go, all of which I find detrimental to town and am thus fine with your lynch.

@15377, you know damn well that is not what I am doing. I simply asked you to explain yourself. You've not only failed to do so, you've tried to distract from your flimsy response by pointing fingers at me. And for the record, proving that "there is no reason why Town would reasonably want a random lynch" is not the same as proving "there is as reason why scum would want a random lynch."

I'm really starting to wonder about your Alignment, JD. What say I use my Alignment changing ability on you?

@Zinger:

Come again?

How can you not take away from all that has been said the motives for why scum would prefer a random lynch and why town wouldn't prefer a random lynch? They are opposites so when you show one, you know the other.

Speaking generally, as has been said numerous times and will not be said again so you can't claim a mistake of not knowing, a random lynch is of no benefit to the town. That is, the chance of town killing town in a random lynch is higher than that of lynching scum with a random lynch. Not only that, but to go with a random lynch eliminates other forms of information that would prove useful in drawing reads on people. You effectively enter D2 with one person dead and nothing to go on doing a random lynch (unless of course the 25% comes through, but I wouldn't count on it).

From this you can draw the motivations for why scum would desire a random lynch. No paper trail of reads to follow (which means no danger of being the target of people's attention when you don't have to take a stance), and a much higher chance of town dying. It is for these reasons why town would NOT want a random lynch.

Is that not clear enough for you? Do you understand that what is good for scum is not good for town?

Proving what scum wants is the same as proving what town doesn't want. It is that simple, and has been stated numerous times throughout the thread.

Counterpoint: Prove why a random lynch is beneficial to the town since you're so keen on wanting proof of the opposite.

Numbers


For the record, Zinger, what Numbers said here is concise and to the point. It is entirely accurate and is the sum of all I said in my previous post to you. So either you're in the same boat as TB and never bothered to actually read the points being made, or you're just so intent on misdirecting away from Rag or something.

Do I now? Let's take a walk down Zinger's past day:

Early in the day you drop a fruitless claim followed by a quick succession vote for random lynch (because "funsies") minutes after Niklor does. You then dabble slightly in discussion of Scarlet's post restriction but by and large stay out of random lynch discussion. When random lynch begins to flatline, you immediately bail, citing Scarlet's points against random voting being right (a clear indication that you recognize the harm a random lynch can present to the town, conversely a boon for the mafia) without expanding on the topic. Shortly after you then fence sit on the topic of the moment, Rag and his flawed argument. In this one post you simultaneously say his wagon is suspicious yet it's a perfectly acceptable day 1 wagon, but shame on those blasted Rag voters. Now at this point I expand on why I'm voting Rag, unsolicited. You read this and conceded they are fair points but still try to paint Rag as an impossible mafiate, claiming ignorance on how scum could benefit from a random lynch. To this I reply that if you can see how town can be harmed, then you can see how mafia will benefit, because that which harms the town is going to be of benefit to the mafia. And that brings us back to the above.

So as you can see from the quick review, you did not ask me to explain myself. This is because I already had, to which you conceded I was making fair points. Additionally, what KoD, Scarlet, Silly, and myself have repeatedly pointed out is not that town has no reason to random and therefore shouldn't, but that there are harmful side effects to random voting that town should want to avoid, ie there is reason not to do it, something you supposedly agree with. These reasons (decreased participation in discussion, hindered analysis, lack of accountability for lynch outcomes) are also good things for scum, making them a perk to scum random voting, as I said in my last post. About the only thing you had right in your post is that I did point a finger at you. But clearly it wasn't to distract from the "fair" points I had already made as you're claiming it is. It was to gauge you. As I've shown, you've been an outsider on much of the discussion today. This is where scum lives Day 1, usually letting a few town get into it and squabble to a mislynch. Much can be learned about those hiding in the shadows if you cast a quick light on them when they aren't ready. In this instance your reaction seems to be to take the extreme defensive. You rushed so fast to throw the light back on me that you didn't realize most the points you were parroting off of True were invalid in the first place. And then you finish it up with what I can only assume is a threat on my life? I assume your plan is to expand my win con so that I can win with both sides and then immediately declare me a threat regardless of what my original alignment is? Doesn't sound like a very townly plan. But then again nothing you've done today has seemed very townly to me so it wouldn't surprise me if that is your end game.

Soon KoD and JD are scum then?

Which one of you wants to out the other and get my "suddenly I'm town" Power?

@KOD

If my logic is M Night Shyamalan's logic, your logic is like Three Sttoges' logic. I was specifying the defense after my point, so your past explanations were useless. And you dismissed it entirely.

Then you proceeded to defend your point using my own defense, which you said was wrong. So just because you said it, it is right?

And you believe now Ragnarokio is comedy, which plainly invalidates all your logic up to this point. Congratulations! You just murdered all that is logic.

@Comedy-players

Let's review the facts.

1 - Kod and Numbers are the contraditory ones and I believe I made my reason crystal clear. You may not like my tactic or my opinion, but that does not make me Mafia as they want you to believe.

2 - After my claim, they automatically assumed they would be killed by me or attacked me. And I never said that, until that point I still could believe they were comedy. This is the typical reaction of someone that is guilt and can overwhelm the opposition. Why they did that? Because they believe in my claim. And that is the main reason I now believe they are mafia players, after all Mafia is a psychological game, and their reaction was the predicted reaction.

3 - I am alone, and they are more than one. And how many players are at the mafia team?

So you can kill 2 birds with one stone now, if you lynch one of them. If you still do not fully believe me, let me stay alive today and check my claim at night. You could still lynch me at day 2, and heck I will even shoot myself, if you do not believe me then.

Just in case you lynch one now and for an unbelievable chance he flips comedy for being a heavily misguided comedy player, I will not shoot the other as I have the best interest for all comedians at heart. And you can freely decide his fate at the next day.

You have a lot to gain by lynching one of them now and nothing to loose, specially because I already claimed my role and the flavor matches it perfectly because it is real. Shinsuke Takasugi is the main anti-villain of the series.

Choose wisely.

Not for nothing but; "Three sets of Gintama characters were randomly chosen to be greed aligned. The game is not breakable via flavor." Not saying your scum but it's already been outed that flavour doesn't matter as far as alignment is concerned. No point pretending otherwise.

I don't care what kind of defense you were specifying or that I dismissed it entirely. Everything you've said is null.

Your premise that only town would vote for random lynch, for example, is one such thing that I consider null. Everything based on that, such as Rag having to be comedy aligned because he is voting random lynch, is null. And you understand why contradictions are bad, right? It is one thing to support a player even if they have bad logic. It is entirely a different matter to support a player AND vote for them while wanting them to claim despite thinking they are town aligned. And that's not counting the idea that you want to force a claim but can't do so unless you are willing to lynch the player which, since you think the player is town, creates another contradiction.

Literally there is no defense you can come up with to justify these stances. So if you're wondering why I'm dismissing them, well there you go.

TB


Care to elaborate? As far as I can tell, I've not had to use your defense to justify myself on anything. Fact is you have numerous contradictions piled on your shoulders whereas I don't. You're focused on the idea that people who vote for random lynch must be town and those who don't must be mafia despite this being erroneous. As for myself, I've only called out Rag for pushing a bad agenda using MISREPRESENTATION of facts to do so. I've called you out on your contradictions.

Please, show me how I'm wrong to think the way I do.


TB


...

No. No. A thousand times no. Here is what you need to do. You need to go back through my posts and pull up proof of me saying Rag is comedy aligned is my stance. At no point have I maintained a belief Rag is comedy aligned. If anything, I think you have a problem with associating my stance with how I view a player. In Rag's case, you are assuming that just because I switched my vote off of him, to you, that I must think he is now comedy aligned. That is not the case. That is not fact. All it means is that I've chosen you as a more worthy lynch for something I find to be scummy.

In short, my logic isn't invalidated by my action. That is not the case for you as what you have done is a straight up contradiction.

---------------------------------------------------------------
"Facts"

1 - Your "reasons" consist of our posts which are supposedly "proof" that we are mafia. Except that our choice to pursue you over Rag isn't proof that we are mafia or proof of anything else. We've given reasons for changing our votes. We've given reasons, numerous times, why we think you are scummy and worthy of being lynched today over Rag.

(It seems both JD and I are in similar agreement that your actions are much more worthy of being lynched for over Rag's use of misrepresented information to push the random lynch. I have not forgotten Rag and how he's gone silent which just makes me suspicious of him even more.)

2 - Is he serious? I was already voting for TB before he claimed. Then I made an obvious observation. If you look at his post, he claimed. And why did he claim? Because when he kills everyone is notified it was him so he wanted everyone aware of it. This implies he intends to kill tonight (something he did not dispute when I made the observation post). And do I have reason to be fearful TB? Yes, I do. Despite my vote on you BEFORE you claimed, you immediately post after Numbers does to indicate how you view us. And as I said previously in my post about your rhetorical questions, your state of mind is questionable. Your logic is flawed. I do not trust a kill in your hands. If you're town, then all you've done is show that you do not think clearly or recognize bad logic even when solid reasons are presented to you. If you're scum, none of this matters. You'll kill anyway.

As such, all you've done is just made yourself an obvious choice to be lynched least you make it to night and show someone for flawed reasons.

3 - I got nothing here. I won't even touch it.

The last bit in your post, TB, is of interest though. You say you only have the best interest of comedy at heart. If that were true, then why do you, did you, believe random lynch was the best option for town? Everything you've done up till not was based off of that belief about it being good for comedy aligned. Not only that, but if you look at one of Rag's posts about vigging, then you'd know it would be better to hold off on killing as you'll have better odds of killing mafia later on in the game. Yet you clearly intend on doing otherwise (except that you've now made the comment that you won't if one of us turns up comedy aligned -- course my alignment has no bearing as a fact on Numbers's alignment so I don't get you here.).

Sup brocookies.

I think the most info will be from a TB/Rag lynch, with the second most coming from KoD/Numbers.
Right now, as it seems to me, I think it's much higher to hit scum with a TB/Rag lynch. Right now, I'm keeping with Rag, but, I'd be willing to switch over to TB - if it looks like someone else from another list will get the lynch.

@JD, hypothetically speaking, if you were Mafia and you suddenly gained the ability to win with the town, would you turn on your former compatriots?