Yes, that's something that Neo's result told us as well. Anyway, you never answered my question. That is, you never expanded upon what changed your mind or the like when it came to going against what you originally decided to focus on. Plus, none of us are closer to figuring out your sanity. This makes it similar to yesterday with exception that we know no inversion happened.

The consensus was that I retarget you. Last minute I changed my mind on the basis that I realized I couldn't confirm my sanity by doing so. Since the day ended right after that before I had a chance to confer with everyone my change of mindset, I decided to go back with the consensus.

Why are you so fixated on this, KoD?

There was no consensus. What happened was Neo suggested that we get two people to retarget their first targets the following night. Originally I volunteered to target you under the assumption that Neo was asking about targeting you. After that you volunteered to retarget me. Then Eli mentioned needing three people at which point I, again, volunteered. Towards the later part of the day I asked why two people wouldn't work since (as io had mentioned) there is benefit in getting more targets in. Two people would work because if the Krampus lies, then an inconsistency will develop which will indicate the Krampus (if he was one of the retargeters) was lying. Suggestions of randomly selecting people to retarget were made and I made the suggestion that you and Neo retarget since you two seemed more keen on it. You were more concerned with your sanity though. For some reason you thought retargeting would help you get a handle on your sanity, and after I pointed out that it wouldn't, you changed your mind in favor of targeting someone else rather than retargeting.

As you can see, there was no consensus. Merely you volunteering and then deciding not to do so in order to pursue your sanity (which you ended up not doing).

So if you must ask why I am so focused on this, it is because inconsistencies are what catch my eye. You were inconsistent. Plus this is the second time you dodged the question I asked of you. All you did was restate what we can see. That is, what was this change in mindset that caused you to not follow finding out your sanity? Do you intend to answer this question at all, or just keep throwing stuff at me that I readily see from the thread without having to ask you (such as what your possible sanity is or that you changed your mind at the last moment as to who to target)?

KoD this is a logic puzzle, not a Wifom puzzle. Your Wifom is confusing. I bet you're krampus.

What does that have to do with my question to you?

I've answered your question to the best of my ability KoD. If that is not the answer you were looking for perhaps you should rephrase your question.

Now if we can stop arguing over stupid things and start looking at facts here is what we get:

Thanks to my retarget of KoD and neo retarget of me we know the inversion was not used n0 or n1. So we can trust results

Io targeted Eli and got naughty. We know Eli was not naughty so io is not sane or naive.
I targeted KoD and got naughty. I am not naive.
Neo targeted me and got nice. Neo is not insane or paranoid (my perspective).
Kod targeted io and me and got nice on both. KoD is not paranoid.
Eli targeted KoD and got nice. Eli is not paranoid and is definitely not krampus.

From this we can learn a few things actually. Because the bottom three are not paranoid we learn that either io or I am paranoid.

There's more to pull from this utility is can't really think it through right now cuz I'm busy.

No, you never answered my question.

You've avoided it twice (well more than twice now as of your current post and the one before it). At no point, as far as I can see from your posts, did you ever tell us why you changed your mind. What you did say though:

(For context here is my original question regarding your mindset: What changed then that made you decide to recheck the same target?)



This is your first post where you mention the change in mindset that I asked you about. For some reason you chose to go against finding out your sanity and you've neglected to tell me why so far.



Here you repeat things we already know just by looking at the results posted. You avoid answering my question about what changed that caused you to go against finding out your sanity (first time you avoid).



Here you avoid my question a second time as to why you changed your mind in pursuing your sanity and just retargeted.

After rereading that last one, the only reason I can imagine as to why you would tell me you answered my question is because you're asserting that you needed to discuss your decision to pursue your sanity with us. If that's the case, then there's one glaring problem that arises: Why didn't you mention this in the same post? There was ample time before the day ended to discuss whatever it was you wanted to with you wanting to pursue your sanity. After all, you made it obvious to all of us that you were more interested in finding out about your sanity than confirming whether the inverse ability was used (something Neo was going to confirm and one could probably assume Eli might've done too).

And since I'm quoting posts, let me pull up your post that I'm talking about just so you understand exactly where I'm coming from.



I have that post clocked at 2:27am EST (on the 29th) and deadline was the 30th at 11:59pm GMT. Just by looking at the times, I'm assuming there was more than 24 hours available to discuss whatever you wanted to discuss. Instead you told us you'd rather target someone else (since confirming your sanity was more important to you), and that seemed acceptable as far as I was concerned. I can't speak for anyone else, but I imagine the lack of commenting in regards to your statement was probably due to similar thinking (that is, they saw no problem with you targeting someone else -- io, for one, would be one such person who wouldn't have a problem with this since she tends to think more results are better than having a bunch of people retargeting).

Way I see it, you're either not answering my question, or you answered my question in a way that just makes you look a hell of a lot more scummy than I was initially feeling about you.

Zinger


I'm not paranoid nor am I insane since if I was insane I would only have one nice result. I compiled a list of all the targets everyone has at the start of this day back on the previous page.

KoD I didn't read your wall of text past "no you didn't answer my question you've avoided it." If you're going to be antagonistic then there is not much point in having a conversation with a wall.

You have obviously failed to present your question in such a way that makes it clear what kind of an answer you are looking for. To the best of my knowledge I have answered your question so badgering me further is not going to get you a different answer it's just going to incite arguments. I don't know what you want me to say so it's not worth discussing further.

You are correct that you are also not insane, meaning one of Eli, myself, or io is insane.

To be clear, quoting your original question over and over again, accusing me of ignoring it, is not fruitful discussion because from my perspective I have answered your question no less than twice and I see no point in repeating myself. If the answer I gave was not adequate for you then you need to better phrase your question instead of accusing me of dodging it.

Uh huh. If that's the case, then I'm going to have to assume it's the latter, and that just makes me sure you're Krampus. I'll have a better idea tomorrow once I figure out if I'm sane or naive.

Whatever. You're impossible to see eye to eye with. Believe what you want.

It's not that I'm impossible to see eye to eye with. Rather than actually carry out a dialogue over something I have an issue with, you'd rather ignore it. Am I supposed to just be like, "Oh, guess nothing is wrong."?

You've plainly made it clear you have no intent to actually discuss my issue with you. So if you're just going to write me off as "impossible to see eye to eye with", then that leaves me little reason to think highly of you when it is clear to me that you're acting scummy.

I don't know what you want from me. Explain to me how I am supposed to discuss a point with you when you have not made it clear what point you want to discuss?

I'd call that being pretty impossible.

Alright you two...let's stop the tunnel and try and plan out a win here. As I said before, this is our final night, and, I really think that, if we plan this correctly for who everyone is going to check, we should be able to find the scum.

Do we want to try and direct the checks tonight, or just assume that all will be well with whatever?
Clearly, at the least, everyone should check someone they have not already checked.

@Zinger: Originally I wanted an answer that you didn't give as far as I could tell despite your insistence that you had. Course since you ignored a post of mine, beyond the first few words, you missed where I relooked at your answer(s) and commented/questioned appropriately with regards to that. At this point you don't need to discuss it with me since you chose to ignore it the first time around. In the future though, don't just ignore posts and shrug them off. Or ignore them if you want. Doesn't matter to me now since I've already got my opinion developed of you thanks to you.

@Neo: Based on our past investigations - I've got only you left to investigate, you've got me or Zinger, Zinger has you or io, and io has you or Zinger. Having me investigate Zinger or io again won't do much good so you'll be my target tonight. The rest of you though could find a way to determine your target randomly. Best way that comes to my mind is to roll dice, but if you let someone else pick your target that can potentially give insight about the person picking your target. Do you or any one else have a personal preference? I prefer naming someone else to name your target.

I am fine with that plan.

Let's keep in mind that seeing as this is the last night the inverse could happen (it hasn't already happened).

There's a huge advantage that we have right now in that we can trust all results had to some extent. Tomorrow that won't be true.

I like someone naming each other's targets.
But random might work as well.

Right now, my gut says that it's Zinger.

But, here's my breakdown (please let me know if there are mistakes)

Known: Eli can only be Sane/Naive/Insane
Inverted ability has not been used

Results:
Eli - target KoD (Nice)
Zinger - target KoD (naughty), KoD (naughty)
KoD - target Io (nice), Zinger (nice)
Io - target KoD (naughty), Eli (naughty)
Neo - target Zinger (Nice), Zinger (Nice)

Eliminated Roles:
Eli - Scum, Paranoid
Zinger - Naive
KoD - Paranoid
Io - Naive
Neo - Paranoid

Available Roles:
Eli - Naive, Sane, Insane
Zinger - Scum, Sane, Insane, Paranoid
KoD - Scum, Naive, Sane, Insane
Io - Scum, Sane, Insane, Paranoid
Neo - Scum, Naive, Sane, Insane









So - Io can't be scum. The config with the least information known is mine, but, we should be able to figure this out with tonight's check.
Once someone double checks my work and confirms that Io can't be scum, we should all consider that when picking targets, since it's a known variable that we can check against.

And, looking from another angle.

If Io is not scum (as I believe) then she has to be paranoid, since she got naughty back on Eli, and we know he's town.

That leaves:
Naive - Eli, KoD or Neo.
Sane - Eli, Zinger, KoD or Neo.
Insane - Eli, Zinger or Neo.
Scum - Zinger, KoD or Neo.

Assuming Eli is insane, that means that KoD has to be scum.
That would mean that Zinger is sane and I'm naive.

Assuming Eli is sane. That means that KoD can't be scum, and has to be naive or sane. Which means that Zinger is either scum or insane, and I'm either scum, naive or insane.

Io - I don't think it matters who you check tonight, as it's going to come up naughty.
Zinger - if you check Io, it would narrow you down to either scum/sane or scum/insane.
KoD - since you're scum/naive/sane, you should check me. If you get Nice, I think that confirms that you are naive or scum.
For me, if I check Io, I can cut down to scum/naive/sane with a nice, or scum/insane with a naughty.

So - my overall proposal is for Zinger and myself to check Io, and for KoD to check me.