Alright, that's fair. The reasoning is plausible.


My intention was rhetorical! I wanted to illustrate that your reasoning in-of-itself, when extended, implicates you even more-so than it does Naga (thereby suggesting that your case on Naga is, if you are town, not as objectively strong as you might have hoped). While I agree that we necessarily all present ourselves as townies, our readers cannot operate off the same premise, so I tend to find arguments more compelling when they don't suppose that others will trust in our alignment.

I actually consider the admission a point in your favor.

That kind of depends on the circumstance. And very much the role. Statistically speaking, and assuming that Rag/Zinger/Dusky are competent enough to claim before they die (which I believe to be the case), Amber is the only possible non-Zinger PR kill. As such, given that whomever town lynches has the same opportunity to claim before death, scum is still fairly unlikely at 2/5 overall to have hit the PR by tomorrow.

For instance, a doctor ought not to claim (which you probably ought to also have mentioned!) unless they're on the block. Whereas a cop with actionable info on the active town players in particular might indeed be incentivized claim, though even this is probably predicated on whether or not today's ultimate target is likely/unlikely scum from that privileged information.



You saw his scum play last game. Though he did die Day 2.

But that brings me to a tertiary point. Jay has fairly strongly flavored the game mechanics according to the basic game play sequence of Among Us (the voting system, the lack of PR info in deaths), and in that game mafia has no ability to chat. Ergo, it is relatively likely that the scum can't coordinate the way that they normally might.

You probably haven't seen my scum game tevish. Cause my town game is so **** good.

I think the scum have a scum chat. Maybe its flavored as like they are cheaters with a secret discord

Yeah I'm pretty certain it's kod and tevish.

I'm a bit disapoint in Rubik. What his opinion?

Basically if kod were town with me then we agree better. The Naga lynch was for yesterday. Dang it. No they wanted to lynch the most active town

Sure would be nice if Rubik was the other pr

Im looking it over I think we trapped them lol

To be fair, I didn't see ANYONE'S play last game, I was nothing but a lyncher driving for his lynch, I didn't bother paying attention to any of the little activity that wasn't lynching me or Shadow.

Continuing where I left off:

Regarding Arrgh, I initially felt, during D2, that he was pocketing me by being as non-aggressive as he stated towards me (it isn't uncommon for me to butt heads with some people, and Arrgh is one of them). His whole commitment to not vote me despite Amber being killed struck me as weird. Further, aside from the unease in that I may be the victim of Arrgh cozying up to me, I haven't had issues with his train of thought. So when I compare him to the likes of Sky and CL, I have more of a town lean on him by far.


Tevish i haven't had a problem with this game. As scum or town he constantly engages in conversation, yet nothing about his posts have struck a chord with dishonesty or intentional misrepresentation to me (compared with Skystone vs Zinger -- here's looking at Sky). Tevish would be my first choice of a town lean (over Arrgh).


The lurkers i can't quantify, and there is something to be said about Skystone's comments thus far. CL, on the other hand seems to be off in his field out left.

While I understand that one or two people can be drawn into bad lynches by convincing arguments, I'd like to think that town isn't so catastrophically harebrained as to accidentally and collectively gang up on the most active pro-town player. As such, and given that neither KoD nor Tevish have displayed any inclination to self-reflect or to even assess the patterns that led to the lynch on Rag, I am inclined to agree with Lunch that Tevish/KoD is the most likely axis.

@Aaarrrgh: Given that you appear to lean KoD in terms of your active player suspicions, I am willing to commit to a lynch on KoD specifically if you are amenable.

For me the factor was extremely simple: Rag going bulldog for KoD smacked of trying to follow through a frame job, especially how long Rag remained unwilling to entertain other options.

Yesterday, my words on the matter were similar. We know now that I was incorrect in that assumption, but I still believe my actions were on a functional premise. I don't think there's any need to beg and scrape for forgiveness, nor that the lynch of rag represented an unusual or catastrophic leave of our collective senses.

In any case, it seems like the battle lines are drawn. KoD and I have similar suspicions. You and lunch have similar suspicions. In this condition, Aaarrrgh will be decisive assuming we don't get the rubik surprise I'd been dearly hoping for.

Self reflect? You, Skystone, essentially want a lynch aimed anywhere but you (or CL seemingly).

Rag was lynched, and I pushed, willingly mind you, for Rag's lynched because I was convinced Rag was trying to push Amber's death on me. While that may not have been the case, I am still convinced that Amber's death was done intentionally (despite your quip) to put pressure on me. Rag may not have been one of the impostors, but I'm still susing you over the circumstances. That's not including the issue of you vs Zinger. You were squarely in Rag's corner with her case against me (that's despite later when Rag reassessed her view given Zinger being cleared). And more than that, you, rather than solve Rag/me, ended up pursuing Naga then (even though now you're trying to save Naga in favor of me now).

Duly note that the circumstances leading up to Rag's lynch fully include everything (that includes Amber dying which triggered Rag into pushing on me -- which may have been the point all along). As long as someone pushes, right? I believe you said that Skystone.

And Tevish's point regarding Naga making it to LyLo is valid (with the focus on a town Naga more so than a scum one since lynching a scum Naga is obviously good). Lynching Naga would probably hedge our bets, but you seem content on pushing for a scum lynch today (despite the direction you're trending).


I'm more than happy to commit to lynching you today Sky.

The key here is that an authentically town-aligned player would be compelled by self-interest to examine all of their compatriots. The Anti-Rag vote only coalesced at the end of the day in an effort to divert the lynch from a player with (to us) strong town vibes, and Naga was a broadly tolerable option for a mid-game lynch that ought to have had some appeal to legitimate town. Ergo, the Rag wagon initially provided a safe harbor in that it a) seemed to reflect a consensus, and b) provided a relatively safe place for scum to drop their votes.

You can believe that your vote was right at the time without also presuming that the circumstances leading to the lynch ought not to be examined. On the contrary, it is the basic duty of town to examine all circumstances and motivations, and it is in fact the perfidious badge of scum to fail in this most sacred of concerns.


Patently (and demonstrably) untrue. There are seven living players. I only desire to lynch 2 of them.


A position for which you have barely tatters of evidence. The more fundamental problem is the fact that Rag died, Rag was confirmed town, and yet somehow you and Tevish refuse to even posit that scum might have reason to join the Rag wagon.


Because lynching a lurker in LyLo is utterly nonsensical. Recall: Rubik still hasn't contributed. Why in the world would you, as town, defer your ability to win to a functional lurker? That's the problem you're pretending you want to avoid.

The two you desire lynched fall into the broad category of "anywhere but you and CL". Course, throughout the entirety of this game, you've moved from Zinger, to Naga, to a preference of myself and Tevish now. Excuse me if I don't believe you.

Skystone


And what kind of evidence would you prefer? A claimed cop investigation? Perhaps a hard claim from Rag verified by the mod (Innocent Child)?

There isn't any evidence aside from reads and where votes are placed. That's it. You casting blame at those of us for Rag's death doesn't make you or CL any less likely to be impostors. For all we know, you defended Rag as much as you did so you'd come out looking good once Rag flipped.




A lurker who, by virtue of who I'm sus of, is likely town ***and here***. And notion you keep pushing that this is LyLo is not true. That is what you're saying right? Because lynching Naga here makes sense since it isn't LyLo and prevents him from reaching LyLo tomorrow where (as town) he'd be a nonfactor. You actively want to avoid lynching Naga here because odd reasons. You want Naga to live into LyLo, and that's odd to me further still.

You want to intimidate and misdirect with verbage. So, I'm going to break down the attempt to obfuscate the situation into a few points

• Your Point #1: A townie should examine all players with suspicion

Basic, true. But a player must also form and eventually pursue opinions.

• Your Point #2: The rag alternate appeared at EoD
• Your point #3: The alternate of lynching naga appeared when it did because those who voted for it felt Rag had strong town vibes
• Your Point #4: Naga should have been a tolerable lynch that day
• Your conclusion from this:Townies should have voted Naga

When a counter-wagon to divert lynch shows up right at the end, it's kind of sus. But let's put that normal situation aside from the moment: there is little reason for a town member who believed Rag to be scum to swap to Naga over Rag. We all kind of assume that the inactives are town at this point, I feel. After all, scum are still getting their hits in, so they're not BOTH inactive at the very least. I even argued yesterday that Naga alive was basically negative utility, but your own arguments today have suggested how that thinking may have been flawed: Living or modkilled, Naga is the same burden, it only matters how close the game APPEARS to be to the end. To this, a townie with no conviction votes Naga yesterday. A townie with any conviction that they may have found scum votes scum.

• Your Point #5: Rag lynch was "safe" for Scum

I feel this is quite incorrect. Scum would know that Rag would flip town, and also that they would be functionally obligated to kill Zinger (a rag voter) in order to keep the suspect list open. That leaves three votes on rag. You propose Scum would hide two of them to one "safe lynch" in such a situation? I don't think so. The safer place would be out of that wagon one way or another -- scum looking to be safe want to Nader vote. And wouldn't you know it, the Naga counter-wagon showed up after discussion had largely zeroed in on Rag, so the outcome would be largely known. And who voted for that? Rag himself, of course -- Rag would want to live. And you and CL, buddies suddenly moving in step together. You jumped for a wagon that was broadly acceptable and not particularly indicative of anything. True, removing a lurker removes a mostly dead player, but it was fairly reasonable to expect, when the Naga wagon formed, that it wouldn't actually fire. If it did, it's a much safer wagon than Rag to be on. We all would have expected Naga to flip town, and townies would still be happy with his demise. And no doubt the Rag/KoD fight would resume the following day. If it didn't, you sit there and point and say "An active townie has been lynched, it must be scum that did it." Three candidates, but it's a shell game: the ball is in the con-man's palm the whole time.

Considering what appears to be (with a town read on KoD as I have) a confirmation of Zinger's suspicion that I had previously found absurd, that kicking off the fight from the sidelines was the goal of going for amber in particular, I find it much more likely that active scum would read the discussion and quickly adopt a non-confrontational vote position.

• Your point #6: You accuse that I wish to bury analysis of the Rag lynch

To the contrary: I gave an account of myself, against your prior accusation of disinterest in doing so. Rather, I say, my stance is clear and you need only look back over the evidence. I'm not changing my tune now, I'm saying that I feel I made myself clear then, and gave a summary. Town can take their own conclusions.

I won't be here at deadline. Lets decide between Tevish or Kod. What do you say Aaargh you are the chosen one

I haven't seen any compelling evidence that it has to be either of them. Tevish justified his position quite well.

So, CL, please convince me that you are less suspect than they are.

Well I haven't lynched any town for one thing. I can't make any fancy speeches from my phone. Do you not find there posts contradictory and scum motivated rather then a say a townie would think trying to solve with no information? I mean it looks like that to me. And I seemingly see contridictions in various places. I wish I could do better I know it's on me to sell you a case.