The problem with your directed questions is that they are too pointed. They don't actually ask anything other than what he's already given us. As my example points out, the wiggle room in Zing's NLP is pretty wide. Your questions don't eliminate that room, but are asked in a way that he can comfortably stay there, because his NLP isn't based on what you believe, it's what he believes. Let's break it down.

Your first question asks if he has a majority of votes on him, will he be lynched. He's already stated that a normal majority won't kill him (for today's purpose, that would be six). I've speculated that he could be majority +1 to lynch and still safely make his statements (keeping with the numbers game that makes it seven to lynch him). Now per your question, he will have to answer no because at 6 he will not be lynched despite having a majority.

Your second question falls under the same flaw. While you think being all encompassing will change his answer, he'll have to answer no again because he's already stated that a vig cannot kill him even if other targeted kills can (such as the mafia nk).

Your questions aren't framed in a manner to excise more information from him, nor are they framed in a manner as to test what he has put forth. They are framed in a manner that you'll already know the answer to, which means you have your own ends in mind rather than actually seeking truth. Here are the questions you should be asking:

Zinger, can you be lynched today under any circumstances?
Zinger, can you be killed tonight under any circumstances?

An affirmative to those shows that he's trumping up this supposed unkillability. A negative means he truly believes he's invulnerable.

As for the bastardity level of the game, this is from the setup:

"The game is bastard, meaning some of the things I tell you during the game may not be entirely truthful or may be blatant lies."

And this is from the queue:

"the game is bastard and players may or may not be lied to"

On two separate occasions Lilan has stated you may be outright lied to. At no point has he stated that PMs would be exempt. Assuming all PMs from the mod are free from lies without Lilan confirming so is literally the greatest folly you can commit in a bastard game.

In regards to the majority lynch on Zinger, not even what he believes will keep him from lying. By that I mean when you ask him if a majority of votes on him will cause him to be lynched at the end of the game day, he may choose to believe that majority refers to a game majority, but then he's actively (knowingly) neglecting the context of the question. Ultimately it is up in the air how he'll use his NLP from game to game, but all I need is one instance where he doesn't stick to his NLP knowingly to disregard it going into the future.

Either way, your analysis has helped to make the questioning of Zinger's role better, and I would like for Zinger to answer your questions.


As for my own ends in mind, no. They were simply questions I thought up when thinking of of how to question Zinger to get more information about his role. This is now the second instance you've made of alluding to me having some kind of ulterior motive in regards to my way of acting towards Zinger.

As for the bastardity of this game:

"The game is bastard, meaning some of the things I tell you during the game may not be entirely truthful or may be blatant lies."

What you quoted here from the setup thread is the mod saying that, during the game, she will tell us things that may be lies or truthful. Setup is before the game. Confirmation phase (including obtaining your role) is before the official start of the game. Therefore all of the roles sent out, done during the confirmation phase but before the start of the game, would not be subject to bastardity.

The second quote is just general. It encompasses the entire game and therefore is true since we may be lied to during the game. Has no bearing on the first statement from the setup thread though as that comment differs entirely from this one.

What he believes is all that matters, because his NLP is expressly based on his beliefs. He has come out and said that if something is later proven to be untrue, it's irrelevant to his NLP's integrity as long as he believes he's telling the truth when he makes his statements. So as I pointed out if you ask him if he'll be lynched at majority and he believes that at majority today (being six votes) he will not be lynched then he can and will answer no to your question without violating his NLP even if at votes 7, 8, or 9 he would be lynched. And this won't be a lie because majority is being defined by the mod, not you or Zinger.

No. Day starts when day starts. The game starts the second the mod starts sending out Role PMs. At that point the rules are in effect. You are essentially arguing that they don't apply until the mod officially starts the first day (or night in such a start situation). This would mean that you could quote your pm to the game thread during confirmation with no repercussions. But you can't, because the game has already started and the rules of the game are already in effect. This includes bastard rules, which do not innately guarantee you lie free role pms. There's a reason why people began advertising lie free role pm bastard games on the mothership (lovingly referred to as "lite bastarding"), and that's because in a full on bastard your role pms are completely game to be violated by the mod if the mod so chooses - which they did and people assuming their pms weren't capable of containing lies walked right off a cliff like a bunch of lemmings. Butt hurts ensued.

As for his NLP, all the better that you are here to point these tidbits out so as to point us in the right direction for obtaining relevant information.

As for the game start, you are indeed right. Apparently I make the mistake of equating Day 1 start to the actual game starting. That being said, that only reduces what I was thinking to being a mere assumption still without anything solid to back it up. Meaning that I still believe the the role PMs contain no lies until proven otherwise, and since, as you have successfully pointed out, the game was started not necessarily with role PMs going out but also with the creation of this thread, there is no way to be sure there are any lies contained in the rules.

Course that is something that can definitely be tested at risk to a player willing to test it. Point being, as you contest that the role PMs could contain lies so too can the stated rules.

So until we actually encounter an issue concerning a lie, there is no reason to believe we have been lied to.

KoD, just look at what you can gain vs what you can lose...

If you push forward in a bastard game with total faith that something is set in stone, you're just asking for the rug to be pulled out from under you. If you simply shrug and treat everything with a healthy dose of skepticism, then nothing is really lost.

What we gain: Potentially knowledge that no amount of votes to trigger a lynch will actually kill Zinger.

What we lose: Day 1 lynch.

Given Zinger's NLP, I'm completely fine with trusting that he can't be lynched today as opposed to thinking there is a way to lynch him today. I'd much rather see the lynch used to actually net solid information in the form of an alignment, revealed role, etc. Course that's all assuming that what the mod tells us is not a lie once we do get information from a lynch.

And it's not total faith Eli. If it were total faith, as you say, then even if something came up that contradicted what I assumed, I wouldn't believe it. What I'm maintaining is that I will believe we have not been lied to *in our role PMs* until such a time that something happens that gives reason to doubt that. That position of mine has no bearing on information that comes later in the game in the form of role interactions, results from a death, etc. I've completely left open the option to entertain a different way of thinking should something prove what I'm assuming to be inaccurate.

The paranoia of the possibility of having been lied to is not enough to act on in regards to this. Otherwise, to keep in spirit with the way you two are thinking, I might as well assume the mod lied to us in the rules as well. After all, the rules were stated during the game and could be subject to the lies the mod may throw at us. Right? Or will you tell me that you're just going to accept the rules as being 100% lie free without any basis like how I am doing with the role PMs?

Haven't read everything. Have been asked a lot of questions which I may answer tomorrow but frankly I'm about to go to bed and skimming from my phone. I will answer two questions I saw from Numbers since he specifically pointed out he was irritated that I didn't answer his original question (which I missed entirely?).

Can I be lynched toDay under any circumstances? Yes. There is a way for me to be lynched.
Can I be killed tonight under any circumstances? No. I am unkillable by anything other than a Lynch, albeit a standard majority lynch is not enough to kill me. I am not prepared at this time to reveal the exact nature under which I can be lynched, but I do know what it is. Feel free to test with however many votes you like if you feel so inclined.

I'll come back and answer some other questions tomorrow. Bed time.

Oh, it's not just investigations, but rather, any targeted ability used on me which will weaken the seal to unleashing doom on all of you. Not recommended if you want to keep me in a non threat to the town state.

Zinger, would you mind revealing your victory condition for when you're not a threat to town? Also, it seems like the mafia could easily target you to "unleash this seal" if they have any targeted abilities and that could be dangerous.

Unleashing my seal is equally bad for Mafia and Town.

Unleashing my seal is a game ending condition that results in losses all around. Very bad. Don't make this happen.

I'm not prepared to share my wincon. At least, not yet.

Now I'm going to bed for real.

I totally have a hunch on how to kill Zinger. IT SHALL BE MY SECRET.

Also, 'One of my win conditions means everyone loses, and Im nigh unkillable. The other win condition I refuse to share.' Just. Just...the worst.

From the way he talks about how he is bad to both mafia and town, I would imagine that he could be lynched only if everyone voted him and nothing less. Now I'm willing to test this.

Vote: Zinger

Vote Count
Zinger - Rubik, Rubik, Rubik, KoD (4)

Don't be too hasty, KoD.

I advocate for leaving Zinger be this first round. His posts are clearly designed to attract attention, or hostility, by saying that he is a game ending threat, coupled with some unspecified form of defense which makes a standard vote ineffective. On the other hand, we know for a fact that he is not currently a threat, or at least that he is not necessarily a threat to town, which means eliminating him is conditional. Attempting to do so could potentially be dangerous, given his warnings about investigation.

Also, as a minor clarification, the die I rolled earlier corresponds to the roll-call sheet at the beginning of the thread. This means my vote will be for KoD unless I am convinced otherwise.

Not certain on what to make of Zinger. The point of an NLP makes it difficult to see him not telling the truth. So far, we just know investigating him will bring him closer to his seal breaking. He is a large unknown, but he claims to be immune to night kills and not able to be conventionally lynched.

@Zinger
Can you vote?

In other news, KoD seems overeager to potentially waste a lynch and Rubik makes the only sensible move he could have if he planned to vote at all today without looking really damn suspicious. Number's ability is interesting. Hope I don't get confused between players and the insights of the spectators.

Turin is probably the most suspicious person so far of those who are not named Zinger. Voting randomly is voting without cause. Easy way to avoid anyone really paying much attention to you.

I think this Niklor guy is spot on.

@Turin: I'm not being hasty. I'm fine with placing my vote on Zinger to see if he can be lynched by more than majority, but that is up to others to follow suit if they want to test it.

@Niklor: How exactly am I overeager since I've recently made a switch from not wanting to lynch him (when it seemed like there was no way to lynch him) to wanting to test a lynch on him after he admitted he could be lynched? Does this mean you too support not wanting Zinger lynched today?

If we can determine the correct method to lynch him, I am for it. However, pushing votes on him when he has claimed a standard majority lynch can't lynch him might just end the day and waste our lynch. If we don't know the method to lynch him, we risk wasting today for a small information gain and still have the issue of him tomorrow. You seem overeager because you've thrown votes on someone with 3 votes piled onto him already when it has been stated that majority lynch will end the day.

I would assume that majority lynch actually means someone gets lynched, so that trying to find out if it works or not won't prematurely end the day. Maybe that's crazy talk.

I find 'threat' to be a really vague word. I would say that KoD was my biggest threat during Epistemology, despite being on my team. Maybe you're all potential threats, and this is actually highlander.

Having a NLP that lets you lie is really dumb. Just say "I can't state my alignment because of my NLP." Nobody is going to believe you just because you say you're town regardless.

Debasing Turin for voting at random seems really strange after having initially voted for random in the previous game, which I do believe there is credible reasons for doing. Don't really want to open that can of worms though.

I don't think this specifically has been asked, so let me probe Zinger since that is the fun thing to do this round.
@Zinger: Do you personally believe you can win together with town? Is it possible for your condition, and town condition, to be fulfilled at the same time?

@Niklor:


Already had this talk with Numbers while I was on the other side of the fence. Explain to me how you intend to find out how to lynch the claimed self aligned player who has said that he can be lynched? By telling me that my one vote on him, which puts him only at four votes, is overeager and therefore not good? Overeager indeed. As was already mentioned in my conversation with Numbers, you have no way of knowing if the rules contain lies or not. So how do you know that only a simple majority of votes will be counted and not excess votes? You're by no means obligated to vote for him if that is your choice, but I've decided my choice will be for him. At the least if a majority is not reached, then perhaps he'll be lynched by less than a majority. Only one way to find out.

@Mown:

The defined majority is 50% +1. As for threats, it's straightforward. Town must win when all threats to the town are eliminated. While you can argue varying levels of threat (like how Zinger says he is not a threat to town atm -- and also not a threat to mafia as well it would seem) the fact remains that if you're not town aligned, then you can be considered as anti-town and thus a threat. Also, Epistemology was literally different from how a mafia game functioned. This isn't highlander.

@Mown
I would like to hear of these credible reasons. Let's open the can of worms.

@KoD
I would personally question Zinger more first. Since he wishes to adhere to this NLP of his, the worst that can happen is he declines. He can sit there and stonewall with a lack of answers, but we don't know how much information he will allow us. He has already granted us quite a bit, after all.

Essentially, you're putting him within two votes of the majority. Two happy bandwagoning votes from potentially losing today's lynch and any more discussion today. You'd rather risk that on the basis we might stumble across the correct method to lynch him instead of actually holding back and putting him closer to someone aggressively putting him at majority while we see what more we can gain today. I see it as overeager. Perhaps we can get nothing more out of Zinger, but I don't see much reason to potentially abandon the day.

Unless you believe his condition is that he can only be lynched during the first half of the day or something to that effect. There are so many wild possibilities for what his lynch immunity weakness is that anything is possible. We will have less wild geese to think about if we force a majority lynch now, but I'm still in favor of not risking the day's end on a no lynch this early in the day.