Naga lynch is not such a shot in dark if you think the active players are not likely scum. Besides we still need to avenge dusky. Everybody be arguing about the nk but nobody worry about poor dusky.

That's true. But Naga in particular also tends to lurk as town.

As far as avenging Dusky goes, it seems like Jay lists votes in the order they're cast. That would make Aaarrrgh's the vote that got her lynched.

Did I get a townie lynched? Technically, yes. Did I do so partially to save someone who is now a confirmed town PR? Also yes. Granted, saving Zinger was not my primary motivation for doing what I did, and I had no idea he was a PR at the time, but I still feel that it should be a point in my favor. Or, like, a quarter of a point at least.

You get -1000 IQ points because it's Zinger

@Numbers
Do we get confirmation if the killed players had PR's? I don't see flips.

The flavoring of towns PR are just additional tasks assigned to those players so flips are only going to be imposter or not.

Something an imposter would definitely want to know...

the case on KoD is that KoD always has a strong preference for killing lurkers N1 and that most scum players do not, and that a lurker died N1.

True. But I would have asked in scum chat

@Kod
Do you support a Tevish lynch

I do not support a Tevish lynch.

I prefer Rag, then Skystone. I'd also be ok with a lurker lynch if traction can't be made against either of them (though I'm certain of Rag and Sky being impostors together given how they stayed focus on me and Zinger respectively).

For a moment I was about to be like, "My vote is still on Rag and I can't move it," but then I remembered Zinger called for a recount (and what a recount it will be the best recount out of all recounts. Ever.).

But yeah, I stand by my choices so if we're going to string Rag up, I've got the rope. Rag has her neck. All we need are the votes.

I've made clear that I've got a vote with Rag's name on it. Zinger listed Rag in his preferred lynches (and skystone and CL). I prefer rag or Naga but in retrospect would not oppose skystone

We still need to hear from a good number of people but I'm holding my vote until at least late-ish tonight since they can't be moved.

So, two thoughts:

1) How in the world is focusing on someone scummy? It's a strange but seemingly common perspective here that players who pursue cases or who commit especially strongly to positions are necessarily suspect, but in practice the truth is more often than not to the contrary. Scum frequently decline to commit to controversial opinions perspectives on the exact basis that all attention is bad attention when you have something to hide. We see this for instance in the archetype of scum-as-lurker, or in louder players like KoD who are widely recognized to be less confrontational as scum, or in players like Aaarrrgh who seem especially likely to hedge bets and avoid confrontation when non-town. If anything, on balance and across large numbers of game, vocal (active) argument is probably a minor town tell.

2) KoD is essentially this forum's poster-child for pursuing cases at all possible costs, ergo the conclusion of his postulate here is that he's always scum.

I'm not convinced town tunnel more often than scum or vice-versa but i certainly think tunneling is a null-tell, at least in a vacuum. I think the traditional wisdom goes that scum like to tunnel because it absolves them of the responsibility of having to create nuanced and novel cases which is more difficult for scum than it is for town, though i'm not convinced thats actually the case and its definitely the case that town frequently tunnels for a variety of reasons as well.

I tried to avoid the word "tunneling" on purpose, but I agree that tunneling taken altogether is on balance probably null, or at least close to it. It might partly be a product of the specific environments I play in, but do I find that (barring a few specific players) active/aggressive tunneling/pursuit is slightly more town-like, presumably because of the inherent exposure cost of mounting the initial case, while other sorts of tunneling tend to be something of a wash. Scum are perhaps marginally more likely in my mind to OMGUS (because it provides some rhetorical cover and exactly the sort of unnuanced case that you alluded to), but enough people can't divorce the act of being falsely accused from the alignment of their accuser that I wouldn't be willing to bet on it.

Takeaway: "X is tunneled, therefore they're scummy" is a slightly worse causal proposition than "An owl hooted and a man died, therefore owls kill men."

I agree with a lurker lynch if only because they might come in last minute and swing the lynch and I would not like that.

I just had a thought about our lurkers.

There are two types of lurkers:

1) someone who is lurking because they lack either the amount of time or the amount of investment/interest required to motivate them to post.

2) someone who is lurking to lay low (a town PR in fringe cases, or most likely, scum).

If we're dealing with #2 when it comes to Naga or Rubik, I would have thought they'd have something to say about the Day's deadline having past and Night having not yet begun, given we've established in this hypothetical scenario that they actually are paying attention and only refraining from posting in order to lay low.

Zinger, I'm not sure I agree with your supposition that Naga would be clean (the takeaway I got from your post: Rube showed briefly when called out). While I would prefer a Rag lynch today, I feel like Lurkers remain decent backup lynches for two reasons

1) LurkTown is an asset of negative value. Unless you feel they're markedly less likely than actives to be scum, their presence as part of the quota leaves us in a situation where Scum is closer to controlling the lynch than they should be. Example, in a 3-2 LyLo, if one of the townies is afk and never votes, Scum wins even should the remainder play perfectly.
2) I personally feel that deliberate lurkers would remain dead silent in the current scenario. At least, if I were Scum!Naga having decided on a Lurk strat, I would stay out of the day as-is unless pressured with "or else lynch" which is harder to do when we can't build wagons to the danger zone and then unbuild them.

Yeah, you might be right. Was just a thought.

Actually, I hedge bets and avoid confrontation no matter what my alignment is. I've said this many times before, but I'm not on the slightest confident in my ability to get reads. I prefer to solve through mechanics and logic, if possible. When I can't, I default to just encouraging other people to make cases so that I can follow whoever makes the best one. I will never fully commit to a position unless I have solid evidence to back it up.