Memebase Mafia Game Over!

[sensfan]

Oh my stupid Pr!

And my post above was defienently fun, don't you think?

[slowreactor]

Couple of things here:

The only evidence that I see of iceDagger skimming is his brief mention of 38 (now 39) pages giving him a headache. Can someone explain how exactly that leads to skimming, and why it's so bad?

Also, vote drake_259 for trying to fake-softclaim my role. There can't be two people there...

[pancakemix]

(PS, please clarify Omegle. Can we talk to each other by pm?)

"Outside the thread" means outside the thread. PM, Skype, go find them in person, anything goes.

[JenBroness]

It's impossible to gain something from ckyrias' lynch on Day 1. We can't find out the scum because of the bandwagon on him (which I did join, quite rightly so) was 99% based on inactivity and disappearing. Is it possible that someone silenced ckyrias? It's a longshot but in this game like this we already know someone couldn't talk:

I don't always post during the day, but when I do I always make sure everyone is day-masoned too!

Now that I can finally speak, I will post my initial thoughts later tonight.

but we didn't notice it. It might have been a scum strategy to silence the inactive, although that might have been a waste of a move.

I think that you're reading into this too much. DoomYoshi couldn't talk because it was night, pure and simple. He joined the game at night, and them's the rules.

It got to the point where I expected everything to go better than I expected, but I was wrong...

...it went even better.

[spiesr]

Even if Rodion is town he is fucking us up. 1 less to vote each day and he could stop a power role at night. Luckily this time he did not as I am not a cop or doc but I can get info that could be usefull.

But, if he uses it against someone who turns out to be scum then it is great. Really, he seems like simply a creepy roleblocker variant. If he plays like one then there is no reason to lynch him unless we actually think he has anti-town alignment.

Is it possible that someone silenced ckyrias? It's a longshot but in this game like this we already know someone couldn't talk:

I don't always post during the day, but when I do I always make sure everyone is day-masoned too!
Now that I can finally speak, I will post my initial thoughts later tonight.

but we didn't notice it. It might have been a scum strategy to silence the inactive, although that might have been a waste of a move.

Are you suggesting that yoshi's post indicates that the scum have an ability that let's them prevent a player from talking? I didn't read that from his post at all, you think if that had happened to him he would have actually indicated it in a definitive way. I think the memes my on the verge of blocking out the sun here. Clearly "I don't always post during the day" line was simply a reference to his meme.

The only evidence that I see of iceDagger skimming is his brief mention of 38 (now 39) pages giving him a headache. Can someone explain how exactly that leads to skimming, and why it's so bad?

Right I've skimmed the thread now, and I've made an interesting discovery: 38 pages of solid internet memes can make you lose the will to live. I think this also explains 4chan.

If people skimmed the part where icedagger said he skimmed, then when the the skimming reach enough recursions to form a singularity?

[DoomYoshi]

To be fair, my joke was partially a jokevote. I wouldn't actually condone lynching someone for saying they skimmed. For putting forward a WIFOM case is another issue entirely. Part of your argument is actually that strike wolf is scummy for posting so much. I will admit, this is the first time I have ever seen a case on someone that claims we should lynch them for activity.

Pedobear, are you allowed to not target somebody at night? If that is not an option, I can see no other option than to lynch you. Unless you can target yourself, we might be able to work something out.

[safariguy5]

To be fair, my joke was partially a jokevote. I wouldn't actually condone lynching someone for saying they skimmed. For putting forward a WIFOM case is another issue entirely. Part of your argument is actually that strike wolf is scummy for posting so much. I will admit, this is the first time I have ever seen a case on someone that claims we should lynch them for activity.

Pedobear, are you allowed to not target somebody at night? If that is not an option, I can see no other option than to lynch you. Unless you can target yourself, we might be able to work something out.

I agree with this. Unless we have multiple strong cases, having to roleblock someone each night and rendering them voteless can be exceedingly detrimental to town. So if you are forced to roleblock someone each night, then I think the potential to harm town is greater than the potential to help town as it's essentially a random roleblock+ votelessness.

[sheepofdumb]

For someone who thinks skimming warrants a vote you don't seem to have actually read my post. Quite a bit of it outlines why I don't think strike wolf is a townie. Strike has the added bonus that even if he is town it's not a big loss.

As for the skiming part, which sheepfodumb and doomyoshi also use as a major justification for voting me- really? It's a 38 page thread, I didn't read every word of some of the walls of text discussing game mechanics.

Mine wasn't that major. I noticed it but it was the claim that caught my attention. Gotta build the strongest case you can, no?

Sheepofdumb- you at least broke my post up but don't seem the least bit concerned with addressing my arguments.

The claim- it feels like cover? What? The player I replaced had no heat on him. The reason I claimed was because we likely have a number of town players with night actions. I don't expect it to prove my town credentials one way or the other.

I find an out of the blue "don't touch me, lynch him!" maneuver rather scummy. PGO is a scum claim. It frightens people away from you which is exactly what scum want.

The "super aggressive push" is because I genuinely believe strike is by far and away the obvious lynch. You cite it as if it's some kind of evidence for me being scum but don't give any reason why.

The reality is I've raised my head above the parapet because I'm more concerned with a town win than my own survival, I don't really see how that can be construed as a scum tell.

So your argument is that we lynch a townie so the town can win. You believe that there is a 50% chance that strike is scum because he's voteless and that if he really is town he's just dead weight and thus a danger to the town. Strike only becomes a danger in late game if the mafia are winning. He makes a very poor day 2 lynch because the mafia have more chances to take out power roles. We need to stop mafia early in the game to reduce the amount of damage they do.

I might consider lynching him day 4 or 5 if we have no leads because his presence becomes a bit more dangerous.

[jonty125]

vote icedagger for admitting to skimming! and wanting us to lynch a townie (yes he maybe voteless but our #1 priority should be scum not 'worthless' townies.)

For someone who thinks skimming warrants a vote you don't seem to have actually read my post. Quite a bit of it outlines why I don't think strike wolf is a townie. Strike has the added bonus that even if he is town it's not a big loss.

Sorry I forgot to add I thought strike was town because (as you or may not have noticed that post I made was in a rush forgetting my PR and thoughts about Rodion). And there you are skimming again I voted you for 2 reasons not 1.

My case for strike / icedagger's pathetically weak case
Reasons in red

1)He originally voted someone, before remembering he was voteless. If the extent of my role was voteless townie, I think I would remember the voteless bit. If I were scum though... the more interesting part of my role might well lead me to forget I had no vote. I know strike is in multiple games and it can sometimes be hard to remember what actions you do/don't have so voting when your voteless I can understand - especially when being voteless is extremely rare


2) Would the mods really put a voteless townie in the game? A player who has very little ability to impact anything would be a real bastard role and likely promote inactivity, which brings me to my third point... Yes, with a town influential voter and town double voter dead a voteless townie will help balance this out.


3) Strike wolf has been posting like a demon. He seems altogether too interested in the game for someone with such a crappy role.
This is the lamest point I've seen and I've seen OVER 9000!. He is showing an interest for the TOWN'S SAKE AND HIS OWN! For the town as strike is possibly one of the greatest scum hunters ever and he wins with town: alive or dead. Secondly for his own sake. No activity either a modkill or us lynching him 2 things a townie would not want.

I don't think we should lynch Rodion yet. Because we can wait and see if he blocks a killing role and then there is a good chance they're mafia but what happens if he rumbles a town vig I'm just throwing thoughts out and am curious about what others think.

[Rodion]

To those that think that the power is inherently scummy let me remind you that I've got a PR that can't let me hide my identity and that whoever I target gets unmistakable flavour that lets them know that I did target them. If you think PCM would introduce scum-aligned roles that simply can't argue their way out because of PR + night action flavour, then it really looks like you're trying to set an easy lynch up. To the others, check my D1 post regarding a mafia of vampires and a bloodsucking PR and you'll (hopefully) understand.

Yoshi, I'm not forced to use my skills as far as I know (I assume every power can be used or not unless the mods specifically tell otherwise), but I intend to use them everytime as long as we're not in LYLO and I have a good reason for that, which I'm only going to disclose if I get BWed.

Jonty, I'll also say that hoping that I block a killing role in order to out scum is not nearly as easy as you apparently make it out to be. This being a 32-player game (and the meme flavour having "madness" written all over it) we possibly have at least 1 vig, 1 SK and 1 mafia, with the possibility of multiple scum factions/SKs plus JOATs with 1-shot kills plus whoever decides to target Icedagger (assuming he's not lying). That considered and this being D2, we do not know how many kills are expected per day and thus we can't know whether I blocked one of those kills from hapenning. Even if we later get a good grasp on how many kills are expected per day there is always the possibility of other roles lowering that count (doctor and bulletproof to name a few).

Strike, do you feel comfortable telling whether you are a "voteless vanilla" or a "voteless PR"?

[Rodion]

EBWOP: I just bought my ticket to the Justin Bieber show here in Brazil. That show will be most definitely epic, I can barely wait!

[skillfusniper33]

To be fair, my joke was partially a jokevote. I wouldn't actually condone lynching someone for saying they skimmed. For putting forward a WIFOM case is another issue entirely. Part of your argument is actually that strike wolf is scummy for posting so much. I will admit, this is the first time I have ever seen a case on someone that claims we should lynch them for activity.

Pedobear, are you allowed to not target somebody at night? If that is not an option, I can see no other option than to lynch you. Unless you can target yourself, we might be able to work something out.

I agree with this. Unless we have multiple strong cases, having to roleblock someone each night and rendering them voteless can be exceedingly detrimental to town. So if you are forced to roleblock someone each night, then I think the potential to harm town is greater than the potential to help town as it's essentially a random roleblock+ votelessness.

If strike is truly voteless, why doesn't rodion just block him for the next night or two until we can try to find some possible power rolls that could be blocked. This means if he is forced to target someone then there would be someone that doesn't help us with the votes.

[DoomYoshi]

To be fair, my joke was partially a jokevote. I wouldn't actually condone lynching someone for saying they skimmed. For putting forward a WIFOM case is another issue entirely. Part of your argument is actually that strike wolf is scummy for posting so much. I will admit, this is the first time I have ever seen a case on someone that claims we should lynch them for activity.

Pedobear, are you allowed to not target somebody at night? If that is not an option, I can see no other option than to lynch you. Unless you can target yourself, we might be able to work something out.

I agree with this. Unless we have multiple strong cases, having to roleblock someone each night and rendering them voteless can be exceedingly detrimental to town. So if you are forced to roleblock someone each night, then I think the potential to harm town is greater than the potential to help town as it's essentially a random roleblock+ votelessness.

If strike is truly voteless, why doesn't rodion just block him for the next night or two until we can try to find some possible power rolls that could be blocked. This means if he is forced to target someone then there would be someone that doesn't help us with the votes.

He isn't forced. Got skim? I read your bloodsucking vampire bit but I don't think it is a totally solid defense. They could have thrown one such role in knowing that the argument presented would be presented. Effectively a WIFOM argument, so I digress. The thing is that we can't have you throwing random molestations around. If you think someone is scum and needs to be roleblocked, then why not just vote for them and have them die instead.

unvote vote Rodion

This is the beginning of the BW on you and I want to hear your reasoning for being a molester.

By the way, about earlier, I don't always miss my PR, but when I do it' because I had to rush to deal with something at work and just hit submit so it wouldn't be sitting there.

[icedagger]

Finished with my woman 'cause she couldn't help me with my mind...

Mine wasn't that major. I noticed it but it was the claim that caught my attention. Gotta build the strongest case you can, no?

Ok, I was just a little bit annoyed that after I'd spent quite a bit of time going through the thread and building a substantive case three people in time-honoured CC mafia fashion ignore the arguments and take the opportunity to jump on me for using the word skim.

I find an out of the blue "don't touch me, lynch him!" maneuver rather scummy. PGO is a scum claim. It frightens people away from you which is exactly what scum want.

You'd be right if I was under any pressure at the time. My claiming was completely unrelated to my case against strike wolf. I read my power, thought "this seems more likely to f*ck up townies than scum" and claimed. Again, I'm not using it to prove my town credentials, but you're suggesting I'm scum who decided the best course of action would be to, under no pressure, claim a high profile role and immediately vigourously persue a case against the one role who could prevent a crushing scum victory- a voteless townie

So your argument is that we lynch a townie so the town can win. You believe that there is a 50% chance that strike is scum because he's voteless and that if he really is town he's just dead weight and thus a danger to the town. Strike only becomes a danger in late game if the mafia are winning. He makes a very poor day 2 lynch because the mafia have more chances to take out power roles. We need to stop mafia early in the game to reduce the amount of damage they do.I might consider lynching him day 4 or 5 if we have no leads because his presence becomes a bit more dangerous.

This is what confuses me, you keep deliberately misrepresenting my case. How can you say in your first sentence my argument is to lynch a townie and then later acknowledge that I believe there's at least a 50% chance he isn't town? If you don't agree with my arguments why I think strike is likely scum- fine, say so, or better yet actually address them. But it looks scummy when you ignore the arguments and go on the attack in such a disingenuous way.

Jonty, you make some decent points. I do find the "we should keep strike alive because he'll find scum for us" argument objectionable though. I'm not sure if I've played with strike before and he may well be a good scum hunter but when you use that as a reason not to lynch him it makes you look lazy, and makes it too easy for him to win as scum.

[safariguy5]

To be fair, my joke was partially a jokevote. I wouldn't actually condone lynching someone for saying they skimmed. For putting forward a WIFOM case is another issue entirely. Part of your argument is actually that strike wolf is scummy for posting so much. I will admit, this is the first time I have ever seen a case on someone that claims we should lynch them for activity.

Pedobear, are you allowed to not target somebody at night? If that is not an option, I can see no other option than to lynch you. Unless you can target yourself, we might be able to work something out.

I agree with this. Unless we have multiple strong cases, having to roleblock someone each night and rendering them voteless can be exceedingly detrimental to town. So if you are forced to roleblock someone each night, then I think the potential to harm town is greater than the potential to help town as it's essentially a random roleblock+ votelessness.

If strike is truly voteless, why doesn't rodion just block him for the next night or two until we can try to find some possible power rolls that could be blocked. This means if he is forced to target someone then there would be someone that doesn't help us with the votes.

He isn't forced. Got skim? I read your bloodsucking vampire bit but I don't think it is a totally solid defense. They could have thrown one such role in knowing that the argument presented would be presented. Effectively a WIFOM argument, so I digress. The thing is that we can't have you throwing random molestations around. If you think someone is scum and needs to be roleblocked, then why not just vote for them and have them die instead.

unvote vote Rodion

This is the beginning of the BW on you and I want to hear your reasoning for being a molester.

By the way, about earlier, I don't always miss my PR, but when I do it' because I had to rush to deal with something at work and just hit submit so it wouldn't be sitting there.

Yeah, I mean, usually, if you're just town roleblocker, you would block someone because it only affects night actions and doesn't handicap them the next day. With the added votelessness, if the person you blocked is town, it hurts the town's ability to get a lynch.

[sheepofdumb]

I don't think Strike is scum. He's worth an investigation but this early on in the game I don't believe that a voteless townie is going to drag the town down. Especially since this game was balanced with a double voter and an influential voter.

[Rodion]

Yeah, I mean, usually, if you're just town roleblocker, you would block someone because it only affects night actions and doesn't handicap them the next day. With the added votelessness, if the person you blocked is town, it hurts the town's ability to get a lynch.

In the early phase of this game, one less vote (from someone with an unknown alignment) will not make a meaningful difference.

Do you think that ckyrias would have survived the lynch if for whatever reason one of the 17 voters could not have voted? I think that no, someone else would have hammered.

Do you think that today's lynch target will survive because the deadline will end with him at L-1 and Dazza saying "I wish I could vote on him"?

Consider this: we still have 29 players alive, 27 voters if you consider Strike's claim and Dazza's crippling and I think 15 votes are needed. The lynch WILL get done either way and the person that was going to be lynched had Dazza a vote will still be the lynched person by the end of this day. I'll rethink my approach as we get to mid/late game, but, for now, I'm convinced that blocking people is the best course of action.

@Yoshi and the WIFOM part: you're saying the mods would screw the mafia in the ass because the mafia would be able to get away with the "for balance purposes the mods would never do that as it would screw mafia in the ass"? Do realize that your theory is not about a player casting WIFOM, it's about the mods purposefully screwing the balance with the specific thought that the WIFOM would rebalance the game by itself.

[DoomYoshi]

OK, I will agree with your use of the voteless pattern. It doesn't harm town, but it doesn't harm scum either.

However, you totally ignored the part that saf stressed, which is that you are still roleblocking. Why would a town roleblocker block randomly? This theoretically could really screw town, especially if a cop or doc gets molested. As you agreed, it is not likely to help us with the blocking of mafia kills (I imagine a game of this size to have a godfather who sends in the kill, although I have no evidence for this). So what is your reasoning for roleblocking people?


I don't always trail off, but when...

[spiesr]

The thing is that we can't have you throwing random molestations around. If you think someone is scum and needs to be roleblocked, then why not just vote for them and have them die instead.

This argument. Are you trying to suggest that roleblockers shouldn't exist because if they think someone is scummy enough to be blocked they should have just lynched that person instead? I don't think I can really agree with you here.

Consider this: we still have 29 players alive, 27 voters if you consider Strike's claim and Dazza's crippling and I think 15 votes are needed. The lynch WILL get done either way and the person that was going to be lynched had Dazza a vote will still be the lynched person by the end of this day. I'll rethink my approach as we get to mid/late game, but, for now, I'm convinced that blocking people is the best course of action.

This seems reasonable enough, I don't think it is madness...

This early on in the game I don't believe that a voteless townie is going to drag the town down. Especially since this game was balanced with a double voter and an influential voter.

Since the extra voters have died, does the scale now tip an the game fall out of it's zen like balance?

[Rodion]

I ignored the blocking part because Safari took no issue with it. Blocking the cop is really unfortunate, but it's only a 3-4% chance and I can lower that by targeting people that are less likely to be cop (by analysing behaviours). I can also block kills (3-4% chance multiplied by the number of nightkills), block mafia power roles or block a possible cult recruiter. It's a longshot, but I could even block the town doctor and keep him from protecting a mafia PR from a vig/SK kill. Roleblocking is a lottery, really, anything can happen. Weighing pros and cons, I reckon it to be better to block than not to.

Besides, by knowing who I blocked I'll possibly be able to see through fakeclaims (like a tracker fakeclaim saying they N3 tracked "X" and got a report saying "X" visited someone when I molested "X" N2 -> obviously, the molested players would have to keep a low profile and perhaps try not to cast votes during that day now that Dazza outed me).

I don't always have sex, but when I do I make sure they're underage.

[sheepofdumb]

This early on in the game I don't believe that a voteless townie is going to drag the town down. Especially since this game was balanced with a double voter and an influential voter.

Since the extra voters have died, does the scale now tip an the game fall out of it's zen like balance?

We still have 29 players. I say we wait. There will be a lot of time for us to drop a voteless townie later.

[DoomYoshi]

I don't always unvote but when I do children get molested. I can see we are at an impasse. Perhaps you can explain why dazza is a good target for silencing but not for voting?

[chapcrap]

You all have posted thoughts, so now I will accept the challenge and post my thoughts as well. Consider this as a CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!!

Ok, first of all, whoever said that Rodion might make people mute (or something like that) because DoomYoshi didn't talk in Day 1, DY wasn't here day 1!!

Secondly, even though strike hasn't come on here to really defend himself since icedagger's accusation, I don't think he should be voted for. A voteless townie makes perfect sense with the other crazy voting shenanigans that have already been revealed in a couple other roles. Furthermore, why would he claim a crappy role like that if he was trying to hide as a scum. It's obviously not a person that the town needs, so it's an awful claim to hide behind. I don't mind lynching him, in the future, if there is nothing else to go on, but why vote out someone who is town when we should be scum hunting? Silliness I think.

Thirdly, icedagger saying he skimmed 38 pages of thread is no big deal. How much time do you want him to devote to catching up? He missed Day 1 of a 32 person game. Give him a break on the fact that he said he skimmed it. It's not like we had a lot of relevant information there anyway. Plus, he did at least try to come up with something for us. The one thing that is bad about icedagger is that he gets on strike for being too active. Really? That's your complaint. You think he should just ride the bench on this game because he didn't get an awesome role? I'm too active on the whole site and I have a crappy site role, that doesn't mean anything. To me this seems like someone trying to start a bandwagon on a good, active scumhunter.

Fourthly, Rodion, why do you gotta go molesting people? There's no reason for it. I understand the fact that he's pedobear and has the PR. I get his argument that the mod shouldn't make it that easy for us to find scum. The truth is, sometimes it is that easy. He may not be scum, but it sure seems scummy. Vig? SK? Cult of some kind? I don't know. What I know is that children weren't meant to be molested and I don't see how his role could be something that is helpful to town. He blocked one person and already found out they weren't a power role. Now he's just going to move on to more people and see if he can get any info from them. It just seems an awful lot like scum searching for town power roles.

In conclusion, icedagger and Rodion, I have my eye on each of you. I'm not voting yet, but I think when I do, it's gonne be one of you. Unless someone claims scum.

[chapcrap]

You all have posted thoughts, so now I will accept the challenge and post my thoughts as well. Consider this as a CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!!

Ok, first of all, whoever said that Rodion might make people mute (or something like that) because DoomYoshi didn't talk in Day 1, DY wasn't here day 1!!

Secondly, even though strike hasn't come on here to really defend himself since icedagger's accusation, I don't think he should be voted for. A voteless townie makes perfect sense with the other crazy voting shenanigans that have already been revealed in a couple other roles. Furthermore, why would he claim a crappy role like that if he was trying to hide as a scum. It's obviously not a person that the town needs, so it's an awful claim to hide behind. I don't mind lynching him, in the future, if there is nothing else to go on, but why vote out someone who is town when we should be scum hunting? Silliness I think.

Thirdly, icedagger saying he skimmed 38 pages of thread is no big deal. How much time do you want him to devote to catching up? He missed Day 1 of a 32 person game. Give him a break on the fact that he said he skimmed it. It's not like we had a lot of relevant information there anyway. Plus, he did at least try to come up with something for us. The one thing that is bad about icedagger is that he gets on strike for being too active. Really? That's your complaint. You think he should just ride the bench on this game because he didn't get an awesome role? I'm too active on the whole site and I have a crappy site role, that doesn't mean anything. To me this seems like someone trying to start a bandwagon on a good, active scumhunter.

Fourthly, Rodion, why do you gotta go molesting people? There's no reason for it. I understand the fact that he's pedobear and has the PR. I get his argument that the mod shouldn't make it that easy for us to find scum. The truth is, sometimes it is that easy. He may not be scum, but it sure seems scummy. Vig? SK? Cult of some kind? I don't know. What I know is that children weren't meant to be molested and I don't see how his role could be something that is helpful to town. He blocked one person and already found out they weren't a power role. Now he's just going to move on to more people and see if he can get any info from them. It just seems an awful lot like scum searching for town power roles.

In conclusion, icedagger and Rodion, I have my eye on each of you. I'm not voting yet, but I think when I do, it's gonne be one of you. Unless someone claims scum.

EBWOP: Fast posted. Challenge Accepted.

[strike wolf]

Right I've skimmed the thread now, and I've made an interesting discovery: 38 pages of solid internet memes can make you lose the will to live. I think this also explains 4chan.

Anyway, I've decided it's for the best that I claim since we almost certainly have quite a few town power roles and I don't want to kill them off. I'm Paranoid Parrot, town paranoid gun owner. Anyone who targets me at night will die.

Moving on, Vote Srike wolf. I'm honestly suprised he wasn't lynched on day one. He's claimed voteless townie- a role that actively hurts town even if he's telling the truth, since he can't vote scum but ups the number of people needed for a lynch.

umm...what? Since when do we actively lynch people for being voteless. Yes later in the game I may become a liability due to inability for voting but I would never outright lynch someone for being voteless. The sensible thing would rather be to have me vigged.

I'm not at all convinced he is a townie though, for three reasons:
1) He originally voted someone, before remembering he was voteless. If the extent of my role was voteless townie, I think I would remember the voteless bit. If I were scum though... the more interesting part of my role might well lead me to forget I had no vote.

I'm in 4 games right now. I think technically 5 when this game started. I don't always keep everything straight as far as my role is concerned. I usually glance at it once when I get it and then forget about it until later in the day. The rest of this is complete wifom. You assume scum based on the fact that I forgot I can't vote even though there are a lot of other possibilities.

2) Would the mods really put a voteless townie in the game? A player who has very little ability to impact anything would be a real bastard role and likely promote inactivity, which brings me to my third point...

There was an influential voter and a double voter. So to organize again what has already been said, wouldn't adding a voteless scum make the game much harder to balance favorably for scum? It's much more detrimental to scum than it could ever be to town.

3) Strike wolf has been posting like a demon. He seems altogether too interested in the game for someone with such a crappy role.

since you haven't been in recent games with me, I know that you don't know my playstyle. I'm traditionally a very active player. I also know how to play a vanilla role as far as trying to be aggressive. How would you play this role? Or are you one of the ones who would go inactive?

Bearing all this in mind I'd say there's at least a 50% chance strike is scum. When you consider that even if he is town we're actually better off without him, I think he's a great lynch candidate.

Really? 50% chance I'm scum? I don't see the evidence to support that. Really to me this case reeks of looking for the easy lynch. I mean if we're lynching potentially harmful town roles we should spend the next three days lynching me, you and Rody (to clarify I have read through and liked rody's defense. I probably would have played it a bit differently but I have no problems with what he said. My only question would be why pick Dazza?).