Mafia 1 - The CROWN - GAME OVER!

[Princess.ruxi]

I've never seen a vote blocker pro-town before.
Except for vigilante, voting is the only WEAPON, the only way for townies to lynch a mafia player.

[Gridfon]

3) I picked Sander on Night 3 because he was the deciding vote in lynching radwulf. I did not know if radwulf was innocent or guilty, but I did not like that we lynched him/her when the nurse could have been a very important role for finding Mafia (and I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post).

@Sander: Can you confirm this?

[MrWaffles]

I've never seen a vote blocker pro-town before.
Except for vigilante, voting is the only WEAPON, the only way for townies to lynch a mafia player.

Fine, but the town has killed three innocent people. Mafia/psychos/whatever have only killed two so far.

No lynch being a mafia strategy was the same argument used at the beginning of the game to lynch all those townspeople so quickly. We probably should not have listened to the pro-lynch faction, but they seemed like they knew what they were doing.

-MrWaffles

[Sander]

3) I picked Sander on Night 3 because he was the deciding vote in lynching radwulf. I did not know if radwulf was innocent or guilty, but I did not like that we lynched him/her when the nurse could have been a very important role for finding Mafia (and I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post).

@Sander: Can you confirm this?

Yup, it started with cramps and evolved into a high fever.

[MrWaffles]

No lynch being a mafia strategy was the same argument used at the beginning of the game to lynch all those townspeople so quickly. We probably should not have listened to the pro-lynch faction, but they seemed like they knew what they were doing.

I know I am saying the above quite late, given that I joined in two of the three lynches. However, if you look back at my posts, I generally wanted more dialogue and evidence before voting for lynch.

[EscapedConvict]

I've never seen a vote blocker pro-town before.
Except for vigilante, voting is the only WEAPON, the only way for townies to lynch a mafia player.

True but you can also think of it in the sense of blocking a mafia player from voting and lynching townies. (but yes, the argument is a little too contrived that way I think)

So this sounds either like a vigilante role (pro town) or a phycopath role (pro mafia). Most likely the latter.

Unvote MrWaffles for now, so I dont give the scums a chance to intant lynch him before everyone else weighs in.

If no-one else will disprove what MrWaffles said about visiting Joesatri, Noni and Sander these last 3 nights then he is who he says he is but its up to us to decide if good or evil.
I lean heavily towards evil at this point.

This is why role declarations sometime throw more confusion in the mix then clear things up. Because you can chose which details of your real role you reveal.
Mix truth with lie to give more credibility to your claims.

[Noni]

3) I picked Sander on Night 3 because he was the deciding vote in lynching radwulf. I did not know if radwulf was innocent or guilty, but I did not like that we lynched him/her when the nurse could have been a very important role for finding Mafia (and I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post).

@Sander: Can you confirm this?

Yup, it started with cramps and evolved into a high fever.

That is very strange to me because my email didn't say anything about any fever and joesatri confirmed his fever was not linked with the food poisoning (as confirmed to him by daemon)

[Princess.ruxi]

@Sander: Can you confirm this?

Yup, it started with cramps and evolved into a high fever.

That is very strange to me because my email didn't say anything about any fever and joesatri confirmed his fever was not linked with the food poisoning (as confirmed to him by daemon)

I have a fever and muscle aches

[EscapedConvict]

@Sander: Can you confirm this?

Yup, it started with cramps and evolved into a high fever.

That is very strange to me because my email didn't say anything about any fever and joesatri confirmed his fever was not linked with the food poisoning (as confirmed to him by daemon)

Maybe the food poisoning manifests differently in different people.
Maybe the details (the symptoms that color the story) don't all have to be the same as long as the result is? (not being able to vote)

[EscapedConvict]

Yup, it started with cramps and evolved into a high fever.

That is very strange to me because my email didn't say anything about any fever and joesatri confirmed his fever was not linked with the food poisoning (as confirmed to him by daemon)

I have a fever and muscle aches

You were infected by the mafia.
Infected people die eventually (ie Joesatri N2)

Poisoned people (ie Joesatr N1, noni, sander) cannot vote but don't die.

[EscapedConvict]

@Sander: Can you confirm this?

Yup, it started with cramps and evolved into a high fever.

That is very strange to me because my email didn't say anything about any fever and joesatri confirmed his fever was not linked with the food poisoning (as confirmed to him by daemon)

Rather this shows even more as I pointed out in the previous post that infectied people and poisoned people are two different unrelated things/events
Joesatri just happened to be the target of both in 2 consecutive nights.

[EscapedConvict]

I just want to make another point about MrWafffle's role in case its not obvious to some people:

If he is a psycho (mafia) this would be the third faction of this game, meaning the main mafia clan would not side with him and would also want to kill him and vice versa.
The psychos main goal in a mafia game is to win the game single handedly.

It's a hell of a fun role to play. Radwulf gave me that role in the first mafia game on our first RMC forums.back in the old days and whomever was around at that time maybe remembers how I took full advantage of it

[Sander]

That is very strange to me because my email didn't say anything about any fever and joesatri confirmed his fever was not linked with the food poisoning (as confirmed to him by daemon)

Well, it's the fever that makes me feel weak and therefor I doubt my own capabilities. Therefor I will not take the chance in matters that concern life and death.

[Princess.ruxi]

I'm ok for keeping Mr.Waffles around as long as he continues to target Mafia (aka Sander and the likes of him).
unvote MrWaffles

Where do we go from here?
@Gridfon thank you for your explanation. I appreciate your logical thinking and argumentation. You have the microphone.

[EscapedConvict]

Sorry for multiple posting but by now you guys probably figured out that's my style of play. Got to say it when it somes to mind before it goes away.
Plus I tend to change my mind often and I see that as a quality/asset

Having said all the above now Im thinking maybe a vigilante makes more sense for MrWaffles for 2 main reasons:

1. We already have someone that kills at night with knife/hammer/other blunt instrument so that would fit the role of psycho pretty well
2. A pshycho role would be more powerful (ie kill at night as I explained above) then a vigilante role since the psyxho is by himself but a vigilante sides with the town.

So now I tend to believe MrWaffles to be a vigilante (townie)

[EscapedConvict]

I'm ok for keeping Mr.Waffles around as long as he continues to target Mafia (aka Sander and the likes of him).
unvote MrWaffles

Where do we go from here?

We vote Mary (or myself)

[Princess.ruxi]

Sorry for multiple posting but by now you guys probably figured out that's my style of play. Got to say it when it somes to mind before it goes away.
Plus I tend to change my mind often and I see that as a quality/asset

Having said all the above now Im thinking maybe a vigilante makes more sense for MrWaffles for 2 main reasons:

1. We already have someone that kills at night with knife/hammer/other blunt instrument so that would fit the role of psycho pretty well
2. A pshycho role would be more powerful (ie kill at night as I explained above) then a vigilante role since the psyxho is by himself but a vigilante sides with the town.

So now I tend to believe MrWaffles to be a vigilante (townie)

Vigilantes kill dear EC! They do not block voting!

[EscapedConvict]

Sorry for multiple posting but by now you guys probably figured out that's my style of play. Got to say it when it somes to mind before it goes away.
Plus I tend to change my mind often and I see that as a quality/asset

Having said all the above now Im thinking maybe a vigilante makes more sense for MrWaffles for 2 main reasons:

1. We already have someone that kills at night with knife/hammer/other blunt instrument so that would fit the role of psycho pretty well
2. A pshycho role would be more powerful (ie kill at night as I explained above) then a vigilante role since the psyxho is by himself but a vigilante sides with the town.

So now I tend to believe MrWaffles to be a vigilante (townie)

Vigilantes kill dear EC! They do not block voting!

To be clear you know/agree Vigilante is a pro town role right?

As to the ability leave it to Daemon to tweak it.

I explained above why vigilante make more sense to me then psycho.

But then again, the main mafia clan can also have MrWaffles ability since their kills are delayed by one day.
To even things out .
So we can't discount him being the clan leader or just a mafia member that can also block people from voting.

[Princess.ruxi]

The Vigilante can be aligned with either the town or with mafia. Depending on the mod, the vigilante can even choose sides.
The idea is still valid - just like mafia, the vigilante is a role that kills. That's why I think our vigilante is the author of the hammer killing.
As for Waffles I tend to think he is mafia. Makes most sense for me.

[Gridfon]

We are getting closer to filling in all the known gaps in NTA usage:

"I am rather unwell and cannot vote today" crowd:
Day 1: joesatri (post #31)
Day 2: Noni (post #584)
Day 3: Sander (post #1050)

"I am going to die next morning" crowd:
Day 1: ---
Day 2: joesatri (#642)
Day 3: Princess.ruxi (post #1014)

"I had a visitor and I'm compelled to vote for ... our discussion was inspired and eye-opening and I simply cannot vote for anyone else, anything else or abstain" crowd:
Day 1: Noni against zero (post #716)
Day 2: valli against Trigardon (posts #665 and #1021)
Day 3: Bombaclaat against josatri (post #995)

"I had mandatory cleaning previous night" crowd:
Day 1: ?
Day 2: joesatri (#642)
Day 3: ?

These seem to be the only intrusive NTAs that we know, right? If MrWaffles is not affiliated with mafia, that leaves at most 3 NTAs in control of the mafia team in this large 27-28 player game. But it is possible that we did not get to see SilveXtru's NTA ability (nothing of the above matches his role name "Infected Gardner"). It is also possible that multiple mafia members have special one-use-per-game abilities that were not used yet.

@EscapedConvict: Is it plausible that the mafia team has so few disruptive abilities?

The "mandatory cleaning" also does not sound like something a mafia would do with malicious intentions. Because cleaning is supposed to kill infections, no spread them. But there's always a chance that Nanaa's wild guess from #729 is true that there is a "dude polluting rooms with virus infected rags".

Does anyone have experience with mandatory cleaning? If someone was targeted this night, it would be very useful to know whether they feel well afterwards.

[phox]

That is seven votes for revealing my NTA: Princess.ruxi, zero, Emilly, Siderite, Noni, EscapedConvict, and phox. So here goes:

I am not infected, but I am indeed the cook. My NTA is I can give food poisoning to one player each night by using spoiled food to make their meal. This normally results in the player not being able to vote for 24 hours. I don't myself know what the exceptions to "normally" are, by the way.

I targeted joesatri on Night 1, Noni on Night 2, and Sander on Night 3. Below are my reasons:
1) I picked joesatri on Night 1 at random. As I said before, I don't know when my NTA does not work and wanted to see the effects. Also, I felt at the beginning of the game that not lynching is a better strategy when we don't have enough info (although in the end I joined in Moxy's lynch).
2) I picked Noni on Night 2 because despite all her points and arguments, she threw her vote away on zero on the first day. On the second day, she revealed that she had been forced to vote for zero, but by that time I had already submitted my NTA.
3) I picked Sander on Night 3 because he was the deciding vote in lynching radwulf. I did not know if radwulf was innocent or guilty, but I did not like that we lynched him/her when the nurse could have been a very important role for finding Mafia (and I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post).

I realise that some people feel that vote blocking has to be a Mafia ability. However, I would like to point out that lynching has killed more innocent people so far than night kills. Still, as I have not played this game before, I cannot really weigh in more on whether vote blocking is always evil.

Also, I would like to point out that I could have easily said that I had gone to investigate Noni, rather than to vote-block her, as Princess.ruxi only knows who visits whom. However, I think that dishonestly is just going to make the game harder for the town (which may have been a mistake that Moxy made).

Please let me know what else you would like to know.

-MrWaffles

Edit: "Did not know until after the lynch if radwulf was innocent or guilty"

To me it does not seem like MrWaffles is such a great threat, he's a cook after all, not mafia , maybe an evil cook who knows, but we got bigger fish to fry in my opinion. I am down to keep @MrWaffles around, but on ONE condition, namely that he proves himself innocent and targets a person the town decides is likely to be mafia. For now, unvote MrWaffles

[Sander]

@Princess.ruxi Did you have mandatory cleaning?
Another question. Does it say you could have been saved, or can be saved? Cause I always wondered that with Joe.

[phox]

@Princess.ruxi Did you have mandatory cleaning?
Another question. Does it say you could have been saved, or can be saved? Cause I always wondered that with Joe.

Joe already said he could only have been saved if someone would have saved him the night before. After he was able to tell us he would die, it was already too late..

[Princess.ruxi]

@Princess.ruxi Did you have mandatory cleaning?
Another question. Does it say you could have been saved, or can be saved? Cause I always wondered that with Joe.

I already answered these questions Sander!
No I did not have any cleaning. And yes the email did say I could have been saved.

[MrWaffles]

To me it does not seem like MrWaffles is such a great threat, he's a cook after all, not mafia , maybe an evil cook who knows, but we got bigger fish to fry in my opinion. I am down to keep @MrWaffles around, but on ONE condition, namely that he proves himself innocent and targets a person the town decides is likely to be mafia. For now, unvote MrWaffles

Hi all,

I am absolutely fine with vote-blocking whoever the town feels that I should block. You can vote during the day on who to block, and I will choose the person with the most votes at night. If no one votes, I will make a decision myself. If there is a tie, I will decide amongst the people who tied.

I should mention that I can potentially be blocked from vote-blocking a player. I also do not know when normally not being able to vote does not apply. If there are issues on any given night, we can certainly discuss whether I should be lynched in the morning.

I should also say that I don't know if the above is a perfect strategy. We might end up simply vote-blocking unpopular townspeople (as opposed to Mafia). But as I don't have another idea of how to both maintain trust and help the town, I am happy to go along.

-MrWaffles

[MrWaffles]

I'm ok for keeping Mr.Waffles around as long as he continues to target Mafia (aka Sander and the likes of him).
unvote MrWaffles

Where do we go from here?

We vote Mary (or myself)

Hi @EscapedConvict ,

I have now caught up with all the posts not related to myself. I don't want to vote for Mary just based on your word. However, if you want I am happy to vote for you instead (as you say it will result in the same outcome). Are you OK with this?

-MrWaffles

[Clemens]

@Gridfon

Even if you thought that I was a mafia player trying to defend an innocent to gain some trust (it's extremely stupid, but it was suggested by Clemens, so I'll entertain this possibility)

But it's not stupid, it's a common strategy.
It's just not enough to go on to split the focus onto you when there are other things going on still.


@phox

1. I do not agree with what you said about @zero , I am quite neutral about him and he hasn't done anything too grave to lead me to believe he is a baddie, sure there was one post where he wrote a sentence 10 times , but that was probably a joke to annoy @Noni .

I don't know why you'd label him as neutral when he was trying hard to derail the discussions with crude behavior.
Who benefits from distractions and diversions? You know the answer to that.

2. As for what you said about @Princess.ruxi , I COMPLETELY disagree, she is the one that I consider has made most sense throughout the game and has brought forward some really valid points.

I daresay the "most sense" would be exactly what makes her suspicious. Since so far the ones not making sense (e.g. Moxy and Radwulf) have turned out to be (probably) townies and dead. Further, perfect sense is pretty difficult to achieve if you're a completely clueless townie, since a scum would accurately know if someone is an ally or not. Regardless, if what she says about being on death's door is true, you can throw out all the suspicions against her as it would be a waste of effort and attention to figure her out today (demonstrated by Radwulf vs joesatri the day before).
Frankly, I would believe her on this since I can't quite see the benefit of labeling yourself soon-to-be-dead when you're not under any pressure whatsoever. As a last-ditch effort to survive another day when the game is soon to end, sure, but I don't think that's the case.

3. Why are you putting @Sander and @Rene in the same boat, when Sander has done much more to look suspicous and he was the one to have the final decision on getting Joesatri lynched a couple of minutes before the day ended? It seems to me like you are putting them in the same boat to try to get Sander a bit more in the clear, without a valid reason. I don't know enough about Rene, he hasn't been that active.

I didn't put anyone in the same boat, I just listed them as seperate entites in the same kind of category because I noticed them. And they swung in both ways.
If you want to be specific, I shuffled a lot of players together into the same category - namely all the names I didn't explicitly list and put into "silent/inactive" category. Because let's face it, there is an overwhelming amount of players, so I tried to condense the summary a little. I doubt you'll claim that I grouped those into the same boat for some kind of malicious gain, so why these two?

4. Regarding who I am "going after" : well I think it would be good to start with the last minte lynchers of radwulf and also with a role declaration from @MrWaffles (stop stalling please ). After we reach some conclusions we are happy about and act on them as a town we can focus on the whole @EscapedConvict vs @Mary but I really don't want to repeat yesterday's mistakes and waste so much time again.

Yes, you've said that already, and I'll repeat - so who?


@Princess.ruxi
I'm assuming you're telling the truth, so...
I wish you hadn't shared your role name and role description with us, as that was unnecessary information to accompany your NTA results.
This is information you have given to Mafia for free. In fact, assuming they infected you and you will die very soon, you have just rewarded them with information for them killing you off.
I would have believed your NTA results without the need for details at this point.
MrWaffles has confirmed your result and accusation against him, at the very least.


@behemoth has not voted once (if I didn't miss it), but also has not actually participated after day 1 (again, if I didn't miss it); seemingly missing day2 entirely and yet not having been removed from the game for inactivity unlike others. Doesn't this strike anyone else as odd?


@MrWaffles
Much like many others, I'm not certain that this NTA is particularly helpful to the townies when voting is precisely our main way to get rid of scum.
I do not think that you are a vigilante or psycho, as I would reserve that role for the hammer kill, for now. Since you used your food poisoning (sinister, by the way) NTA every night, I doubt you had the time to pick up a hammer.
I can get over your night1 and night2 choices, not much to go on early in the game so most choices are better than none.
But I don't fully understand this statement for night 3:

3) I did not know if radwulf was innocent or guilty, but I did not like that we lynched him/her when the nurse could have been a very important role for finding Mafia (and I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post).

You chose your target because you didn't like the last-minute bandwagoning - that's fine, including who you chose.
But you state that you did not know if Radwulf was innocent or guilty, but his death revealed his role before the night started.
So you already knew at the point of choosing that Radwulf was most likely telling the truth and innocent (since "Nurse" and his NTA do not sound evil at all - or does anyone disagree?). Does this mean you still thought, after learning his role was real, that he might not be innocent?


@EscapedConvict & @Mary
Killing a scum by sacrificing a townie sounds numerically sound.
But that's only the case if he's telling the full truth.
If he's guilty, this is a weird play - apart from killing Mary, the only gain I can see him getting from this is becoming more powerful by completing an objective of some sort.
If he's innocent and telling the truth, I would prefer lynching him to kill both over trusting him blindly and killing his victim.
Ideally, I'm not sure I want to kill either of them if he is telling the truth - since scum will not likely go after him at night if it means having to sacrifice one of their own.
Meanwhile, Mary has confirmed the whole "twin" thing, but denied the rest (which is a given). She has also shared that she has an NTA to find her significant other. This strikes me as important. What is the point of finding your twin? Is it to kill them? Is it to do something else with them? Is it to protect them because you die as well? And she claims it can only happen once, that sounds like horrible odds considering how many players there are. Also, what's the point of having twins from a gameplay-mechanic that have as only consequence that they both die together. That would be a horrible role to have on a single side (both innocent, both guilty) and would only make sense if they are on opposite sides and are trying to hide from one another. Or they are lying and have more secret abilities that they are not telling us about.



For the record, I can vote, I just haven't decided which way I personally want to go as this is technically my first day even when it isn't for everyone else.

21 players remain. 7 dead. 6 presumed innocent. 1 presumed guilty.
That's a pretty bad ratio so far.

[EscapedConvict]

I'm ok for keeping Mr.Waffles around as long as he continues to target Mafia (aka Sander and the likes of him).
unvote MrWaffles

Where do we go from here?

We vote Mary (or myself)

Hi @EscapedConvict ,

I have now caught up with all the posts not related to myself. I don't want to vote for Mary just based on your word. However, if you want I am happy to vote for you instead (as you say it will result in the same outcome). Are you OK with this?

-MrWaffles

In principle, yes, but first please explain why not Mary and why me.

(I explained earlier why there is a slight chance Mary could excape if I die)

[MrWaffles]

@MrWaffles
Much like many others, I'm not certain that this NTA is particularly helpful to the townies when voting is precisely our main way to get rid of scum.
I do not think that you are a vigilante or psycho, as I would reserve that role for the hammer kill, for now. Since you used your food poisoning (sinister, by the way) NTA every night, I doubt you had the time to pick up a hammer.
I can get over your night1 and night2 choices, not much to go on early in the game so most choices are better than none.
But I don't fully understand this statement for night 3:

3) I did not know if radwulf was innocent or guilty, but I did not like that we lynched him/her when the nurse could have been a very important role for finding Mafia (and I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post).

You chose your target because you didn't like the last-minute bandwagoning - that's fine, including who you chose.
But you state that you did not know if Radwulf was innocent or guilty, but his death revealed his role before the night started.
So you already knew at the point of choosing that Radwulf was most likely telling the truth and innocent (since "Nurse" and his NTA do not sound evil at all - or does anyone disagree?). Does this mean you still thought, after learning his role was real, that he might not be innocent?

Hi Clemens,

At the bottom of the post that you quoted (post #1050) I added an edit a minute or so after writing the portion you quote. It says: 'Edit: "Did not know until after the lynch if radwulf was innocent or guilty"'

What I was trying to say was that I was not sure either if radwulf was innocent or guilty at the time of the lynching, which means I can forgive people who voted to lynch with solid reasoning. However, I felt that Sander joined the bandwagon at the last moment in a way that did not help the town. Once radwulf was discovered to be innocent, I decided to block Sander's vote, because I trusted his vote less than the vote of other people.

-MrWaffles

[MrWaffles]

We vote Mary (or myself)

Hi @EscapedConvict ,

I have now caught up with all the posts not related to myself. I don't want to vote for Mary just based on your word. However, if you want I am happy to vote for you instead (as you say it will result in the same outcome). Are you OK with this?

-MrWaffles

In principle, yes, but first please explain why not Mary and why me.

(I explained earlier why there is a slight chance Mary could excape if I die)

I don't want to take either your or Mary's word on this, because the role you have described feels a bit strange. What I do not want to happen is that we vote for Mary, she turns out to be innocent, and then we instant lynch you. If you are lying (which I agree is also not too likely), that strategy costs us one extra townsperson before we kill you.

If I vote for you and you are telling the truth, you will both die anyway. If I vote for you and you are lying, I kill a Mafia member without hurting Mary.

-MrWaffles

[Sander]

@Princess.ruxi Did you have mandatory cleaning?
Another question. Does it say you could have been saved, or can be saved? Cause I always wondered that with Joe.

I already answered these questions Sander!
No I did not have any cleaning. And yes the email did say I could have been saved.

Sorry, based myself on Gridfon his post.
I think we are going all wrong about this then. Based on your explanation Princess. We firstly assumed Trigardon was mafia because he was blocked the first night and there was no kill. But I believe Joe was "killed" in N1. The virus takes longer than one day to kill its hots. So
Mafia targets Joe in N1 and he dies in N3.
Mafia targets Princes in N2 and she dies in N4
Mafia has targeted someone in N3 and we will realize that in N5.

Which makes sense with the "corona" since it slowly kills. In one day would be way to fast.

[MrWaffles]

If we were to lynch you, @EscapedConvict, would that yield the same result? If you are telling the truth, your infected twin should die instantly, right?

Do you know for sure that she [Mary] has no way of escaping if you are eliminated?

Forgot to answer this.

I cant be 100% sure since Daemon likes to mess with people's heads a lot of times as we all know.

In his response to me when he confirmed the basic premise of me playing for the town and Mary playing for the mafia, he also mentioned that my ability, what gives me protection from the mafia, is the fact that Mary will die when I die and then at the end he wished me good luck and said something to the effect of "let's hope that ability will be there until the end" (not quoting him, ofcourse)

Now did he say that to even things out for clarifying some other things for me or did he say it as a clue ?...Who knows

Nonetheless it does leave the possibility this strong connection between me and my evil twin Mary might be broken at some point.

But I'm willing to take that chance and end Mary sooner then later .
Safest bet right now, imo.

Hey @EscapedConvict ,

Can you ask Daemon if your connection to Mary still exists (if all the above is true). If so, will you then be OK with me voting for you instead of Mary?

-MrWaffles

[EscapedConvict]

@EscapedConvict & @Mary
KEscapedConvict & @Mary
Killing a scum by sacrificing a townie sounds numerically sound.
But that's only the case if he's telling the full truth.
If he's guilty, this is a weird play - apart from killing Mary, the only gain I can see him getting from this is becoming more powerful by completing an objective of some sort.
If he's innocent and telling the truth, I would prefer lynching him to kill both over trusting him blindly and killing his victim.
Ideally, I'm not sure I want to kill either of them if he is telling the truth - since scum will not likely go after him at night if it means having to sacrifice one of their own.
Meanwhile, Mary has confirmed the whole "twin" thing, but denied the rest (which is a given). She has also shared that she has an NTA to find her significant other. This strikes me as important. What is the point of finding your twin? Is it to kill them? Is it to do something else with them? Is it to protect them because you die as well? And she claims it can only happen once, that sounds like horrible odds considering how many players there are. Also, what's the point of having twins from a gameplay-mechanic that have as only consequence that they both die together. That would be a horrible role to have on a single side (both innocent, both guilty) and would only make sense if they are on opposite sides and are trying to hide from one another. Or they are lying and have more secret abilities that they are not telling us about.

Maybe that is the only way for the mafia to kill me without Mary perishing as well as a result of it. (maybe this is what Daemon meant when he said my protection from the mafia might not laat forever)

Daemon did mention in the email that if wither one of us is ikilled (which could mean knife/ hammer killed by the psycho?) or put in 0croy-stasis (lynched) the other one will follow.
But he disnt say if I get infected Mary dies too. (which is the 3rd known way of killing in this game)

So if we let her live today, I migjt as well be the next target on N4 if the above is true.

As things stand I am willing to vote for myself again if we all decide to go that route.

[EscapedConvict]

Hey @EscapedConvict ,

Can you ask Daemon if your connection to Mary still exists (if all the above is true). If so, will you then be OK with me voting for you instead of Mary?

-MrWaffles

I sent him an email. Waiting for a response from him though I doubt he will be able to clarify this for us.

[Gridfon]

@Gridfon

Even if you thought that I was a mafia player trying to defend an innocent to gain some trust (it's extremely stupid, but it was suggested by Clemens, so I'll entertain this possibility)

But it's not stupid, it's a common strategy.
It's just not enough to go on to split the focus onto you when there are other things going on still.

Is it a common strategy for a mafia player to materialize out of nowhere 10 minutes before the end of the day and attempt to save an innocent player who is on the verge of getting lynched? What about doing all of the above to save someone who claims to have a detective role (and does not belong to mafia, so is not likely to lie)?

Please.

The context matters. You're trying to conveniently swipe it under your floor rag.
Don't touch it!... Nanaa told us it could be infected.

I already answered these questions Sander!
No I did not have any cleaning. And yes the email did say I could have been saved.

Sorry, based myself on Gridfon his post.

That's a good way to keep bringing me up for no reason. The reason I asked the question of who experienced the mandatory cleaning this night, and whether they still feel well, is exactly because I was well aware that Princess.ruxi mentioned in her first post today that she did not experience mandatory cleaning.

--------

@Princess.ruxi Did you have mandatory cleaning?
Another question. Does it say you could have been saved, or can be saved? Cause I always wondered that with Joe.

Joe already said he could only have been saved if someone would have saved him the night before. After he was able to tell us he would die, it was already too late..

I think we are going all wrong about this then. Based on your explanation Princess. We firstly assumed Trigardon was mafia because he was blocked the first night and there was no kill. But I believe Joe was "killed" in N1. The virus takes longer than one day to kill its hots. So
Mafia targets Joe in N1 and he dies in N3.
Mafia targets Princes in N2 and she dies in N4
Mafia has targeted someone in N3 and we will realize that in N5.

Which makes sense with the "corona" since it slowly kills. In one day would be way to fast.

This is what joesatri told us about the mandatory cleaning, the maintenance department, and about him dying. I will only quote the relevant parts of his posts. As you can see, he was all over the place, but towards the end he convinced himself that he died because he was targeted in Night 2, not Night 1. Go figure.

I was forced to leave my room last night, for mandatory cleaning. (these guys mean buisness! mandatory cleaning...)
Not feeling too well, i went to get checked.. and it looks like this is my last day alive. I will not survive the day.

The cleaning and maintenance department is clearly the mafia (N1 kill confirms it).

Just to be clear, do you mean the stabbed transmisionist who died before Day 1?

No. I mean the murder weapon that killed AFTER Day 1.

(I do not see a reason to believe the above conclusion is true; not for the reasons provided by joesatri anyway).

It all started in day 1, and indeed, the FOOD caused this.

It's too late for me, but Noni can still be saved tonight.

The high temperature is the result of .. no doctor saving me last night.
It seems the NURSE did not have what it takes to save me... just a thermometer. Either that or.. there was no visit.

radwulf, your ONLY ability is to check the temperature ?

Sander, i'm gonna reply to your #666 post...
- to be clear, i will die at the end of this day.
- i got targeted on N1, with bad food, and the first symptom was - not feeling well - cannnot vote, and i had a chance of being saved by a doctor in N2 (which obviously, did not happen).
- i was temporarily moved to a different room.
- regarding your last question, at night, all abilities are perfomed simultaneously.

So, as other great minds have said so before me, there are probably 2 killing parties:
1. The department that handles Cleaning and Maintenance:

A hammer much like the ones used by maintenance personnel, the obvious murder weapon, was abandoned not two feet away from his spilled brains.

2. Somebody that uses food poisoning:
- Got me infected the first night (before D1)
- Got Noni infected the second night (before this day - D2).

@joe are you sure your dying didn't come from the cleaning order but it came from the food? If this confirmed by daemon or your interpretation?

Regarding your last question, i have gone through everything again. I believe my interpretation was wrong.

Food poisoning in N1 is not related to my death at the end of this day. I have been reading too much between the lines.

So it turns out.. Noni will not die tomorrow night.. unless she gets an offer she can't refuse: mandatory cleaning!

I was infected during N2. Not related to food poison.

N1: Joe is targeted and can't vote.
D1: Joe only states that he can't vote.
N2: Joe has cleaning and is called away
N2: Noni has food poisoning
D2: Joe states he will die, unless the healer would have targeted him in N2, directed from the infection of N1
D2: Noni, points out that is weird because it talks about a food poisoning and nothing else.
D2: Joe adjusts his story and says it has nothing to do with N1 but with N2 and that he will definitely die.

How the hell can Joe know that his temperature is elevated if there is no direct communication about it. He has got to know something that he is not sharing. Noni clearly states it says nothing about an infection. So what infected him, and how does Joe know about?

I know some think the cleaning crew are the evil doers. However, you have convinced me to think corona wise. Cleaning and hygiene is what saves people at the moment. If his room was disinfected, he would have not gotten the virus there. We know he got called away, but I would find it strange that the one who infects people, would call people to his office to do it. Though that could work well the idea of the cleaning crew. The cleaning crew cleans everything while the target is send to a place to be infected. But I find that to far fetched. That would also suggest two people need to use their NTA.

Regarding events you shared, i obviously thought that N1 feeling unwell and N2 getting the virus are related. Makes sense. However, I asked for clarification, and i got an answer, that the two events are not related.

Regarding the "how the hell can Joe know that is temperature is elevated" - that's because i was informed of it, and that I will DIE at the end of the day!

I mentioned the doctor when i thought the N1 has N2 events were related.
Since Noni got targeted in N2, the same way i was targeted in N1, i obvioulsy thought she would get the same symptoms and .. that she could be saved!

I'm curious if Joesatri isn't a mafia, why he came out with fever.

Because I got infected by the cleaning and maintenance department last night.
Fever DOES NOT MEAN mafia.

@joesatri said he went out to look for doctor on N2. I don't get this. Do you get extra NTA to try to find doctor when sick from bad food? But then again you said bad food isn't lethal, the fever is. Then it makes no sense to get option to visit doctor the same night you get infection. These actions can't possibly happen during the same night or can they? Aren't all night actions executed simultaneously without extra player input in between?

@joesatri before day ends can you please explain this?

This is what the story said in my email from the mod, that I was not feeling well, and I went to get checked out, and it turns out I am infected with the virus, but it was discovered too late.

That's what initially got me thinking about the infection happening during N1. Turns out I read too much into it. I was simply infected that night (N2), and was going to die at the end of the day.

[Princess.ruxi]

2. As for what you said about @Princess.ruxi , I COMPLETELY disagree, she is the one that I consider has made most sense throughout the game and has brought forward some really valid points.

I daresay the "most sense" would be exactly what makes her suspicious. Since so far the ones not making sense (e.g. Moxy and Radwulf) have turned out to be (probably) townies and dead. Further, perfect sense is pretty difficult to achieve if you're a completely clueless townie, since a scum would accurately know if someone is an ally or not. Regardless, if what she says about being on death's door is true, you can throw out all the suspicions against her as it would be a waste of effort and attention to figure her out today (demonstrated by Radwulf vs joesatri the day before).
Frankly, I would believe her on this since I can't quite see the benefit of labeling yourself soon-to-be-dead when you're not under any pressure whatsoever. As a last-ditch effort to survive another day when the game is soon to end, sure, but I don't think that's the case.

Mistrusted for making too much sense. Well, that's a first!

@Princess.ruxi
I'm assuming you're telling the truth, so...
I wish you hadn't shared your role name and role description with us, as that was unnecessary information to accompany your NTA results.
This is information you have given to Mafia for free. In fact, assuming they infected you and you will die very soon, you have just rewarded them with information for them killing you off.
I would have believed your NTA results without the need for details at this point.
MrWaffles has confirmed your result and accusation against him, at the very least.

This team has a solid history of not trusting townie roles and descriptions and lynching townies for the smallest thing, especially for revealing partial information. You (all of you) would have asked for the full info before trusting me, so I thought I should just save us the time. Plus, my role name would have been revealed tomorrow morning anyway.

Loved your summary. Welcome to the game @Clemens !

[Princess.ruxi]

I've been thinking.
I believe Mary's NTA has only one purpose as she said - to identify her twin in order to not Kill him and thus kill herself.
I see no reason for EC to lie.

[Princess.ruxi]

My current list of suspects is as follows:
- Mary
- Waffles
- Bombaaclat
- Sander
- Siderite
- Blissie
The other one was Silvextru but he is already dead. (BTW if he would have claimed the gardener role I would have voted for him. Gardener at the north pole??? )
I don't know about Telvek he has been extremly inactive.

[Sander]

@Gridfon ... Joe can be wrong you know. He could have been targeted by 2 people in the same night. Or do you think it's first come first serves, and no one else might be targeted...

I find it strange, that no one else has had cleaning. It doesn't make sense to me.

I'll refrain from using his name cause that is me just dragging in him for no reason.

[valli]

I'd like to point out this contradiction of how the vote-force NTA is explained to work by two seperate players.

Just got a email from the big boss and he said I had to vote that way and had no choice in the matter. Regardless of him being dead and all I asked specifically. I'm simply not allowed to ignore it.

[...]I went on to push for @Trigardon . Then I got informed by the mod that my vote has to stay on @Trigardon as someone forced me over night to do so and the email didn't reach me. @Trigardon was killed and I could freely vote again. (Clarified that with the mod).

@Bombaclaat is saying he has no choice but to vote for a dead person.
But @valli is saying that once the person is dead you no longer have to vote for that person.

So concerning this I was bound on the first vote of the day. I asked our mod after Trig was lynched if I still have to vote for Trig and that was declined by him. So if that is still valid, once we insta-lynch somebody, then Bombaclaat should be free to vote for anyone again.

[...]
@behemoth has not voted once (if I didn't miss it), but also has not actually participated after day 1 (again, if I didn't miss it); seemingly missing day2 entirely and yet not having been removed from the game for inactivity unlike others. Doesn't this strike anyone else as odd?
[...]

Yes, guess why I voted for him on D2, but not enough people wanted to go that way. BTW Telvek is pretty much the same...

@EscapedConvict concerning the topic with you and Mary, I would only vote for you as well and not for her. It's important to state, that I do not think that voting for you should be our priority one target.

[Gridfon]

I find it strange, that no one else has had cleaning. It doesn't make sense to me.

I agree. It's a big mystery for me right now.

It could just be possible that someone like Behemoth or Telvek is in charge of cleaning, and they simply forgot to do that on two of the nights. But that's just a wild guess, based on no evidence... Or may be inactives like them were targeted by the mandatory cleaning, and they are not here to report that to us...

@Clemens: What do you think about mandatory cleaning?

[zero]

@EC's claims that he left clues pointing to @Mary are irrefutable and his summary in #1004 is very much spot on. Armed with hindsight, I am a little bit embarrassed that I didn't notice them earlier although @Mary was on my top 5 suspect list since yesterday. See below:

All of you who aren't understanding the concept behind lynching joesatri and are instead trying to bandwagon on radwulf either don't understand basic concepts in logic or are favored by the prospect of spreading distrust in radwfulf's NTA because you are probably also hiding an elevated temperature. I am referring here of course to EC, Noni, Mary, valli and SilveXtru.

With the risk of blowing my own trumpet, it seems I was at least right about @SilveXtru and I am pretty certain there is at least one more mafia in that list. I guess @radwulf might have looked like scum to some, but it certainly wasn't "OBVIOUS" and neither was there an "OBVIOUS" contradiction in his role claim as @joesatri mistakenly claimed and which I tried to refute as best I could. Moreover, I find it a bit rich for people to blame @Gridfon for coming too late to @radwulf's aid with info. The truth is that it was a case of classic mafia bandwagoning and no information or logical reasoning would have prevented it. There really wasn't any compelling reason to lynch @radwulf yesterday and if we want to find as many mafia players as possible, we must look no further than the people who cast their votes in the dying moments of the day,

We must also not forget @Noni who was one of the main instigators to lynch @radwulf and conveniently isn't on the list of voters because she was unable to vote that day.

Anyway, I will vote Mary. I see no reason not to believe @EC bearing in mind the clues he had left throughout day 1 and 2 and the fact that I don't see how he would gain any advantage if @Mary turns out to be a townie as he would be instantly lynched today as well.


Regarding @MrWaffles, there are two confirmed NTAs which seem to influence the voting behavior of their target. There's the one that prevents someone from voting the entire day and which is claimed by @MrWaffles and the other one that forces someone to vote a particular player. Honestly, I find both of them not super town friendly but if I were to pick the worst out of the two, I'd say it's the latter since an extra townie "vote" would be much more useful to the mafia for bandwagoning than preventing someone from participating in voting for a day altogether.

[Clemens]

What I was trying to say was that I was not sure either if radwulf was innocent or guilty at the time of the lynching, which means I can forgive people who voted to lynch with solid reasoning. However, I felt that Sander joined the bandwagon at the last moment in a way that did not help the town. Once radwulf was discovered to be innocent, I decided to block Sander's vote, because I trusted his vote less than the vote of other people.

Thank you for clarifying.

Daemon did mention in the email that if wither one of us is ikilled (which could mean knife/ hammer killed by the psycho?) or put in 0croy-stasis (lynched) the other one will follow.
But he disnt say if I get infected Mary dies too. (which is the 3rd known way of killing in this game)

Now we're asking the right kind of questions. Her NTA must have some kind of point.

(BTW if he would have claimed the gardener role I would have voted for him. Gardener at the north pole??? )

Garden within the facility to grow self-sufficient food?

Is it a common strategy for a mafia player to materialize out of nowhere 10 minutes before the end of the day and attempt to save an innocent player who is on the verge of getting lynched? What about doing all of the above to save someone who claims to have a detective role (and does not belong to mafia, so is not likely to lie)?

You didn't materialize out of nowhere at the end, you've been around pitching in here and there.
And I didn't buy his cop-role, the way he presented it, so it's a mute point to want to save him out of conviction.
But yes, it is a common enough strategy to vouch for an innocent before they get killed off.
This is not to say that every guilty person will do it, nor that every person doing it is guilty.
I can reiterate your "defense" again - you put yourself in unnecessary risk by revealing you can save someone that might be important with a possible ability that is important as well. Except, you didn't actually do anything to save him. This does not add up at all. You didn't save him and you exposed yourself - and you're not dumb enough to do that. I am a lot more inclined to believe it was a facade.
However as I keep saying, you're on my list of suspicions, but you're not important enough to focus on right now.
More so if your role is indeed useful, I'd rather keep it hidden for now until it actually helps us.

I do agree with Gridfon that currently the infection points to being the main method of killing by the sheer numerical ratio, and the hammer was a one-off.

[Princess.ruxi]

(BTW if he would have claimed the gardener role I would have voted for him. Gardener at the north pole??? )

Garden within the facility to grow self-sufficient food?

Isn't that called a farmer? A gardener cares for a garden - grass, flowers... But maybe I am mistaken.

[phox]

@phox

2. As for what you said about @Princess.ruxi , I COMPLETELY disagree, she is the one that I consider has made most sense throughout the game and has brought forward some really valid points.

I daresay the "most sense" would be exactly what makes her suspicious. Since so far the ones not making sense (e.g. Moxy and Radwulf) have turned out to be (probably) townies and dead. Further, perfect sense is pretty difficult to achieve if you're a completely clueless townie, since a scum would accurately know if someone is an ally or not. Regardless, if what she says about being on death's door is true, you can throw out all the suspicions against her as it would be a waste of effort and attention to figure her out today (demonstrated by Radwulf vs joesatri the day before).
Frankly, I would believe her on this since I can't quite see the benefit of labeling yourself soon-to-be-dead when you're not under any pressure whatsoever. As a last-ditch effort to survive another day when the game is soon to end, sure, but I don't think that's the case.

First of all, she wasn't just a "clueless townie", which you already knew from her role declaration. Secondly, making sense does not make you seem guilty in this game, most often it's contradictions or stupid exacerbated theories.

4. Regarding who I am "going after" : well I think it would be good to start with the last minute lynchers of radwulf and also with a role declaration from @MrWaffles (stop stalling please ). After we reach some conclusions we are happy about and act on them as a town we can focus on the whole @EscapedConvict vs @Mary but I really don't want to repeat yesterday's mistakes and waste so much time again.

Yes, you've said that already, and I'll repeat - so who?

I already answered your question @Clemens , I said let's start with the "last minute lynchers of radwulf". (which we all know are @Sander , @Nanaa and @valli ).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@Sander I think now would be a good time for you to start convincing us why you are not a bad guy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@Nanaa can you please tell me why you didn't vote for radwulf the entire day, and then in the last minutes of the day, after we discussed and some of us came to our senses (both me and ruxi unvoted radwulf) you referenced an older post by @Princess.ruxi and said you'll vote for radwulf based on that logic. How does this add up? You like ruxi's logic but when it comes to her voting choices you suddenly don't?

It's clearly stated in the story that the virus was modified in order to be used as a biological weapon - you get the target infected, he dies, does not spread the disease.
It's obviously clear that Joe was a target. It's just a delayed mode of killing someone IMO.
What bothers me is that in this scenario I do not see the usefulness of your ability. The infected can tell us they are going to die...

Princess.ruxi makes a lot of sense here. Thanks for reminding of the backstory and clearing my thoughts.

Radwulf's useless ability bothers me as well. The only logical explanation for knowing about Joesatri's fever is that Radwulf is the infector or part of such group.

I'll go with this logic

unvote behemoth
vote radwulf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@behemoth don't think you are going unnoticed, it's high time you show up and contribute to our discussions, unless you want us to take higher measures. @Telvek you too!!!

Edited a typo*

[Emilly]

About @EscapedConvict and @Mary I noticed that they have identical roles: they are both volunteers to be tested. It seems too simple for one of them to be told that he has a twin brother who is a mafia. I rather think that they are both under the influence of some substances and have "hallucinations". It is my opinion, considering that we are in such a laboratory. To make sure @Mary is a mafia, I propose that she be investigated at night. I'm afraid they are both drugged and we're killing them in vain.

@MrWaffles should prove to us that he is clean and block at night who we suggest.

There are three people who undeniably chose to ignore my attempt to save Radwulf. Those are @Sander, @Nanaa, and @valli. All of them kept on posting after my request to stop the lynch, so neither of them can claim that they were not around to withdraw their vote and save Radwulf. Other people from the Radwulf-lynching crowd were showing as "browsing this forum" at the time, but they did not leave as much hard evidence behind, unlike the ones I listed.

Let's look at the timeline of the last evening.

phox: unvoted Radwulf 2h05min before deadline.
Princess.ruxi: unvoted Radwulf 1h29min before deadline.
<--- Radwulf is at 6/9 votes required for lynch; as the time kept ticking out, it seemed increasingly likely that he was going to survive the day.
valli: voted against Radwulf 20min before deadline.
Nanaa: voted against Radwulf 13min before deadline.
Gridfon: attempted to stop the lynch 10min before deadline.
valli: submitted a post 7min before deadline.
Sander: voted against Radwulf 3min before deadline.
Nanaa: submitted a post 3min before deadline.

By trying to stop a lynch 10 minutes before deadline, I revealed important information about myself (making myself a prime target for a night kill) in exchange for temporarily saving Radwulf. I decided it was a worthy exchange for the town. As for the mafia, they should have been content with losing an opportunity to pull through with an uncertain deadline lynch (as it could go either way in the last moment) with strings attached (revealing uncomfortable last-moment voting decisions), because in exchange they identify me as a valuable kill target. So I was quite surprised that they pulled through with the lynch.

One could argue that perhaps I was a mafia member trying to protect a fellow mafia member in a very ballsy high risk and high stakes play. But if that was indeed true, it would have meant that I identified myself as Radwulf's associate (in a desperate defense 10 minutes before the deadline, no less!). Eventually the town would accumulate enough critical information to convincingly lynch either me or Radwulf, and that would directly implicate the other one of us, resulting in an easy 2-for-1 lynching deal. In short, if both me and Radwulf were mafia members, then me vouching for Radwulf basically gives the town one free mafia-player lynch down the line. This knowledge would not go away, and there was no benefit in rushing to lynch Radwulf anymore (the expected course of action was to instead start the next day by forcing my role declaration and testing it for inconsistencies).

We can leave it here, or we can over-analyze the situation and carefully go through every possible combination that could arise at the end of Day 2, such as:
C1: Radwulf is innocent, I am innocent.
C2: Radwulf is innocent, I am mafia.
C3: Radwulf is mafia, I am mafia.
C4: Radwulf is mafia, I am innocent.
No matter how you look at it, you will conclude that denying my request to stop the lynch was extremely likely to hurt the town.

So here we are. There are three possible mafia members who could not resist the smell of blood, even at the expense of leaving obvious signs of reckless play. All 3 casted last-moment bandwagon votes against Radwulf. Out of them, @Sander stands out the most, because first he tried to pick up a pointless fight with me, and then basically suggested that he lynched Radwulf in spite of my request. So he's the obvious target to pursue now.

vote Sander

I agree. Even though I wrote in several posts that radwulf is not a mafia, he voted 3 minutes before deadline
vote Sander

Next: Telvec, blissie, behemoth

[Skuggi]

As things stand, we have several promising leads to go on. We can look at the players who bandwagoned against radwulf within minutes of the deadline, such as @Sander and @Nanaa. There is @MrWaffles. And then there are @Mary and @EscapedConvict. All of these I think are very suspicious but I think we need to focus now. We need to make use of this day and capture a mafia player (or more). As Clemens mentioned, our numbers so far don't look great:

21 players remain. 7 dead. 6 presumed innocent. 1 presumed guilty.
That's a pretty bad ratio so far.

My vote is still on Mary. Frankly, I don't see why EscapedConvict could gain from lying. If we agree to go that way, it is possible to de-risk it further by lynching EscapedConvict himself, if he is lying for some reason. Unfortunately, if he is telling the truth it means losing one more townie - however, that's probably a price worth paying.

[Clemens]

Oh, I missed this question.

@Clemens: What do you think about mandatory cleaning?

Since @Princess.ruxi did not mention any with her infection, I'd assume it's an entirely different NTA.
Combined by the nature of "cleaning" in a "corona" game, I'd believe they are not on the Mafia side.
I don't know if the "cleaning" actually cleans, though - that would define if they're innocent or a third party.

I already answered your question @Clemens , I said let's start with the "last minute lynchers of radwulf". (which we all know are @Sander , @Nanaa and @valli ).

I was just asking you to pick one first, who is on the top of your list of the late-bandwagoners. Alright, none then.

First of all, she wasn't just a "clueless townie", which you already knew from her role declaration.

Her role declaration was on the third day, which is after the first and second day, so at that point I can only asssume she's a clueless townie or an informed mafia since there is no evidence otherwise. Or are you saying you knew already that she was an important townie? You seem to be getting something mixed up. But you know what? Why are you even trying to argue a mute point on someone that I don't suspect anymore? Is it because what I said about her could perchance apply to you instead and that has you nervously defending your own standpoint? Seriously, why are you so adamant on trying to turn a wrong into a right so desperately when you are not even under fire? I will be remembering this.

Secondly, making sense does not make you seem guilty in this game, most often it's contradictions or stupid exacerbated theories.

And literally everything makes you look suspicious and guilty in this game - that is the whole point - so you might as well give up trying to prove the one or another without anything to back it up. She was not suspicious to you. If it was a 1:1 science, no one would ever lynch a townie.


Let's get back to more important matters.
We've got the late voters that certainly raise eyebrows. I agree that we need to take a closer look at these.
As I've already stated, @Sander has given me reason to believe he could be on either side - to spell it out in other terms -> that means he has done enough wrong to not get killed off by Mafia during the night, but not enough wrong that he has been at immediate risk of a lynch.
@valli has been in and out, sitting in the background adding in his intents - a little bit of a sneaky wibe.
@Nanaa has been too inactive for me to judge one way or another; too many players have been inactive to definitely say it's purely because of their guilty disposition.
If @behemoth doesn't reply soon, we'll waste more time. Then we need to make the prompt decision of insta-lynching or moving on to something else. This needs to happen a lot quicker than last day.
I've already shared my stance on @EscapedConvict and @Mary, how I'd rather kill off the claimer than the accused when it comes to unknown truths about this murder-suicide twin role going on. But before that, @Mary you're telling us that you're both townie and the only point of your very limited NTA is to find out who the other townie is so you don't accidentally kill them?

[Emilly]

@Clemens are you sure @Mary is mafia?

[phox]

@Emilly how do you know about mary and EC being drugged or hallucinating? Did I miss them saying anything about this?
@Clemens I wasn't arguing with you, just pointing some small things out, you're right we have the same standpoint anyways, regarding your question about who is on the top of my list it's the person I named first, @Sander. I already asked you once @Sander to convince us you are not Lynch worthy. Do you need a nudge? vote Sander for now.