Peanuts

Two dead traitors and all loyalists alive and kicking? So both the vigilante and whoever prevented the scum kill did a great job. Glad to know Jellico was scum, and even Ozzel, even though I didn't think so. That's going to be useful for voting patterns.

Does it? Wouldn't investigator be the better claim for a desperate scum? Even if there is another cop, they can't easily give up their role. Vigilantes don't have to.

Huh, this was unexpected. I'm not a huge fan of vigilantes, they tend to srew with the town more than they do with the scum in my experience. But it's unusual for scum to claim vigilante, just because of how easy it is to check up and how you paint a big target on your back if someone else is the real vigilante. And I don't want to lynch the vigilante. I guess it's too late for another lynch now, but I will still try Unvote: Ozzel (Actor Builder) Vote: Jellico(Lady K)

True, I was the one to start the vote for Jellico and I don't think there were any particular actions, I just found him overly defensive. I don't trust people who quickly hop on other cases, traitors in my experience will rather be eraly supporters of an accusation than initiate one. I don't trust Piett. My personal preferences are Jellico, Piett, Ozzel, Daala. I would rather lynch one of the former two, but I agree we need a lynch today, so I will Unvote: Captain Jellico (Lady K) and Vote: Admiral Ozzel (Actor Builder)

This is a very defensive statement, it seems to me like you reply to almost every quote with some variation of "Show me where I said x". Even when you find Captain Needa "suspicious", it's really just a defense to his criticism of you voting for Admiral Daala. I don't see the bandwagon, it's just three votes. I also don't see how three votes would come from behind-the-scenes collusion, it would be odd for the scum to try and start a bandwagon like that. Especially because I still think the scum wouldn't mind us not lynching today. By the way, I actually wouldn't be comfortable with lynching Shelby without some better arguments. I agree very much that only the scum profits from either extreme, but I personally doubt they would try to force a bandwagon early on Day Two. You are not even going to address the votes against you? Interesting. Some of these accusations feel like you try hard to make Admiral Daala's statements sound suspicious, even the ones where Daala doesn't really say anything. Like, of course everyone is killed for a reason, but on night one their reasons for killing us are almost as bad as our reasons for voting on Day One. And Dellus did indeed vote for Motti, for reasons I still don't comprehend. Why does that statement sound so off to you? I find you fairly suspicious at this point, and looking at Day One, you were also just riding along the middle of the road. These are some really 'safe' opinions: I don't like lynching active people, I want to hear from passive people before voting. Just enough that you can say you voiced your opinions, but not enough that anyone might take offense with it. This is all very descriptive. Yes, at that point it was likely we wouldn't have a lynch. We all saw that. And again you just want to hear from quiet people before voting; has this ever actually helped in any situation like that? Has ever a quiet person spoken up and contributed something incredibly helpful late on Day One? Usually the contributers contribute and the quiet ones are at best marginally helpful if they suddenly speak up late in the day. And you voted for Daala, fair enough. I find you suspicious, so I will vote: Captain Jellico (Lady K)

It's either because of her experience, or because of her activity in the thread. I believe she was killed because she was loyal, and her contributions in the thread were not high-profile enough to be protected that night. I agree, especially because there is no point in taking revenge over a few votes on day one. I tend to believe it's not her votes that got her killed, except maybe the fact she was voting actively. The better question is why anyone else and not her? On night one, she would be as good a scum target as any other loyalist around here.

Our Intelligence Director is gone, that's very unfortunate. I didn't like her, few people did, but she dedicated her life to finding and killing those who oppose the empire. If she's not a hero, I don't know who is. Well, time to read through yesterday's holologs again. At first glance, she voted for Admiral Ozzel and Admiral Piett, and was voted for by Admiral Daala. Fair enough, you did express that opinion. For what it's worth, your response to my accusation and vote yesterday didn't ring particularly scummy to me. Doesn't mean I trust you or anything, just I'm not any more suspicious of you than of any other Officer at this moment.

I found your non-commital statements suspicious and placed my vote on you for it, I don't see how that's railroading. Yes, you haven't said anything nobody else haven't said before you, that's part of what made me suspicious in the first place. You just voiced no strong opinions one way or the other. I remember reading a holo-archive about a village trying to find the werewolves amongst them. There was only one, and he was killed on the first day, before he could bite anyone else. Apart from that, I remember there being some games in which we killed scum early on, but more importantly I read about too many such games...of life... where no lynch happened on day one and we were just as clueless on day two as on the first day. I really dislike relying on those of us who may have actions.

I agree on Colonel dellus, at this point I see no good reason to lynch him. Inactivity is not a scumtell. I would still like to hear the reason behind his vote, though. Fair enough, at least the discussion has made Admiral Shelby speak up without saying anything, which is as much as we could get on day one. It's hard to argue with success. That said, I still believe it's better if we can agree on someone to lynch. Not at all costs, of course, there needs to be reasonable suspicion. But I'm still opposed to ruling out any lynch on day one. You stated why you voted for the Colonel, but your statement sounds to me like "I'm voting just because I have to, but if you want to kill Dellus, that's fine too" which is as non-commital as voting gets. As for being aggressive? There are traitors amongst us and we have to find them. Would you rather ask nicely?

So is it just a joke or a gut feeling you want to act on? Would you actually be comfortable to lynch Admiral Motti? This is a sincere question, I'm not sure what the motivation behind your vote is. Well, we have started accusing each other, and whether or not that will end in a lynch, it's a hundred times more helpful for us than debating lynching in general. Lynching will happen or it won't. I stand by my opinion. Only once we stopped having the debate about Day One Lynches we started accusing each other. Even if no lynch results from that, at least we haven't wasted the day. I find you awfully non-commital. You haven't been inactive today, but I feel like you said a lot without ever saying much. Like, you bring up whether we should lynch, but your opinion on the topic is just "There are decent cases to be made for both strategies". And now you emphasize you only brought up options. Why even start the discussion if you're not willing to actually discuss? At this point you only said there are 'decent cases to be made', but you don't make the cases and get defensive when someone replies to you. After some votes come in, you follow up with a vote of your own, with no accusation, again emphasizing you are not acussing, but only trying to motivate. Still uncertain whether a lynch is benefitial. Still non-commital. This all seems very middle-of-the-road to me, so I'll Vote: Admiral Shelby (Forresto)

Why bring up the option though? What were you trying to achieve? If we agree to lynch someone we still don't know whom. If we agree early on not to lynch anyone all conversation is dead and the traitors can fly under the radar. And if we keep discussing until we agree to disagree, as is the most likely outcome, we have wasted precious time with a worthless discussion and are no step closer to finding the traitors among us. Either we will be able to agree on someone to lynch at the end of the day, or we won't. I'm generally in favor of lynching, I believe we cannot assume we will have any more information tomorrow than we have today. Does it, though? Do we gain anything by discussing it?

So you are both unsurprised and surprised, Colonel? Even for an officer of the ground forces, that sounds confused. And what is your issue with Admiral Motti?

I mean, we all knew something was wrong when we replied in the confirmation thread were ordered to appear in the conference room all of a sudden. Still, I didn't expect there to be rebels on the Death Star, amongst the Imperial Officers. Did you?

Clearly, arcane mystic powers are no match for the acumen and rational reasoning taught in an imperial academy. That said, I am shocked that any officer could ever harbour rebellious thoughts. Even if they didn't see how despicable their cause is, surely they would have to realize it's hopeless to oppose the emperor? Anyway, here we are. Let's find these traitors quickly.

Imperial officers, being AWOL? And admirals too, this lack of discipline is the very reason why bands of rebels can continue to terrorize the galaxy. Then again, maybe I shouldn't say that too loud, being late to the sign-ups

You're right, I'd really want to have Lord vader's approval on this mission. I think someone should ask him about it...someone else. Any volunteers? Once we got approval, all we have to do is make sure there will be no rebels in the park. Such a resounding success ought to justify all expenses, right?

You know, I heard such amusement parks tend to attract rebels, smugglers and other scum...we should send a recon team to this Disneyland to ensure they establish no presence there. Obviously such a matter is much too trivial for an Admiral and too complex for a lower-ranked officer, but a team of four, say, captains would be ideally suited for this kind of mission. Of course, in order to blend in we may have to spend quite a bit, but certainly the information gained by such a mission outvalue the expenses. What do you think, Captain Jellico?

Captain Fenton, ready for duty!

So, I haven't really had time to write anything yet, but here I go. I had a ton of fun. My scum team was great to play with. And Actor's behavior made the game much more interesting. Something I have been thinking about: Most townies assumed a scum mayor would want to clear the godfather or a fellow scum member and that's why you assumed for a while Medium's townieness made me town as well. Maybe I was too much in a mafia mindset where you can get away with less as scum, but my motivation for clearing Medium was that he was the only one I had expressed suspicion for, and I was too conservative to pretend he's scum. Now that the investigation is more decided by public opinion then by the mayor I wonder what the best move for the scum would be. I guess if they control the investigation they can lobby for the godfather or one of their own, but if I play again, I will be extra wary of out-of-the-blue investigation suggestions. I suppose investigating the first investigator is a solid choice for the second investigation, if only because it means that investigating the godfather becomes a dangeroud choice for the scum mayor controlling the first investigation. I agree that communication should be in thread and alignments should not be revealed. Either that or go the mafia route and allow the town to communicate as well. As for alignments of dead players, if the town plays it right they can use them as 100% confirmed investigations. It's too powerful in a game in which losing team members is not as big a problem as in mafia. Just my 2 cents. Otherwise it was a great game, thanks for hosting, Bob. I'll see whether I can play in the next game. The days were slow in this one, so it was not a problem for me. But I will be busy in the near future, and if the game speeds up, I might not be able to keep up.

Oh, I can vote! No. Ralph has been acting scummy so far, I don' trust him. And I will not vote for any TCC other than myself, because I know I am town and trust nobody else. Yay for demcracy!

No objection, I think you made a good choice. Go ahead Well, the good news is you guys still have Anne as a confirmed townie. Oh, wait, she's dead Poor her. Does anyone remember the time when two people killed a policeman in this town? This town really has an eventful past, doesn't it? I will. I promise your death won't be in vain I lied Sorry if I'm unsportsmanlike, there's just nothing else I can do at this point.

Ah drat. There's no message. I made it up. And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling townies... It's okay though, we live in a town where maximum penalty is being sent to exile. It was nice known y'all, but you are terrible neighbours.

Think about it. We have one kill left. If the scum gets hold of it, we have no more chance to kill the godfather. Our only winning plan then is to pass two out of the town policies left in the deck. It's better to get the guaranteed victory now than to take any chances. You know I'm town. I investigated Anne as town and you know I was truthful. So you should know I am not lying about Ralph claiming to be the godfather. So you deny it? Well, of course you do, I expected that. But seriously, why would I lie about it?

So, I received one town and one scum from Robert. It's more likely that the third card was a scum card, so he is legitimate. We should trust him. Now, here's the thing: I discarded the town policy and enacted the scum one. Well, sorry about that, but something came up: someone contacted me claiming to be the godfather. By that time, the government was passed already. I could not discuss it in thread anymore. We have a mayor I trust, so this is the chance to win the game. I would rather not risk the scum getting their hands on the kill ability instead, and potentially turn the game around. That's why I passed the scum policy. No idea why everyone hates you. Maybe it's because you told everyone I am scum? Or the fact that you did nothing to help us? Oh, it may be the fact that you told me you are the godfather. As to why Ralph thought I was scum, I am stumped. So, apparently this is the deal: He said he investigated Lindsey and found her to be town. Due to pressure in the thread he claimed to have investigated me instead, and pretended I am scum to see how I react. And for some reason my reaction made him think I am scum, so he claimed to me. I won't pretend I understand it. But it happened. We townies pretty much won this game. Now all we need is for Robert to kill Ralph.

Though there is a difference between the fourth and the fifth scum policy passed. And, of course, the target. I guess the scum wasn't overly reluctant to kill Anne, at least the investigated townie is dead. And if they had opposed the public yesterday, they still would have had to pass two more policies, while after the fifth they might be close enough to winning that killing a proactive townie might be more beneficial than playing town. Especially if the latter means killing one of their own. And after the fifth scum policy there are no kills left, so there is less room for punishment even if the godfather is known to us. Either way, I don't really believe you will discard a town policy, otherwise I wouldn't vote yes, obviously. Let's just hope for the best.