You should read "another" as outside of roles currently/allegedly in play. You should not read "another" as an additional role.....at least not to my knowledge.

I have stated previously my suspicions regarding such things.

" As I've stated already I've been upfront and honest,..."

" I didn't investigate flub last night. ..."

lulz ...(You're probably giving Lifthrasil a seizure.)

So weird. I do just about everything with music on, often even when watching TV.



And since you think that's not what is wanted, you're doing the following?


Wow again, trentonlf. You're dropping a bomb, then go offline saying you won't be here to answer the questions your bomb is bound to cause, and will just check to see if you're still alive before going to work tomorrow? Really?

First you say you've been upfront and honest, then you admit to having lied about at least one thing you said - is this supposed to seal it for us? Why and how are we supposed to believe that anything you've said so far is true, this last piece included? How are we supposed to trust you, when it's "I lied about investigating flubbucket, I did it to test JMich's (and flubbucket's) reaction; bye now"? Do you really think it's unreasonable that we don't trust you, especially after the... stunt you just pulled?

Why would an investigation of flubbucket bring a reaction specifically out of JMich? Does the Town result play a role, or just the investigation part?
If you thought he'd ignore it, as he did, what was the point of the test?
Why should we lynch him instead of you?
What exactly about flubbucket's reaction, and in what way, was "eye-opening"?
What makes you "pretty sure" he should also be lynched?
Assuming you're who you say, if you didn't investigate flubbucket, who did you investigate, why did you pick them, and what did you find?

I'm going to bed shortly, but I hope to see some response from you when I check in again (my) tomorrow.



When does "at the time" refer to?


[emphasis added]

Is this correct, or did you mean to say "would"?



Hmm... what should and shouldn't I do...


So, if such a role is in play, you think it has the ability to mess with the alignment of more than one player per Day/Night phase?

Last Dusk when we got Hijack's flip which differed from trent's report and the following Night when targeting/planning and so on would have happened.


I believe it's correct. My point is that I believe scum wouldn't miss the chance of a free mislynch and wifom if trent is town, given the situation he got himself into.

Don't think + wouldn't take the opportunity = Think they would take it (double negative).

I don't quite follow - last Dusk when we got HijacK's flip, the only thing that trentonlf said is that he knew that HijacK was "a bad guy", hence we weren't aware of the discrepancy between the actual flip and trentonlf's result. Am I missing something here?


I know what a double negative is, and I see what you're saying, I just didn't read the latter part correctly in relation to this bit.

Hijack flipped exactly what he said he will along with the quotes. Trent kept saying Hijack is full of it and lying yet the flip was claimed upfront which rings a bell for me. And it's not only the result. Trent's alleged knowledge of Hijack's bad-guy-ness since N0 was shared at the end of the day for no practical reason and it wasn't in sync with his behavior towards Hijack during D1. I don't see how this wasn't obvious to a lot of people (we practically opened Today with questioning in this direction and we still didn't have the Sage read).

So, I don't know if you are missing something or my view of the general perspective of things is distorted and I expect more other see the same things I see and in the same way. Probably one of these. Or both.

Briefly on

1. I expected JMich to ignore my claim because he is scum and a scum JMIch just wants the easy lynch and doesn't try to get answers like he does when he's town. So his ignoring my claim and what it entails was not surprising because I know he is scum and just wants to lynch me and move on. And if it's not clear it was JMich I investigated.

2. As for flub, it is brought to light that he has been read as town and his response is to vote the person that is saying he is town. If flub was truly town he would not try and lynch a potential town investigative role, especially one that is clearing him. flub is scum of some sort and if he's not I will be shocked.

I have no idea if anything exists. However, a busdriver could switch player's places with each other.


#2..... This is a false dichotomy.

See the way you've played so far. Do you really think I would believe any kind of claim you make without you being revealed as town? Seriously?

And you know that how?

Oh, I see. And what did said investigation reveal? Quotation marks? Mafia? Scum? Town Bodyguard of Arsonist? That I'm a horrible human person?

Vote still stands, and I am invoking LAL as well.

So not a "bad guy", but scum?


Do you honestly think this is a good argument to read someone as scum? I'm not saying flub isn't, consider my question as in a vacuum. Just because someone told you they investigated you and you are town automatically gains your trust? Really? OK, in this case I'm also picking up some stuff that can be used in future games I guess.

1. As far as I know he's just scum.
2. From my perspective it is a very good reason to read him as scum, his actions are not consistent with town flub. As I said if he doesn't flip scum or some sort I'll be shocked.

When trent did not share more about his results on D2, I thought (if he's telling the truth), he has some reason to think he would survive the night. So it didn't surprise me when he claimed a bullet proof. The part about not knowing whether the shot had been used gave me pause. That part seemed risky for someone who had claimed town investigator with game illuminating information.

I do think the progression of his reveal feels awkward.

Based just on that, yes, the likelihood that trent is telling the truth looks a bit dimmer. I don't think trent's claim about anti-town neutrals fits with drealmer flipping regular neutral. Trent's claim doesn't necessarily preclude a regular neutral from being anti-town, but it lacks consistency.

Does that mean he reported as scum and not mafia (like Hijack)? Or that he reported the same as Hijack? And I assume there were no quotes?

Current votes:
trentonlf - JMich; flubbucket
JMich - trentonlf

Not voting: HypersomniacLive; dedoporno; cristigale

Majority has not been reached.

Deadline is Friday night (tonight) Eastern Daylight time. Why does no one follow the motto of "Lynch Early; Lynch Often"?