I lynched you, you changed your current lynch to me with no posts of argument or discussion inbetween. If that's not what defines a counter lynch, then I apologise, but that was the order of events.
I was joining the train of joke lynches that started off the day and simply looked for a sentence to go along with it. I saw two lynch Walrus' on the page I was reading and called you a bloodthirsty dog, which was pretty clearly an exaggeration but I also thought it might be good to note so I rolled with that. I was quickly corrected that someone else was the first to get it over 2 lynches. If that doesn't tell you the amount of thought that went into my lynch (which is normally a serious accusation besides, y'know, joke day 1 lynches) then I dunno what to tell you buddy.
And definitively saying it wasn't a joke when part of my hunch and arguments against Dunsparce was me saying it was pretty clearly a joke, which you seem to have ignored, makes me a lot more suspicious of you.
[REDACTED]
...
So. Man, but I was gonna
rip on you in this post. Because
my order of events included "you found out out your lynch was based on a false premise, called it a joke and un-lynched; I made no comment; you kept revisiting your erroneous suspicion that was alleged to have been a joke; I lynched your ass." Calling it a "joke lynch" implies that you didn't believe you had particular cause for suspicion in the first place, which was at odds with your subsequent behavior.
Then I realized that the particular post I'd read (on my phone, for what it's worth), at the time, in between making sick jumps and tearing up fresh powder on my (totally bitchin') legal-weed-tokin', hot-tub-brew-guzzlin' Colorado snowboarding trip, that was so at odds with your earlier claims as to make me swing the lynch-noose over your way, was written by
Anatronman, and not
Andyman - hence the Australia reference. (Yeah, that it wouldn't have been the proper "AndyM03" in either case was something that never even crossed my mind, cause we've all failed to find enough other friends to use up effectively all of our free time for so long, falling back on this nearly decade-long circle of one-time pretty-amusing cartoon series fans to consume the gap between the demands of labor obligation, and any diversion afforded to individual social ability, that seeing "AndyM03" makes me think of "Andyman" even nowadays, and not the other way around.)
Also, I wouldn't say you ruined OPM Mafia with your catastrophic failure to realize your own alignment. That moment will go down in the annals of both forum meme and Mafia history, immortalizing the game itself by proxy. As the GM, I have no complaints - though, this would have been true either way.
Anyway. To business.
If
@AndyM03 ,
@Danny ,
@Dachande , and
@Cyonica are all on the level, then we've got four Mason-type roles outed here already. That's probably
half the Town or more, so I find it unlikely. I
want to investigate further, but there are only two reasonably reliable ways to do this: Probe for flavor details, or look at death reveals. Since we're most likely going to hit LyLo at Day 3, unless we successfully lynch scum at least once or Doc(?)-save at least twice before Day 4, the time to start using any information we've been able to gather is
now, and probing for flavor details is both against the spirit of the game, and pushes the boundaries of the rule against revealing character names.
...that said, I'm still going to factor some (inferred) flavor details into my consideration here. I'm expecting a RWBY and JNPR Town. I'm expecting that
at least one of the Mason-esque claims is legitimate, and probably consists of two JNPR members. The killfeed will most likely soon tell us whether the second reasonably-likely potential pairing is RWBY or JNPR; this is relevant, because (although it can't be said with full confidence, as the flavor of this game isn't necessarily strictly-maintained):
Of all the possible pairs of characters having a special connection that might translate in-game to a Mason-type alignment-knowledge type role, each Townie in the game can either confirm or rule out, based on the role they have, at least one of: Weiss/Blake, Ruby/Yang, Jaune/Pyrrha, and Ren/Nora. It's guaranteed that of the next three Townies to die, two of them will come from separate pairings. (Or three, if we're lucky.) It's against the spirit of the rules here for any player, if Town, to indicate which of these pairs they may belong to, but process of elimination will help determine whether any of our alleged Masons are lying from there. If you're a character in one of these pairings, still alive,
and at least one member from each of two
other pairings than your own was killed, then you're either one of the Masons, or you know that two of the four players tagged above are lying...
Or scum has been forced to nightkill one or more of those four players.
Right now, there are at least three other Townies, additional to myself of course, who currently have knowledge of: A) which of the above character pairs they're a part of, and B) that this is not a potential Masonite pair. Out of us four, one or more will live through the next three Townie deaths.
Scenario 1: All Masonite claims made were true. This is worst-case for you, the surviving non-Mason, yourself, since it most likely means that the scum has killed off the second character from your own pairing, and both characters from the second non-Masonite one. There are two more intact pairs, apart from yours, that could still be Masons. Each of the Mason pairs can trust their own partners, but you still can't know if any of them were lying or not. Only the scum know for sure that you're a Townie, making you the easiest person to lynch at this point. They just have to convince one of the Mason pairs to go along with it, after all.
Scenario 2: One of the claims was false. This means that there weren't four, but
six non-Masonite Townies to begin with. At least two of the surviving Townies can now say with confidence that one of the claims was false, because they A) know that the pairing they belong to isn't Mason-like, and B) have watched death reveals from two other pairings than their own show that these pairings couldn't be Mason-like. If the player who has the Ruby role, for example, knows that Ruby/Yang Masons isn't a thing, then seeing both Weiss and Ren come up non-Mason means that Jaune/Pyrrha are the only roles likely to have a Mason-like arrangement, so there are two scum players in the group of four Masonite claimants. Depending on what happens between then, and the next lynching, there could be one more or one fewer Townies with that kind of knowledge remaining when the time to vote comes around, plus two Masons.
Scenario 3: Both claims were true, but scum nightkilled one of the Mason-like groups. No guarantee of finding out whether the other pair was lying or not based on death reveals, but that's fine. The day after one of the Masonites is killed, the whole rest of the Town knows to remove the victim's partner from their lynch pool.
Mind you, all of this assumes that any Mason-like pairs would be made up of the duos above. It's a
pretty safe bet, but not ironclad. It also assumes
@Dachande claims to know
@Danny 's alignment, as Danny claims to know his.
@Dachande , can you confirm or deny this definitively?
Unlynch Andy.
