Generally, it’s first come first served for nominations. I’ll go ahead and run with this one after I process the result of the first vote, but my hope is that we don’t have serial escalation of preemptive nominations as time goes on.
YES Votes for the execution of @Juan_Raigada: 2
2 does not meet the threshold of 4, @Juan_Raigada is safe today.
Lantz whispers to Knightsaber.
We get arguments for as well, right?
You can all keep yelling at discussing with each other in-thread for as long as you like
I would like to add my for argument:
Jostly seems like a reasonable person to execute because we need to try and narrow down if the Casey/Jostly pair is legitimate outsiders. Casey has declared a role that is very risky for us to go after, so Jostly seems like the best course of action since a report on his role, while potentially obfuscating, can hopefully provide a little insight into what is going on. Exactly how depends on what information people trust.
I am obviously biased in this conversation, because my obvious internal answer is that I am not evil.
But my general thought as far as the larger game is that I quickly declared a pretty mediocre role and he took his time to declare a more powerful role. I don’t know what other info people are sitting on that might have swayed them.
Also, I am always good.
I can’t speak for everyone else, but for me, I thought it more likely that @Matt_W was bluffing than that @Lantz was, and I thought that based on how quickly they announced their roles (whether they took time to rule out a double claim possibility or not) and which roles they claimed. Lantz came out of the gate with middling role and offered up the information he had right away. Matt, on the other hand, first claimed he had info (which he did not disclose) and only claimed a role later when challenged, and claimed a role which came with a kind of immunity from execution. It just seemed off to me.
Was it right? Dave says so, but is he telling the truth?
Again, the rules on the Undertaker and Recluse are less than clear. In the Undertaker wiki, it first gives this example:
The Drunk, who thinks they are the Virgin, is executed today. At night, the Undertaker is shown the Drunk token, because the Undertaker learns a player’s true character, as opposed to the one they believe they are.
But later in the Undertaker section, it says this:
Beware the Spy and the Recluse! They will likely register to you as good and evil characters respectively, as their abilities continue to function even when they are dead.
I take from this that we will likely learn nothing at all from Jostly’s death.
Lantz responds
The Spy/Recluse are special in that they can a) appear to be other roles and b) continue to do so even if they are dead.
The drunk is always considered the drunk, and always shows up as the drunk when checked, even if the player who is the drunk believes otherwise.
KS phones scottagibson.
Edit, I meant scott, not Lantz.
Nah, I’ve presented what I know publicly. You know I’m not gonna stop until I learn the truth, so if you want to kill me to stop me nominating more people I believe are evil, go ahead. :) You all know who I’m going to nominate before I drop, but after that I’m out of ideas, so might as well bite the bullet (literally) if that helps the good team.
Now voting on the execution of @jostly
Vote in thread, YES to execute @jostly, NO to spare @jostly from execution.
With 7 players alive, 4 YES votes are required to execute.
I’ll start with a big fat NO :)
I’m still going to abstain.
If Jostly is good, we learn nothing by killing him. If anything, we probably get confused by the false report that he’s evil which would result from examining the corpse of the Recluse. We would not be able to tell the difference between dead good Jostly and dead bad Jostly. He would remain, as he as been, an enigma. Although probably he would get the bath he so badly needs.
I abstain.