Yitzi2

The source of my information would not be all that helpful to the village, and would be very helpful to the elims. By next cycle, I hope we'll have made enough progress that it won't help the elims nearly as much.

It will be revealed at the beginning of next cycle...and while I did PM Ecthelion, he has never responded, and indeed that is not the PM I am referring to. It's actually a second-order disconnect from Ecthelion (the PM was not about Ecthelion either), and only relevant in light of other information. Basically, it highly increased the credibility of a theory that strongly suggests the elims are attempting to protect Ecthelion.

"Fooled by elims" seems unlikely here, since you were the first to accuse Ecth. "Accidental mistargeting" is a possibility if Ecth turns out to be innocent, particularly since your logic does make sense (plus the factors I'll tell everybody next cycle).

@randuirthat is fair; I will post the info next cycle. I am simply concerned that posting the full details too early might reveal some information that the elims would dearly love to have. And as I mentioned, I'm back to suspecting Ecthelion, so now I will vote for Ecthelion.

Sorry. What happened was that I edited in the retraction about a minute after, but forgot to hit the edit button, and then later on noticed that I hadn't edited it, so I did it then. As for why the retraction: Part of my theory and then retraction was due to private knowledge that I don't think it would be good for the elims to know about quite yet, so I'd rather not post it. EDIT: By the way, if I were a liar, I could just say that I reconsidered two hours afterward; nobody had posted yet, so editing rather than double-posting would still have been the right thing to do. The fact, however, is that I reconsidered much sooner after, and even mentioned by edit (which I'd thought I had made) to Ecth in a PM. EDIT2: @TheMightyLopen I was somewhat suspicious of BB at that point, but my main reason for the vote, as I said, was that the vote was strong enough that the village had next to no chance of saving BB, but the Elims might; as such, my vote would very likely be irrelevant except in a case where BB was an elim. EDIT3: And now I'm suspicious of Ecth again; my original theory has become a lot stronger due to a PM I received.

Ok, it seems clear that the Hushlanders are going after Freeworlder librarians, presumably to protect their own identities. So if you are a Freeworlder librarian, it may be advisable to ask for protection and/or post what you've discovered so far, before you're killed. The Hushlanders' apparent concern about librarians also strongly suggests that we should not ignore that trait as Ecthelion suggested. In fact, Ecthelion is overall seeming somewhat suspicious to me (with significant influence to that decision due to Randuir's analysis last cycle, admittedly, but still). EDIT: I've reconsidered, and my "Ecthelion as elim" theory isn't as solid as I first thought, so Ecthelion.

This makes sense. In that case, I agree that the danger of elim manipulation, and the difficulty of telling it from an honest village swing, exceeds the benefit from getting in an effective extra turn. (If we could be sure that only elims would break the tie, I'd still favor a tie on the theory that it weakens the elims' main strength (the elim kill) while not harming the village's (numbers), but as it stands...) Cluny Cloudjumper EDIT: Whoops. Cluny Cloudjumper

The way I see it, if we lynch 2 suspicious players at the same time, there are a few possibilities: 1. Both are suspicious villagers. This means that we killed an extra villager, but would probably have lynched him anyway (and wasted another lynch) because he was suspicious. 2. One is an elim. The elims throw in a last-minute vote to direct it to the others. Now we have thrown suspicion on two elims (the saved one, and the vote swinger). 3. One is an elim, and the elims have Bad at Math. The elims use it...now we have a pretty good idea that they have Bad at Math, and anyone who doesn't vote in a cycle where it's used is suspicious. 4. One is an elim. The elims decide to sacrifice him to avoid suspicion for the vote swinger. We took out an elim (and a villager we'd otherwise have wasted another lynch on). 5. Both are elims. The elims lose 2, or lose 1 and soon another 2 due to suspicion. I'm assuming it's random who gets what, except for the librarian probabilities. @A Joe in the Bush, can you confirm or deny that each character has an equal chance to be a Smedry (other than the reroll if they're also a librarian), regardless of whether they're elims or not?

The thing is...unless the elims have the Bad At Math character (fairly unlikely), manipulating it would require a vote, and when the other one was then lynched the next day, it would be extremely suspicious. (I would not advise using a double-lynch if we weren't going to lynch both anyway.) So the possibility of Bad At Math being an elim does mean it's somewhat dangerous, but overall I'm inclined to think it's an advantage.

Let's use an example. Say there are 100 players with 10 elims, and for simplicity assume no roles. Just an elim kill and a lynch, but the lynch might target multiple people. We'll consider 3 cases: Case 1: There is no lynch (lynch targets 0 people). In this case, the elims have a clear win, since they've got the only kill. Case 2: There is a lynch on one person per cycle. This is the standard game, with a reasonable chance for each side. Case 3: The lynch targets 99 people, and the village agrees to choose them randomly. In this case, the village has a 90% chance of winning (as 90 out of 100 potential survivors are village). So we see that more lynches makes for a better village chance. Now, of course roles and the knight kill make this more complicated, but the fundamental principle still holds.

This is fairly valid, and I do think a double lynch will help the village this early on (as it reduces the proportion of kills done by the elim kill), so I am voting for Cluny.

I started a PM with _stick_ on day 1.

"Nowhere to be found" (about the knights taking out Thomas) sounds more like "because he hadn't posted" to me. Contribution crusaders, perhaps?

On the other hand, waiting some time (just not to the very end) can be useful in having more info. (I have not sent out a PM yet today, but probably will in the next few hours).

1 in 16 is because "all Librarians innocent" is equivalent to "all Hushlanders are non-Librarians". With 4 Hushlanders, and a 1 in 2 chance for each, that's 1 in 16.

Early-game suspicions are not really my strength. They could all be good; it's a 1 in 16 chance that will happen. Of course, in such case there probably won't be very many Librarians.

Yeah, if it's a 1-cycle scan, Freeworlder Librarians should indicate to trusted individuals what they know (or to untrusted individuals, and let someone know to whom they gave their role info), but not be too open until they have a lot of info to share. @A Joe in the Bush Is it a 1-cycle scan, or automatically known?

If we can get a complete list of Librarians (this is assuming librarian detection is automatic, not a 1/cycle scan), we get to know all the non-Librarians as well. Also, the bolded statement is not true. They are still more likely to be Freeworlders than Hushlanders, but are more likely to be Hushlanders than they would be if their Librarian-ness were not known.

Doesn't really follow. There are likely more Freeworlder librarians than Hushlander ones, and any given Librarian is more likely to be a Freeworlder. However, the Freeworlders currently outnumber the Hushlanders 4.5 to 1; if there are in fact 3 Freeworlder Librarians and 2 Hushlander ones, then Freeworlder non-librarians outnumber Hushlander ones 7.5 to 1, which is significantly better odds.

"Now that you're interrupted anyway, may I ask which novel? I know it's not one from these shelves, as those are all dry books about computers. Still, if you'd like to make use of this space to read, I don't particularly mind."

Don't forget, though, if the Freeworlders win, everybody on that team wins, even the ones who were already lynched or killed. So unless they're also knights or Smedries, the increased suspicion on them is far less harmful than the increased suspicion on the Hushlander Librarians is beneficial. (Of course, we should still remember that any given Librarian is more likely than not to be a Freeworlder, but only by a factor of 150%, as opposed to 750% for non-Librarians.)

Discussion: Should we ask Freeworlder librarians (if there are any, there probably are) to post a librarian list? (Or does librarian-ism need to be actively scanned?)

Wait, did Bridge Boy have 3 votes, or 4? Also, it is very strange that he voted himself for Lopen, but with his power for Orlok.

Not all contribution is done through special roles.

At this point, the only way Bridge Boy is not getting the only lynch is if multiple Smedries coordinate...and that is highly unlikely unless they are Hushlanders. Hence, I will close off that possibility by voting for Bridge Boy.