Werewolf - Game Over: The Dark Lord Rises

[Krong]

Argh... taxes... haven't had time to readthrough yet.

In the meantime, though, BoomFrog is right -- this is a pretty easy call:

Vote: Lataro

I know there are a couple of different things you could be playing at here, and you very well could be double-bluffing or quadruple-bluffing jester. Or maybe not even jester, but someone-who-wants-to-get-lynched-for-some-reason. If you're townie with some ploy you're trying to pull off, please kindly snap out of it... we could really use your help right now. In the meantime, if you want a vote for acting anti-town, I'll oblige

[Adam H]

I have 3 disjointed thoughts on Lataro. My first is that I always lynch Lataro. My second is that a jester-Lataro wouldn't post like he has. And my third is that I think Lataro is getting burned out with forum mafia, and is just trying whatever he can to make things more interesting.

[Misnomer]

Votals:

fearless (1): Snark
Snark (2): ForAllOfThis, wam
Adam H (2): t1mm01994, Angua
t1mm01994 (3): Adam H, JesseScottOwen, ahammel
Lataro (2): BoomFrog, Krong
BoomFrog (1): Lataro

Not Voting (7): CaptainFinglass, Outnuendo, greenlover, fearless, matt96, webby

9 to lynch. Deadline in just under 51 hours.

[Lataro]

I have 3 disjointed thoughts on Lataro. My first is that I always lynch Lataro. My second is that a jester-Lataro wouldn't post like he has. And my third is that I think Lataro is getting burned out with forum mafia, and is just trying whatever he can to make things more interesting.

Go a few layers deeper.

Truth is, I don't trust Greenlover being active, it's abnormal. Truth two is, I knew it'd get me voted by someone looking to take attention away from others. Truth three was, BoomFrog fell for the bait and made a classic low hanging fruit vote, trying to distract from everything else going on. Truth four will be, that if lynched, BoomFrog will come back anti-town.

[Adam H]

Well, if anyone is trying to distract from everything else that's going on, it seems like it'd be you, not Boomfrog...

And anyways, if either of you are trying to distract the rest of us, all it means is... t1mm is scum! Nice try, distractors!

[Adam H]

EBWOP: Oh, well Lataro voted greenlover before t1mm had more than 1 vote on him, so there goes that halfbaked theory.

[BoomFrog]

Truth is, I don't trust Greenlover being active, it's abnormal. Truth two is, I knew it'd get me voted by someone looking to take attention away from others. Truth three was, BoomFrog fell for the bait and made a classic low hanging fruit vote, trying to distract from everything else going on. Truth four will be, that if lynched, BoomFrog will come back anti-town.

Yes, I'm clearly trying to distract attention from others, that's why I gave my opinion on all the current fights going on right now, and pushed several noobs to give input on the same. Also, Greenlover has been more active in recent games, regardless of alignment. He was the second most active in Underworld and was town for example.

In a multifaction game your behavior makes no sense for scum or town. You're acting scummy to try to attract attention to yourself. In a one mafia game it makes sense to sacrifice yourself to out scum, but not in such a large, multifaction game, and not so early. I'm calling Dusk Druid on this one, have a nice game.

Unvote:
Vote: Greenlover

[webby]

The big problem with Lataro is that he often acts like this regardless of alignment. I'll consider later whether I think he should be lynched.

Boomfrog, why vote greenlover?

I'm sympathetic to the people on the t1mm bandwagon, but I'm not convinced that either tim or Adam H are acting out of character for them. I would pick Tim over Adam H if I knew one of them was scum though.

Sleep time now unfortunately, I'll look to post some real content and a vote tomorrow.

[Misnomer]

Just to give you all a heads up, outnuendo will be modkilled at day end unless a replacement is found.

[t1mm01994]

39C/102F in my body, but I kind of have to pump out a post now. It'll be pretty much just the "highlights" of my thoughts.
@ahammel, JSO: for that I have to read and I haven't currently got the focus. Incoming asap.
@ everyone who thinks I'm scummy: I don't understand why, when I compare me to Adam. Look at his reasons to lynch me. According to his most recent post it's all about one comment I made which I still claim is true.
He's had 4 reasons for lynching me, dropped 3, but is still very, very keen on getting me lynched; he even said that all this going on around this discussion is to distract you from my scumminess! ('cause, y'know, it's an excellent plan to all guard your most suicidal member)

But alas, I think I've pointed Adam's flaws out often enough, so on to scum #2: Snark. The entire fearless conspiracy theory was quite redonkulous, with only 1 tie being somewhat reasonable, and after that was pointed out several times he's still aiming for a fearless lynch.

Bonus points: Adam has defended Snark's theory, by saying there's no argument against it except for wine, and Snark acted quite grateful about that. I could think of a universe in which they're both scummy looking town that happen to agree, but Occam's Razor says I shouldn't.
I've got the feeling Lataro is being honest town, and that BF is anti-town somehow.
More bonus points: look at who the three I pointed out are aiming for: Lataro, fearless, greenlover and me. Quite frankly, if I were to make a list of easiest people to credibly accuse, greenlover is easy to vote for lurking, Lataro for doing random stuffs, me for my aggressiveness, and I personally have quite some trouble understanding fearless on the first go. I could see scum going for us.

tl;dr: Adam + Snark 1 scumteam, BF antitown too. Fine with a lynch of either Adam and Snark, will still be online several times before deadline.

[Snark]

The entire fearless conspiracy theory was quite redonkulous, with only 1 tie being somewhat reasonable, and after that was pointed out several times he's still aiming for a fearless lynch.

It's not redonkulous. I'll give you that DBC's tie to fearless was only "somewhat reasonable", but Mostlynormal's link to fearless is airtight. And two factions attacked Mostlynormal! Which means fearless could have been in either one.

But in any case, I'm no longer aiming for a fearless lynch as the people who agreed with me weren't confident enough to follow up with a vote.

So I'm gonna vote:

Unvote
Vote: t1mm01994

for 1. Grossly understating my reasons for voting fearless and finding me scummy for using basic logic, 2. Wanting to lynch me for a difference in opinion on fearless' connection to kills, 3. Being overly defensive and openly posting scum strategy, and 4. Linking Adam to me based on Adam (initally) agreeing that fearless likely had a hand in the NKs last night. If Adam is scum, I don't deserve to be brought down with him just because he agreed with me about fearless.

I think you're grasping at straws to make the votes move away from you to other people on the voted for list.

But that's just my opinion.

[t1mm01994]

Yeah, I figured that would happen... Something with easy targets, in my last post. I was wondering who of BF and you would switch first... Turned out to be you.

You know that by saying that 2 groups attacked MN you say that there's a reason not tied to fearless to kill him? So, you know, if one group not containing fearless has a motive to kill MN, why does the other group have to contain her?

On the "basic logic": explain to me how those ties are basic logic.. They seem quite complicated and overdone.
on 2: Then you agree with me that Adam is scummy! Yay! Let's lynch him first and if he turns up town you can have my head.
That's not the only reason though. You immediately doubled my vote on tlc, as if you were frightened to vote first (general scumtell). Then, first thing in the day, you claim that fearless is scum for IMO quite dubious evidence, that very well may have been planted by you.

3: on the defensive: I generally don't lie, so getting accused of lying pushes my buttons. Apart from that, I enjoy breaking down the attacks on me reason by reason, just like I'm doing now!
On discussing scum strat, I figured it was common knowledge. However, it appears to be that killing scummy people works to, so to the scum in this and future games: Kill who you want!
4: 2 scummy peeps, one agreeing with the other on a IMO indefensible point... I don't think it's rocket science.

With the amount of people's toes I stepped on, I'm a likely lynch today, so, when I've turned up town, take my suggestions into strong consideration.

[BoomFrog]

Boomfrog, why vote greenlover?

Greenlover - FoSs Snark for an imagined reason then "keeps the FoS" because "correlation=/causation and all that", which is a pretty terrible reason. Not trying to reevaluate the situation when you've had a major misunderstanding pointed out is both lazy and scummy. And seriously there's 17 players left alive why not vote instead of a wimpy FoS? Seems like trying to push a bandwagon of anti-snark sentiment while trying to avoid focus by not actually voting. I'm getting a strong scummy feeling here.

I did reevaluate the situation - I just didn't post my reevaluation. And, if you recall how I normally play, I don't vote that often or early. I'm surprised you think that would change with the number of players in the game.

We'll see if I can get an analysis up of the players later today. Also, I'll have limited internet access for the next weekish (out of town and all), so don't expect much activity.

Greenlover's defense did nothing to dissuade my original analysis. Especially the bolded part.

I was wondering who of BF and you would switch first... Turned out to be you.

Until this sentence I was thinking AdamH was scummier then you. I'm back to undecided again now though. Why do you think Greenlover is town?

[Misnomer]

Votals:

Snark (2): ForAllOfThis, wam
Adam H (2): t1mm01994, Angua
t1mm01994 (4): Adam H, JesseScottOwen, ahammel, Snark
Lataro (1): Krong
BoomFrog (1): Lataro
greenlover (1): BoomFrog

Not Voting (7): CaptainFinglass, Outnuendo, greenlover, fearless, matt96, webby

9 to lynch. Deadline is at 9pm BST, Thursday 19th April, just over 12.5 hours from now. As it is likely that I will be offline when the deadline occurs, I would like to remind you all that you are free to continue posting past the nominal deadline until I actually call night, as long as a majority vote has not been reached.

[t1mm01994]

I do not think greenlover is town; he's in the same "neutral/lurking" bracket he always is.. It's just that I tend to get OMGUSed a lot.

[webby]

Deadline coming up and it's tim, Adam or Snark for the lynch. It is again a shame that we are lynching the active players, I reckon early in large games it is a decent idea to lynch lurky-ish players who are acting a little bit dodgy. I know I haven't posted much, but there are far worse offenders who are getting away without expressing any real opinion. Having them alive at the end of the game is not good.

My preferred candidate of the three potential lynches is Snark. This is a difficult decision because none of them are looking particularly good, but at the same time all of them are acting at least reasonably in line with what I know to be their playstyle. On balance, however, I believe that Snark's votes and suspicions, especially in terms of fearless, look more like scum searching for a convenient vote target than Adam and Tim's do. Both Adam and Tim are known for being the type of players who enjoy creating chaos, voting for people and generally trying to provoke reactions.

I must once again apologise for my lack of activity, after my time away over Easter I had a lot to catch up on this week. I hope to be able to post more on day 3.

Vote: Snark

[CaptainFinglass]

T1mm, what does greenlover lurking have to do with you being OMGUSed? Sounds like a distancing tactic to me. Combined with all the arguements against you, as well as your circular arguements against Adam,

Vote: T1mm01994

[t1mm01994]

.. wut? BF asked why I thought greenlover was town, and I said that he wasn't. I said greenlover was an easy lynch, and I believe BoomFrog took that to mean that I think greenlover was town, which is not what I meant. You know that "all the arguments against me" currently consist of my vote hopping, which most have dropped, and me making 1 off-hand comment? Great.
Just wondering, where is my logic "circular"? I believe all I state is that his arguments change every other post, all arguments given are quite weak at best, and his vote is currently based on a comment that may warrant a comment along the lines of "you moron why do you publicly discuss scum tactics", but not a vote. Even more so: I think I've got second most posts/content in this thread. The odds of a line being able to be singled out and voted on are uhm QUITE HUGE, and as such a lynch being lead on me on solely that fact (Adam has confessed that that's his only reason at the moment) is quite a huge scumtell.

For funzies though: I was roleblocked last night. I cannot be one of the killers, ergo if I'm scum I'm on a scumteam, ergo I wouldn't have to publicly discuss scum tactics, I could have done it privately. Or you genuinely believe that there are 4 nightkills... In which case I think you're strange.

AH well. @ahammel: They weren't bandwagon traps, they were votes for quite specific reasons; poorly justified votes and the like, usually accompanied by a question. If said question is answered to my satisfaction, the vote disappears, hence what happened D1 a couple of times. Adam has failed to satisfy my need for justification (very much so by swapping reasons quite often), so my vote there sticks. On D1 I think Snark's strange for immediately doubling my vote for tlc, which he could have done the post before me too. Seems he was scared to lead a lynch for some reason... And I know that Snark's not the most insecure person, so that's scumminess in my book. MN's vote looks fairly bandwagonny to me, too.

Since I'm getting into pretty much kicking everyone's shins in, I'm going to lay a load of suspicion on JSO too. Put him on the same team Snark and Adam are on. Why, you ask? Because JSO voted Angua for badly justifiying voting for Adam, when there were much weaker votes around, and Adam "jokingly suspecting" JSO. Again, déjà-vu; these jokes tend to be "Oh guys look I think he's scummy certainly he's not on my team lol" which means the opposite. I think it's irreversible I die now. Just lynch Adam tomorrow, as he's most scummy to me, and if he's scum, follow up with Snark, and if he's scum, follow up with JSO, or whoever looks most scummy by then.

For now, I will try to stay alive by lynching my #2 target, because people appear to want Snark dead more than they want Adam dead:
Unvote
Vote: Snark.

[Adam H]

For funzies though: I was roleblocked last night. I cannot be one of the killers, ergo if I'm scum I'm on a scumteam, ergo I wouldn't have to publicly discuss scum tactics, I could have done it privately. Or you genuinely believe that there are 4 nightkills... In which case I think you're strange.

That's... interesting if true. It would definitely imply that I'm wrong about you being the only vampire. But for several reasons, I don't believe you. (1. you'd have to have some sort of output/input power like a cop/watcher/tracker to know that you were roleblocked, 2. it's an easy claim to make when you're about to be lynched and I'm sure you'd find such a false-claim "funzies", 3. you're scum )

I've hammered on this enough that you should know you're misstating my suspicions. Again: you are publicly uniting the different scum factions against town, at least that's your ulterior motive as I see it. And you are STILL doing it.

[Snark]

Alpha)Yeah, I figured that would happen... Something with easy targets, in my last post. I was wondering who of BF and you would switch first... Turned out to be you.

Beta)You know that by saying that 2 groups attacked MN you say that there's a reason not tied to fearless to kill him? So, you know, if one group not containing fearless has a motive to kill MN, why does the other group have to contain her?

Gamma)On the "basic logic": explain to me how those ties are basic logic.. They seem quite complicated and overdone.
on 2: Then you agree with me that Adam is scummy! Yay! Let's lynch him first and if he turns up town you can have my head.
Delta)That's not the only reason though. You immediately doubled my vote on tlc, as if you were frightened to vote first (general scumtell). Then, first thing in the day, you claim that fearless is scum for IMO quite dubious evidence, that very well may have been planted by you.

Alpha) Let's see what you've said/done so far: You've said my strategy was bad, and you've grossly understated the facts about it. You've tied me to Adam for Adam liking my strategy, and me appreciating that someone else thought fearless was suspicious. You've made it clear that if Adam gets lynched and is scum, I should be lynched next. My only way to survive (in your perfect world) is if Adam gets lynched and turns town. I'm not betting my life on that fact. It's ludicrous. So yeah, I'm gonna vote for you. And it's not because you're an easy target. It's because you're the obvious choice. If anyone's going after an easy target, it's you.

Beta) I'm not saying any group has to contain anyone. I'm saying she's more likely to be scum than anyone else.

Gamma) I already posted it here

Delta) I explained already that I had already said TLC was scummy in my analysis, but wasn't reminded of it until you brought it up. Then I voted. And I continued pushing that vote after you unvoted. I was in no way bandagoning or following you blindly or using your vote as shelter for mine. I was following a hunch. And being "frightened to vote first"? Give me a break. I refer you to my vote for fearless at the beginning of D2.

For funzies though: I was roleblocked last night. I cannot be one of the killers, ergo if I'm scum I'm on a scumteam, ergo I wouldn't have to publicly discuss scum tactics, I could have done it privately. Or you genuinely believe that there are 4 nightkills... In which case I think you're strange.

Why did you not mention this earlier? If someone verifies that claim, I'll change my opinion on your scummy-ness level. It's not definite proof that you're town, but it makes your odds better. (The scum tactics you discussed could very believably been aimed at other scum teams, who you were hoping to convince to target townie people as opposed to your scum team.)

Since I'm getting into pretty much kicking everyone's shins in, I'm going to lay a load of suspicion on JSO too. Put him on the same team Snark and Adam are on.

Why stop there? ahammel has a vote on you too. Go ahead and put him on a scum team with me, Adam, and JSO. And if anyone else votes for you, please be sure to accuse them as well.

[ahammel]

AH well. @ahammel: They weren't bandwagon traps, they were votes for quite specific reasons; poorly justified votes and the like, usually accompanied by a question. If said question is answered to my satisfaction, the vote disappears, hence what happened D1 a couple of times.

They were bandwagon traps a couple of pages ago:

Firstly, my random voting wasn't just annoying without any benefits. It lead to a ton of bandwagon votes, some very weak, some only slightly weak. Read into that, kill people with bad reasons, that should make profit happen.

I repeat the question. Based on the response to your D1 votes, who do you think is scum?

[Misnomer]

Votals:

Snark (4): ForAllOfThis, wam, Webby, t1mm01994
Adam H (1): Angua
t1mm01994 (5): Adam H, JesseScottOwen, ahammel, Snark, CaptainFinglass
Lataro (1): Krong
BoomFrog (1): Lataro
greenlover (1): BoomFrog

Not Voting (4): Outnuendo, greenlover, fearless, matt96

9 to lynch. Deadline is at 9pm BST, Thursday 19th April, just under 5.5 hours from now.

[BoomFrog]

I'm not happy with a t1mm for a snark lynch. No time for a long post but t1mm sounds like desperate town. I'm going to sleep now but maybe we can turn this around in time.

Unvote
Vote: AdamH[

[BoomFrog]

Unvote
Vote: AdamH

[fearless]

Vote snark
because I believe timm is more towny than snark and dont want to see him lynched.
because snark has been after me ever since dawn with questionable motivations (and because I know I'm innocent, duh)
because a tie is so much more interesting.

[Angua]

You realise a tie leads to a no-lynch, right?

I'll change my vote if it seems necessary. I'm leaving it where it is for the moment, but I'll be online.

[Misnomer]

Votals:

Snark (5): ForAllOfThis, wam, Webby, t1mm01994, fearless
Adam H (2): Angua, BoomFrog
t1mm01994 (5): Adam H, JesseScottOwen, ahammel, Snark, CaptainFinglass
Lataro (1): Krong
BoomFrog (1): Lataro

Not Voting (4): Outnuendo, greenlover, matt96

9 to lynch. Deadline is at 9pm BST, Thursday 19th April, just over 4.5 hours from now. A tied vote will result in no lynch.

[fearless]

I meant interesting to see who changes votes.

[Angua]

Also, massive FoS to fearless putting us at a tie just before the deadline.

[t1mm01994]

@ahammel: That was a side-effect, not the intended effect. The intended effect of the vote on TLC was to vote him for being probably SK, but Angua and $person joined him and they can't all be SK. Vote on fearless was for a poorly justified vote, which was well-justified later on, and DBC for a poorly justified vote as well. At the end of the day I decided that Adam's vote was more poorly justified, so I voted him instead. Me being vote-happy has a side effect of giving a ton of reactions on me, which can be read. The reaction that jumped out most was Snark, still. Mostlynormal is a close second though.. It's just that I don't want 5 people on my lynchlist. It'll only make the votes on me pile up... So for now I'm happy with Adam > Snark >> JSO >> BF.
And Snark, no, I'm quite fine with ahammel, to be honest. Adam isn't usually the hardest to read.. And I've made it quite clear what I've read on him so far. Me going after an "easy target" is quite humorous too, seeing how I'm currently full-on attacking 2 persons, and as such, being quite sure those 2 votes land on me. Sounds a bit suicidal, as scum, especially when you piss off 2 others as a side hobby. @Gamma: Still not buying it. You (who I view as scum) saying that scum wouldn't do what you're doing is like the BMW salesman telling you that BMW cars wouldn't break down. Sure, it could be true, but it's not very convincing.
@Alpha: There's another way for you to live! Kill me and make me turn up scum. But yeah, you know that won't happen, so you didn't even consider that! Great, point down.

@me not claiming getting roleblocked before: didn't think it would influence that much, and it would force another townie to claim if it had to give me any advantage. It would be likely that I'd still go down, and the townie goes down with me.

@Adam, claiming I'm uniting scum factions against town:

On discussing scum strat, I figured it was common knowledge. However, it appears to be that killing scummy people works to, so to the scum in this and future games: Kill who you want!

on wednesday, 7:07 pm UTC.
By the way, you admitted to it being just an off-hand comment at first, and turned it into a 3-page discussion. I'm sure most of everyone would have read over it if not for you posting it out that greatly.

[Snark]

@Alpha: There's another way for you to live! Kill me and make me turn up scum. But yeah, you know that won't happen, so you didn't even consider that! Great, point down.

Do you realize that I said "in your perfect world". I kinda assumed that in your perfect world, you don't get lynched.

----------------

I didn't want to have to claim this, but I'm afraid I'll be lynched otherwise:

I and Krong are lovers.

You lynch me, and you kill two townies for the price of one.

Please direct your votes away from me. Yes, I know that scum is likely to target Krong and I tonight since I claimed, but I'd rather scum have to use their NKs on us (and possibly have two or three factions target us, since none of the factions know if the others will target us, which will greatly devalue their kills tonight), so that town actually have a chance to lynch correctly today and not lose too many people tonight.

[matt96]

I'll

vote: Adam H

as Adam H is acting really scummy, and I don't like how everyone is moving on to either t1mm or Snark, and I am not getting the scummy vibe I got from t1mm in The Evil Auction, although people may have a case against t1mm, I feel like it was probably just t1mm making an idiotic off handed comment.

Considering that Krong is voting for Lataro, I would like to ask Lataro something:

Lataro, what do you think of Krong?

[t1mm01994]

I'm all for voting Adam, it's just that I die if I do. Lovers are usually 1 scum 1 town, so that fits in nicely.. Quite sorry for Krong though. Again, I'll be on before deadline and if I can get Adam lynched I will.

[ahammel]

I'm all for voting Adam, it's just that I die if I do. Lovers are usually 1 scum 1 town, so that fits in nicely.. Quite sorry for Krong though. Again, I'll be on before deadline and if I can get Adam lynched I will.

Sorry, is the bolded bit a claim that you and Adam are lovers as well?

[Angua]

I thought that at first too, but thinking about it I think he means that voting for Adam means decreasing the numbers against Snark, which, if no one else votes, means he is the lynchee, and snark and adam get tied. What he probably needs is one person currently voting for him to change votes (or 2 other people who aren't voting for snark or timm to change).

[matt96]

I'm all for voting Adam, it's just that I die if I do. Lovers are usually 1 scum 1 town, so that fits in nicely.. Quite sorry for Krong though. Again, I'll be on before deadline and if I can get Adam lynched I will.

Sorry, is the bolded bit a claim that you and Adam are lovers as well?

I think he is referring to the fact that he is currently tied in the votals with snark, and if he unvotes snark, then he will get lynched.

And I got ninja'd by Angua

[Adam H]

Hmmm ARE lovers usually 1 scum 1 town? That's interesting...

I don't understand the argument against me. Angua, BF, and Matt didn't give any reasons for their votes (I thought Angua was pointing out how townie I was until she voted me). I kind of understand the argument against Snark, but I think it's dumb and pulling at straws. And t1mm has given probably the scummiest defense I've ever seen. It seems like everything he says is just complete BS. So I'm not changing votes until it gets right up to the deadline.

[ahammel]

Ah, that makes more sense.

Well, in light of tim's entirely reasonable explanation of the vote hopping:

Unvote
Vote: Adam H

Because an off-hand mention of scum strategy (mistaken or not) does not constitute "uniting scum against town" any way you slice it. Adam's other reason seems to be the "yelling passive aggressive stuff" comment, which was perhaps uncalled for, but I really can't see what it has to do with his alignment.

2nd the FoS on fearless for tying the votes just before deadline for the hell of it.

[Angua]

Adam - the parts in brackets are often my thoughts on what you or tim were doing at the time - if you notice my thoughts in the brackets show where I didn't agree with you (talking about the post where I voted for you here). I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear enough in the structure of my post, but my reasons are there.

[t1mm01994]

What matt and Angua said, yeah. Besides, we would be quite idiotic to full-on attack eachother as lovers, wouldn't we?
Adam, would you particularly mind actually adressing anything I've said? Because I believe I took ALL your arguments and took them out, and all you respond with is "Well that's BS".
It's a fact that you have changed arguments a lot.
It's a fact that in one of your more recent posts you've admitted to that comment being the only reason your vote is on me now.
It's a fact that you admitted to overreacting to my comment; yet it's a fact your vote is still on me.
It's a fact that you defended Snark in finding fearless scummy; it's a fact I find Snark's theory unbelievable, and as such your defense fairly scummy.
It's a fact that you jokingly attacked JSO and not made a vote out of it.

I know you well enough to know that given that you're scum (Pull in the AU again), these last 2 rules mean that Snark and JSO are on your team. I've seen enough in the rest of the thread (you sticking on a vote for which you have dropped all reasons by know) to know that you're scum, so Snark, JSO and you are a scumteam. A double anti-town loverpair would be redundant, so I think this is townie + scum. Anyways, lynching snark seems quite redundant as some other scumteam will probably take care of him... But I don't want to die, so my vote sticks. I'm going to predict that Krong comes in and votes me, and Snark and Krong die this night, along with 1 other person. Snark will come up Werewolf Lover, Krong... Let's say Vanilla Town Lover because Lover is a fun enough role even without extra powers. If Snark comes up scum, lynch adam first thing.

NINJA'D: Still can't unvote due to 3-way tie on 4 votes if I do, and still the likeliness of Krong coming in and 1-upping me. One more vote on Adam and I'll unvote Snark and leave him for the beasts.