So, where do we even begin with this post. Let's try the beginning.
During the relatively early portions of the first Day Phase, Raikaria's votes and reasoning [72] are uninspiring.
Moving onto what I would consider to be Raikaria's first real vote [73a], it's a vote on PX for being unhelpful. Boring. However, the earlier statement in this post regarding ActionDan is far more interesting.
Early into the first Day Phase, Raikaria placed a vote on ActionDan [72] for having only one vote. However, in Raikaria's first real post [73b], he absolves ActionDan of all guilt despite the fact that ActionDan did not address anything about SB, PX, or Zakeri in his post [74].
Given that the crux of Raikaria's earlier argument against ActionDan [72] revolved around ActionDan not applying the same logic towards SB, PX, and Zakeri as opposed to BT, I find it strange that Raikaria's opinion on ActionDan changed so significantly when he did not address any of these issues.
Now, for a significant portion of the first Day Phase, Raikaria's vote remains on PX. This only changes near the end of the day when he changes his vote to Serela [75a]. And if we look at the reasoning he provides for voting Serela at the time, we can see the following statement [75b]. To apply the same logic that Raikaria used against ActionDan much earlier in the day [72], why was Serela the only one to be guilty of not being proactive as opposed to the myriad of lurkers at the time?
In addition to this, he makes mention of SB in this post [75c] as well. I find this statement to be quite contradictory. Whilst Raikaria says that he disagrees with all of SB's statements, going so far as to call them "wild accusations", he states that he still feels that SB is not a sinner and is instead diligent. I propose the following idea in response to this: Is this not a neutral statement that would allow Raikaria flexibility in attempting to determine SB's criminal record?
To quote Raikaria's more recent post [70]: based on interactions regarding SB and Serela [Two townies], I must say that Raikaria flexibility in attempting to determine SB's criminal record?
After this follows the DeLurk shenanigans [40] [41] [42] [44] which I don't intend on revisiting too deeply, outside of the fact that I think Raikaria's arguments regarding DeLurking are asinine.
What I will mention though is that Raikaria follows up these DeLurk shenanigans with a lurker vote on ActionDan [76], which means that Raikaria would rather have us use lynches to remove lurkers from the game as opposed to the tools provided by the moderator. This emphasis on using our lynches on players that we do not believe to have the highest probability of being criminal scum is a topic that I will revisit later in this post.
Now, the remainder of the first Day Phase with regards to Raikaria is largely uninteresting as it is him voting for Zakeri as he believes it is the more likely wagon to reveal a criminal [77].
Let us then move on the Raikaria's activity thus far during the current Day Phase.
As I mentioned in my earlier post [78], the only reason I was of the belief that Raikaria was not a criminal in disguise is due to the fact that he held his beliefs with such conviction.
Now, let us look at Raikaria's first post of the second Day Phase [79]. He ends up voting BT based on shaky reasoning. He continues to vote for BT during the day [80] for various reasons.
This is fine, this aligns with my reasoning so as to why I believed Raikaria to not be a criminal.
However, if we look at the point in time during which Raikaria changes his mind regarding myself, you will notice that, despite having voted for BT for a majority of the second Day Phase, he completely reverses his opinion regarding BT with no reasoning given for this whatsoever. This is similar in behavior to what Raikaria did with ActionDan earlier during the first Day Phase [73b]. To be honest, I had forgotten about the events with ActionDan and this is what began undermining my reasoning for believing that Raikaria was not a criminal. It is difficult to be filled with righteous convictions if your beliefs are inconsistent and susceptible to rapid change.
Following up on what I mentioned earlier about emphasizing using our lynches on players that we do not believe have the highest probability of being criminal scum, I shall state that I find it of interest that Raikaria spent a majority of the first Day Phase voting for Serela based on the reasoning that he was not contributing to the thread. During the wagon consolidation phase Raikaria was trying to sway players, as defined by Article 1 [10], to vote for a lurker after stating his distaste of the DeLurk mechanic. During the current Day Phase, Raikaria is trying to gauge interest in a motion for no lynch[81] [82].
In addendum, in response to the following statement by Raikaria [83], I shall say the following:
Don't think so highly of yourself, pumpkin.
[10] Persons registered for a forum account at the domain "shrinemaiden.org" and its associated domains have the right to become a "Player" in the game "Mafia of the Kaleidoscope" hosted by Bardiche, hereafter referred to as "Moderator." All following articles apply to all persons who have become "Players" in the game, by submitting a registration accepted by the Moderator, unless otherwise determined by the "Role PM", containing all relevant role information.
[40] Delurk is anti-town. Especially when the odds that it hits scum is only 22%. The only situation where I would support such an action is if we couple it with the Holy Night; also known as ##NoLynch. Potentially lynching a member of this Holy Congregation; having the Angels smite a second and then the Sinful kill a Third puts us 2/6 on Day 2.
[41] Delurk is a hideously anti-town motion when there is only a 22% chance it hits scum currently.
[42] I had managed to identify that Delurk was anti-town and should not be used.
[44] And yet, despite both of you acknowledging that Delurk at least potentially is anti-town, and PX has stated he is working on something, neither of you have given Amnesty yet.
[70] So; on re-reading Day 1; combined with events today, and combined with information that we did not have yesterday and the holy powers of hindsight, I have come to a new conclusion. While there are certainly misgivings towards other players, based on interactions regarding SB and Serela [Two townies], I must say that Dormio looks significantly more sinful than he did to me yesterday.
[72] Seems a little strange to judge only one neighbour, and not all thy neighbors being treated the same as thou would wish to be treated. ##:Unvote ##Vote: ActionDan
[73a] Lurking in the shadows because you have nothing to say is one thing. Actively spouting unhelpful nonsense is quite another. ##Unvote ## Vote: PX
[73b] ActionDan's confessions to me appear to be in order
[74] In my best attempt to answer the inquisitive Raikaria, I was not seeing much alignment indicative behavior at the time of my last post aside from a passing thought that polly-kun's first post had a town ring to it. I do disagree with his reservations about the impressive lawyerly ways of our Dormio. I haven't processed what may be sufficient content to get a read (or better read as the case may be) on BT/Serela/Polly/Dormio from these last couple pages just yet?but I will come back and do so. Let's all do our very best to find the scum; I know we can do it!
[75a] Unlike the other inactive players, who are merely guilty of Sloth, Serela is currently guilty of Wrath and Sloth. And as such, I feel it is time to change the candidate of condemnation. ##Unvote ##Vote: Serela
[75b] As Serela withdraws into the shadows; the topic having shifted away from him, my suspicion grows. The aformentioned confession from Polaris niggles in the back of my mind. What have you done except respond, my child? Looking back, I see nothing... proactive. While the Good Book does say let he without sin throw the first stone, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. And the little would-be waffle seems to only be returning ocular blows.
[75c] 7: SB - I'm unsure what to make of his recent Dormio vote. 'Half-Fine' seems superior to unhelpful or nothing at all. Also; while I agree with his suspicion on PX, I fail to see where the idea of PX/Dormio specifically as a scumteam comes from. Is it not too soon to be throwing around such wild accusations? Especially when one half of this combination has hardly done anything as of yet? Still; a lack of me agreeing on all points does not mean judgement of sin. Being wrong is not a sin. If anything, it shows a virtue of Diligence.
[76] So; for the time being, I shall pass judgement upon the other major lurker, in a manner that does not potentially condemn the righteous to a Day 2 MYLO. This is far from a final vote, as I have previously stated, my confessional booth is open all day. ##: Unvote ##Vote: ActionDan
[77] Late night typing in a hurry. I rate a Zakeri lynch over Dormio.
[78] Assuming that Raikaria is not taking refuge in audacity, I find it difficult to convince myself that Raikaria's opinions mirror that of a criminal. I believe Raikaria to be an enthusiastic, if somewhat misguided, player within this game.
I am of the opinion that, were Raikaria to be a criminal, he would be less inclined to continue following through with his flawed line of reasoning when facing the heavy opposition as he is now. Of course, this is simply speculation on my part, but speculation is all I have to work with now.
[79] BT frankly dosen't seem to be scumhunting much either; just parking on a D1 lurker. ##Vote: BT
[80] Also the fact BT is not listening to the congregation further supports the concept that he is not looking for sin.
[81] As another alternative, we could opt to No Lynch tonight; get more information via someone flipping, as well as use the extended Holy Night of Celebrations to get all out ideas and thoughts in order.
[82] Worth noting I am merey putting the option of a No Lynch out there because I'm fairly sure most of us have been fairly busy on this holy day, and have other thoughts than a game of Mafia.
[83] Very co-incidental that Dormio's opinion of me should change when I re-read and my opinion of him becomes more negative.
