A user of this :
I'm not convinced that's true, or even good evidence if it is true. I will admit, I don't come here for much other than mafia since the chatroom got changed to the one we have now. And I come here more often for day rounds in case someone has evidence or acts suspiciously.

I guess I'll FoS User for using wonky evidence, although in my experience the people to make careless accusations are more often Fools or foolish townspeople, so I'm still voting no kill for now.

NovemberJoy :
It seems as though there may be only one role left with the ability to kill at night. If that's the case, it's better to avoid killing people without evidence for now, since we have quite a few nights left to gather information at a rate of one death per night.

In fact, I'm thinking it may soon be time to have people start claiming roles so we can weed out who's innocent and who's headed for the noose... Maybe a while longer.

legacyme3 :
I thought this was going to be your last game, anyways.

It seems like townies who have night roles have yet to get any real evidence on anyone, and the rest of  are either bystanders waiting for evidence or not town-aligned. I kind of appreciate it. Maybe this is the kind of cautious playing that comes with a group of people who all have experience. Personally, I'd find it much more satisfying to wait and be pretty sure about a lynching than to get lucky and happen to lynch a mafia based on no evidence at all.

Frodlex :
Mafia's ideal scenarios go like this: 1. Surreptitiously convince townspeople to vote for innocent players without making themselves appear suspicious or risking their own lives. 2. Let no one be lynched during the day round, in order to continue killing at night without risk to any of their members. 3. (worst case scenario) Get found out and lynched by town.

1 could be very difficult to do, since as soon as a player makes an accusation and votes for a death, we will all suspect that player. Even if the accuser does get us to kill a townsperson, they'll be at risk the next day round after we learned that they convinced us to lynch an innocent person.
2 is much easier to do, and is by far the best way to stay in the game, so on that point you are correct. It IS the best move for mafia members. This is NOT, however, the scenario they have the most to gain from. 1 is best for them.

However, just because it's smart for mafia members to allow no one to get lynched doesn't mean it's smart for us townsfolk to try to lynch a random. If town decides it's fine to lynch without good evidence, then it makes it WAY easier to pull off scenario #1 and help to get an innocent person lynched. So, until someone brings up some evidence we should just avoid killing anyone and let whatever night town roles are present do their best to get some evidence against the mafia.

legacyme3 :
Could we clear up the double kill rules a little? Suppose the vote turns out like this:
No Kill: 13
Snowdeath : 2
Morsalbus : 1
Would Snow be the only person to die, because "no kill" is the first place vote? Or is Snowdeath the first place vote, and Morsalbus the second place vote, because kill votes take precedence over no kill? For some reason I have been supposing the latter was true, but Frodlex's vote makes sense looking at it the first way.

Surgiac :
That may be true, and if it's true, we all lose nothing by letting her kill herself. Personally, I suspect she's simply not a very exciting role and wants to get things over with. Whether she's town, mafia, or third party, there's no reason to keep her from dying since she won't be any good to any of us. Frodlex has voted for her as well out of "self-preservation" but the fact of the matter is that it would still only take one vote for him to die as well (being a doube death day), so I'm not sure I see the point there.

Ultimately there's not much changed here at all, and it's still in both town's and Mafia's best interest to stay on the no kill, as I explained earlier.

Side note: Part of the reason I think Snow is not the Fool, and indeed that there is no Fool this round, is because I'd like to think Leggy isn't stupid enough to start a mafia game with a fool and then have a day round where they can easily lynch themselves on the first day.

Frodlex :
That was my first thought as well, but really any mafia member who waits until the last second and then tries to lynch an innocent will be taking a pretty serious risk to their own livelihood. I'm planning on staying on and monitoring for kill votes and I'm ready to quickly change my vote if someone tries that, but even if we don't act fast enough to kill the voter, we will suspect them, and most likely lynch them next round. On the other hand, if we pretend it's reasonable at this stage to lynch without evidence then we risk killing an important town role. So strangely, it seems to me that it's in both the mafia's and the town's best interest to keep the No Kill votes going strong.

I'm voting no kill as well. Funny thing is I wanted to do that from the beginning, but I was waiting in case someone ended up voting without giving good evidence, in which case I was going to vote for the accuser. Luckily I re-read Leggy's post and realized I can still change my vote if that happens.

maguc:
Kind of surprised to see that you're the one posting this :p

I guess I'll take the time to address this as one of Vizzed's only remaining feminists, and basically every other -ist this site's users generally oppose. Its worth noting that I, and most other feminists, in fact, do consider these gender norms shoved onto men and boys to be a problem. I sympathize with it, and I am in favor of breaking down gender norms and stereotypes on all sides, and not only for the benefit of women, as many of feminism's online detractors might suppose, but for all people. I think men should be totally unobstructed socially and legally from becoming a nurse, or a teacher, or the guardian of their children should they prove the more capable parents. I'm going to be defending feminism a lot here, so I'll ask you all to try and keep in mind that in doing so I'm not "siding with the feminazis" and supporting sexism against men, but explaining that feminism is actually not responsible for most of these things, and in fact is against them.


So let's look at what I consider the more important issues regarding men that you've mentioned:

"Up until the age of 8 or 9, boys cry the same amount as girls... then they get taught to stop. They're not allowed anymore. And it's ridiculous! And this fear of looking weak, or looking feminine or gay is stopping men from talking about their feelings."
This is indeed a common emotional problem that affects men. Myself included, even! 

"Women get costudy of the child the majority of the time, even when the father is more qualified than the mother, because "A child needs her mom"."
Pretty straightforward sexism here, and I'm against it. And this is definitely common in courts across America.

"Men are told they are expandable. Disposable. A guy being raped is seen as a laughing matter. A guy being domestically abused? "Probably deserves it". It's disgusting. "
These attitudes, while I rarely see them, are definitely bad, and I'd prefer they were even less common.

Now, these are all grievances you've listed that I'd say are not at all related to feminism. Feminist activism has never been responsible for these social issues, and in fact feminists generally oppose these policies and attitudes.
As a rule, people who go around telling young boys to suck it up, and "don't cry or I'll give you something to cry about" are NOT feminists, but their own parents (I'd even say it's mostly fathers), and fellow children.
When it comes to custody, courts tending to give women custody more often than men used to be because of the old idea that "a child should be with their mother", but that has been fading as a legal rock to stand on. So why are mothers still so much more likely to gain custody? Part of it is still sexism, but another part is the fact that courts favor the parent who has been the "primary caregiver". That means the parent who has spent more time bathing, feeding, watching, putting them to bed, going through the morning routine, all the day-to-day minutia of childcare. And unfortunately, (if you're like me and think those responsibilities should be mostly equally
shared) the mother is still much more likely than the father to be the one who performs those duties while the couple is still married.
As for people laughing at and looking down on male rape victims, I'd once again say the main perpetrators of this are not feminists at all, but good old-fashioned conservatives.


What all those problems have in common is that feminist beliefs actually discourage or oppose them. 

As for whatever some random tumblr kids are doing... I don't approve of a lot of it, but I don't think any of it is prominent in the real world, and in fact the only times I've ever heard about them have been when anti-feminists from reddit or 4chan dig them up to show how "feminism has gone TOO FAR."  I don't see the point of bringing up some random blogs as though they are anywhere close to the importance or popularity of the problems we have with gender roles in our society in general.

"And this is all from the past few years. After all, when you teach women that every single man is their opressor, how can you not hate them?"
Speaking as a feminist, I don't hate all men or think they are all oppressors, and I'm sure the vast majority of girls don't feel that way either. What needs to be done about these problems isn't to complain about or attack feminism as if it caused them. Those problems have all been here much longer than feminism has.

legacyme3 :  
It's a three-day night round, right? What's the holdup?

Gamin'Gal :  
Third time's the charm?

Sure, I can always make time for a little mystery, murder, or mayhem. It's been a while.

I'm so sorry this happened to you, Makayla. We never should have linked you to this website. The Skype group was bad enough.
P.S: PM me I'm on mobile and clicking your name is too hard and takes too long

Double posted please remove D:

I'm not sure I see the point of these Pokemon posts. Anyone who wants to know about Pokemon moves, abilities, and natures can just look up the bulbapedia page about them. The part where you explained all the natures was particularly odd, since those same natures are available and indeed result in the same stat changes for all Pokemon, not just Tropius. If you're gonna do this for more pokemon, I'd recommend focusing less on stats, moves, abilities, etc... and more on your personal opinions and ideas about a Pokemon. What do you like about its design? What do you wish was different about it? How do YOU like to use this pokemon? Best to leave the stats and competitive analysis to Bulbapedia and Smogon. 

Sidenote: Do you have your Pokemon team back together yet? Always dying to battle, especially since you said you could beat me.

Oldschool777: 
Your ideas about what kind of lowlife gets imprisoned in the United States is kind of silly. You look at criminals like cartoon villains who simply always want to commit crimes, instead of a more realistic actual human being. The vast majority of incarcerated Americans are religious people who don't spend all their time thinking about crimes they want to commit, and most murders are not committed in cold blood by serial killers, but in hot blood by impulsive people who walked in on lovers cheating on them, or got in a fight that got out of control, etc... Public executions won't cut down on crimes like this because the people who commit these crimes never planned to. And even those who planned to were 100% sure they wouldn't be caught.

I also take serious issue with your idea of using execution to punish any crime other than murder. I don't like rape, and I don't like rapists, but consider this: If you start punishing rape with execution instead of prison, then you have incentivised murder. If rape already carries the death penalty, then there is every reason for a rapist to murder their victim after the rape to remove the witness. That's why we have graduated punishments like this. "Hanging horse thieves" may make a few people stop stealing horses, but it will make even more horse thieves murder witnesses so they don't get caught.

As to the cost of imprisonment, I won't deny that it does cost on average about three times as much per year to imprison an inmate than to educate a child, but as I said before, death row inmates cost even more per year, to the tune of an extra $90,000. Executions are cheap, yes, but appeal cases are not, and if you decide to deny convicts the right to appeal then you are simply un-American. Due process is a right of all American citizens.

Also, if you're so worried about how much prison costs, you should really focus on non-violent drug offenses, which make up a much larger portion of our prison system than violent criminals, and often become more likely to become dangerous after going to prison. If we ended the drug war and stopped giving 20 year sentences for millions of nonviolent drug offenders, you would reduce violent crime rates and saves enough taxpayer money to kill all the real lowlife scum you want. The USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world, but it's not because "Americans don't respect the laws." It's because American companies and judges profit by sending people to jail over crimes that should only warrant a fine or community service. It's not because of our "diversity" but because of our corruption.

You aren't a monster, you're just wrong.

Normally I just hang out in chat and don't bother posting in the forum, since I've seen two or three different versions of all the threads on this site or on others. Since chat is down, though, I figure I'll contribute here and advocate for the side of banning state executions. IB122 touched on the 8th amendment, but when I'm off observing debates between supporters and opposers of the death penalty, the constitution is only a minor point that gets brought up. I'll talk about some reasons I consider more salient.

 Most of you have expressed the opinion, more or less, that murderers do not deserve to live, or that they should be killed in order to prevent them taking further victims. That's a position I understand, and possibly even agree with in an abstract, idealized world. However, in real life, governments, and indeed groups of people in general, quite often come to incorrect conclusions about factual issues, thanks to purposeful deception, inadequate evidence, or simple discrimination blinding them from the truth. So in my opinion, whether we should allow state executions doesn't depend as much on whether the murderer deserves to die as it does on whether our courts can be trusted to properly identify those cases and find the truth. The famous (in law) Blackstone theorem states that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. That's not some official ratio, and in fact, I'd lean towards letting even more guilty people escape to prevent one innocent from suffering. And it's not because I'm a particularly squeamish or kind-hearted person, either.

It's impossible to find a reliable statistic for how often innocents are wrongly convicted of murder in the United States, but we can know for sure that it does happen, and it even happens flagrantly, in ways that make you shake your head and mistrust the government. The Innocence Project (not a very large organization, mind you) has exonerated over 300 innocent defendants after their convictions in the past 25 years. Many wrongly convicted prisoners even had recorded confessions from the time of their arrests. It is not at all uncommon for police officers to use every trick they can to get detainees to confess a crime, including telling them that they will be convicted no matter what, and promising them a lighter sentence if they confess (police will mostly do this when they truly believe the detainee committed the crime, so they usually don't have the slightest problem with it). This practice is a gross miscarriage of justice, and there are many more practices in the US legal system that make me very uncomfortable with the idea of letting them permanently end a life, given their demonstrated incompetence at finding actual perpetrators.

Now, from another angle, Txgangsta mentioned that "Jail is expensive. People shouldn't be in jail unless it's really necessary." Jail is actually fairly cheap per prisoner per year compared to many other programs, but if you're so concerned about taxpayer money (which you're definitely NOT if you support a wall on the southern border or any increases in the military or military contracting budgets) then it may surprise you to learn that executions occur much HIGHER costs on average than life imprisonments, thanks to the long death row wait times and pricey legal battles that almost always result from sentencing people to die. You may think "then you should just kill the man and get it over with, and don't let them legally contest the verdict and try to get out of it." That would indeed cut the cost down, but if you think after all these proven wrongful murder convictions that it's morally correct to deny prisoners the opportunity to continue to try and prove their innocence, then you and I will simply never see eye to eye on this matter. 

The bottom line is, I don't think the American government can or should be trusted with a matter as grave as ending a person's life. As a side note, it's very strange to me how many conservative who think the government is completely incompetent DO think it should be allowed to kill its own citizens.

 Sorry for your loss, Pac.

I come into chat like erryday! I'm not inactive!

Some of you may remember my successful breeding thread here. Well, I retired after the school year started to make things easier on me, so Mega Mewtwo X is taking over the business for a while, with a little guidance from me. He will breed just about any Pokemon with any nature, IVs, moves, or items, for a price. If you have any questions about what IVs or natures are, or any other Pokemon related questions, just PM me or Mega Mewtwo X.
Once you're ready to make a request, send a PM to Mega Mewtwo X including your preferred Species, Gender, IVs, Nature, Ability, Egg Moves, and Item, and anything else. Or you can always post that info in this thread. Feel free to let him know if there are any of those categories you don't care about (e.g: You don't want an item, you don't need any egg moves, you will take any ability.) Since Mega Mewtwo X is running the show this time, he has come up with the following prices for breeding requests based mostly on gender ratios of the Pokemon Species and the number of perfect IVs you request:

Breeding will cost
1,000 viz: 5iv m50:f50 gender
1,500 viz: 5iv m75:f25 gender
2,000 viz: 5iv m100:f0/m0:f0 gender

5,000 viz: 6iv m50:f50 gender
10,000 viz: 6iv m75:f25 gender
15,000 viz: 6iv m100:f0/m0:f0 gender

Plus some more if you request
250 viz: a certain gender
750 viz: a hidden ability Mega Mewtwo X has
1,500 viz: a hidden ability Mega Mewtwo X doesn't have
100 viz: each egg move
2,000 viz: Competitive item
Free: Nicknames!

Pokemon Advice
We can also answer any questions anyone has about Pokemon, competitive or otherwise, for free. I highly recommend asking questions about how to best use a Pokemon or what would be good on a team before you ask Mega Mewtwo X to breed it for you, or else you may end up requesting a Pokemon that isn't as good as it could be.You can ask about how a Pokemon could be used competitively, or how it can be used in-game, and you can ask how much it might cost to breed a Pokemon for you if you aren't sure.

My 3DS Friend Code is 3969-5148-2184.
Mega Mewtwo X's 3DS Friend Code is 2852-8887-6874.
If you add either of us, be sure to let us know your code so we can add you back!

cnw64 : Confirmation:
You'd like a 31/x/31/31/31/x Bold Harvest Tropius with Leech Seed
You'd like a 31/31/31/31/x/31 Naive Unnerve* Houndour with Sucker Punch, named Nightmare
You'd like a 31/31/31/31/x/31 Naive Iron Fist Chimchar with Thunder Punch, Fire Blast, and others*, named Kazuya
Theoretically, that should only cost 3,750 Viz.

But there are some problems. Tropius is totally doable, and I've knocked the price down to 750, since you're not asking for all 5 IVs. Houndour is a bit tougher. I don't have any Hidden ability Houndours or Houndooms, so unless you have one you'd like me to use, it will likely take a lot of extra time for me to get my hands on one. Chimchar is a tough one, too. Chimchar will only learn Close Combat once it evolves, so I'm not concerned with that. As you might have guessed, breeding perfect Pokemon with the Hidden Power type you want is a huge pain. Ice, specifically, will mean Chimchar has to have Odd/Even/Even/Odd/Odd/Odd IVs. So if you want Hidden Power Ice, Chimchar's Attack and Defense will both have to be imperfect. Ideally, that would just mean I would breed your Chimchar with 31/30/30/31/Odd/31 IVs, but the IV checker only tells you about the highest IVs a Pokemon has, so for me to make sure that a Chimchar's Attack and Defense IVs are 30 rather than any other even number (0-30 for attack, or 12-30 for Defense), I'd have to train each possible Chimchar up to level 9. Now that's something I really don't want to do, and it would take forever, but I could do it if you want to pay a lot more Viz. I would also be willing to breed it to have 31/eve/even/31/31/31 IVs for the normal 2,000 viz, or you could always do as you suggested and replace it with U-Turn, and all those problems would be solved.

So that was really long! Basically I will have some trouble breeding an Unnerve Houndour and it could take a while, and Hidden Power Ice is really hard to get and you'll either have to pay a lot more, accept a Chimchar with worse Attack/Defense stats, or just replace it with U-Turn. Let me know what you think about those, and then I guess I can get started with all these commissions. e_e