Eviora

Did you attempt to kill anyone last night? If so, was it Alistair? If not, why not?

@purplecicada Please clarify. Are you roleclaiming Mondo?

All that writing in defense of Nicki makes me suspect her and Hypurr more. If Nicki ends up being mafia, I'd say it's incredibly likely Hypurr is, too. I don't like that the vote is currently tied, so let me offer some information about myself in an attempt to gain your trust. At the beginning of the game, I was told I was Sayaka. That's why I was trying to get others to claim the role. If three others claimed it, I would know one of them was lying, and likely mafia. Nicki's refusal to claim any role, even one as defensible as Sayaka, further increases my suspicion of her. I imagine she suspected I had some information about the Sayaka-affiliated roles and thought twice about claiming one. That's just my interpretation, though. @L'Belle What happens if the vote ends in a tie?

Okay. Some time has passed, and nothing has happened to change my mind. Therefore: [Eliminate] Purplecicada (If it's any consolsation, I feel a bit guilty about this. xD )

I'm not entirely certain what constitutes "visiting" someone else in this game. The role list doesn't always make it clear. It seems to me that there are 2 town who can visit people for sure (Kyoko and Toko), two whose actions may count as visits (Mondo and Sakura), and one mafia player capable of visiting (Monokuma.) The Junko and Celeste roles seem like they shouldn't require a visit, but I can't be entirely sure. Regardless, there's a possibility that Byakuya's forced reveal ability will backfire on the town if we don't know who to avoid. That seems more likely than the mafia triggering it. @L'Belle clarification regarding what is and isn't a visit would be appreciated.

It's worth noting that Walpurgis, Venus, and soso all claimed Sayaka earlier, though Walpurgis' claim had a strikethrough and soso's is debatable because he's soso. I asked about that role because I thought people might be more willing to claim it since there are three Sayakas, and more than three claims of a basically powerless role seemed unlikely. I would appreciate it if @Walpurgis, @Venus, and @Psychic Bean Sheep clarified their stances with regards to those claims.

There's still plenty of time left in the day. I'd like to see how Nicki responds. I will cast my vote later today. By the way, Nick, your compiled info claims 4 people are voting for Nicki but only lists 3.

I can't help by notice that Nicki keeps calling out different people as suspicious. That kind of behavior feels strange, and is increasing my own suspicion of her. She seems to be jumping between different tactics to try to defend herself despite not being in any immediate danger at the moment.

@NickCrash You're contradicting yourself now. If the jester gets killed by the vigilante, they won't be able to side with the mafia. Also, even if they *did* choose to side with the mafia, they wouldn't know who the mafia is any better than we do.

I can't say I'm a fan of this position. While we could (and, judging by the votes so far, probably will) just give Mr. Knightly what he wants, I don't see much reason for us to do so at such an early juncture. The only way Mr. Knightly wins is by being lynched; this early in the game, that's something only town can provide. Instead of just handing out a free win, I think we ought to ask for some cooperation in return for the eventual lynch. Lynches are the town's primary resource for self defense. It would be best if we shifted the odds in our favor early by lynching some members of the mafia. Then, later, when we're looking for the last couple of members, it won't be such a sacrifice for us to use a lynch on Mr. Knightly.

Thanks~ I really appreciate that!

I stream on Twitch, but not all that frequently. Lately, I've been streaming Hollow Knight from 5:30 - 8:00 PM EDT on Saturdays. My Twitch username is Eviora000. I'm always happy to have more viewers!

Well, it seems you're going to win regardless. But aren't you the one focused on wordplay? You talk about the office of mayor, but that's not really relevant at all, is it? All the "mayor" does in this game is gets a doubly-powerful vote. Therefore, the mayor should be someone who is especially equipped to discern truth from lies. Do you feel you fit that description, and, if so, why?

It's easy to say you'll kill the bear, but do you have any concrete plans regarding how to do that, @NickCrash? I don't see how you could even know who Monokuma is unless you're mafia.

I'm aware of that, Dive. That's why I chose Sayaka to ask people to roleclaim. I wanted to see who those three were - and to determine whether anyone dared lie about being Sayaka. Anyway, this may not be all that helpful, but... [Vote] Eviora

Well, it seems two different people have claimed Sayaka. That's just so unfortunate. I guess I have no cause to vote for either of you.

If someone uncontestedly claims the role of Sayaka, I will vote for them for mayor.

Evi is sooooo in! Please don't make me Hifumi.

Mine is eating sweets and other junk food; pretty boring, I know. I used to feel bad about all sorts of things. Then I realized that a large percentage of what we humans tend to enjoy doing is bad for ourselves. I've concluded that both life and death are in guilty pleasures and small vices; if you never let yourself experience things that may cause you relatively small harm - especially things you enjoy - you're missing out on part of life.

You could (and people have) take many classes on writing and still never touch on worthwhile techniques. It's a vast subject that can be approached from many directions. Having written a full novel myself, I'll give you the one I find most important. Just write, even if you think what your writing sucks. It's impossible to become a skilled writer without a lot of practice.

The last paragraph of the first post reminded me of one of my favorite quotes: "False tears hurt others. A false smile hurts yourself." - C.C. from Code Geass A long time ago, I learned one harsh but simple truth. That the word "friend" is, far more often than not, a lie. That many who use that word will betray or abandon you for the smallest, shallowest reasons, regardless of how long you have known each other. Ultimately, they strive for their own goals, and anything that gets in the way can be easily discarded. For that reason and other, person reasons I gave up on friendship as a child. I distanced myself from everyone. Even now, it has been over a decade since I had a friend I knew "in real life." But I thought I had made some friends online - only to learn in these past few years that they, too, were capable of betrayal for next to nothing. For a time, my disdain for the lie called friendship became worse than ever. But, over the last year or so, I've found not everyone is as awful as I thought. A small minority of people do practice true friendship. To find them, I've found that I must discard my masks. No false tears. No false smiles. Cliche as it is, the key, for me, was to be and share my genuine self. Let those who can appreciate you for who you are see you for who you are. A bond forged with sincere feelings is far stronger than one built on ephemeral experiences like "having fun."

@Chase It seems we're largely in agreement concerning what you ought to actually do if someone tells you they're in an abusive situation. I was uncertain how able you'd be to contact the police 'cause I used to be Catholic and there it's super taboo for priests to reveal anything said in confession without permission unless it would prevent a future threat. Even if someone comes in and says, "I killed someone yesterday," the priest is not allowed to reveal it. We also agree that Due Process should be employed when it comes to legal matters. The trouble occurs in personal decisions. You can't stop people from judging the accused without giving them a day in court. That's just human nature. One unfair decision breeds a dozen more. Things escalate, and the unscrupulous hide lies among the earnest claims. If many people support an abuser for president, many more will lash out in response. Some will go too far and hurt the innocent. That strife will echo until some larger event stops it. But there's not much we can do but adapt until it passes. There will be no healing while what divides us remains. There certainly are some verses in the Bible that fly in the face of the point I was trying to make. (Though I was so distracted by the objective, almost comical incorrectness of verse 29 in the first quote that I nearly ignored the rest.) The thing about the Bible is that it can never make up its mind. Here's a link that shows some of the other things the Bible has to say about women being submissive. https://www.openbible.info/topics/submitting_to_your_husband Many of the offenders do come from the Old Testament, but as per Matthew 5:18, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_5:18) all of those passages remain relevant. Anyhow, I talk too much, but if there's one thing I wanted to convey, it's that life will probably ask you to weigh two or more things you value against each other. It's mean like that. It may be helpful to anticipate the choices you'll have to make before you're confronted by them.

Well, for starters, if anyone does confide in you, you should probably speak to them as if they're telling the truth within that private conversation. Leave actually figuring it out to law enforcement. I doubt it's in your job description to resolve a legal conflict between, say, two members of your community. Contact the authorities if you think you can and should. If it is in your job description to resolve legal conflicts as a pastor, well, um, maybe find another job. >.> I don't think that can end well. If you want people to send the message that abuse is categorically wrong, you're going to have to be consistent about it. You may like what Trump did with the Supreme Court or whatever, but the hard fact is we have the guy on video bragging about sexual harassment. That's a more divisive fact than you may realize. That tape was released for the world to see, and America's response was, in effect, "no biggie." You can try to talk your way around that all you want. I can repeat that fact as often as I want. The truth is, people have already made their individual assessments of those circumstances regardless of all arguments. I promise, many women have internalized it as a reflection of their value in the eyes of society. Perhaps they feel not-so-differently from how you feel seeing the lives of men torn apart over unproven accusations. You position is especially difficult. You may not have contributed to America's deep-rooted sexism, but your holy book certainly has. I trust I don't have to convince you that it preaches women should be subservient to men. There may be times when you have to clash with your own religion as an authority within that religion if you want your condemnation of abuse to be entirely consistent. I can only imagine how much of a mess that would be.