Thing is, Xander isn't even alive overall (last post in this thread 3 days ago)

Yeah, I know :(

I just hope he isn't a town PR. Yeah yeah I know, wifom, but srsly I'm scared.

UPDATE: I just PM'd Trucks to prod him.

I think what miz is pointing out about mr.p and you is much more an issue than flip flopping votes, if at day one you don't use the only tool that is there (votes) you can't motivate people to participate and could just move to night. Also, you gotta weigh how many people can potentially be scum, if you wanna go all out on that go for 4 people, and then you have like how many people that switched votes so far? 6? You can't seriously think that all of them are scum, besides people aren't flipflopping on stances, there are just things happening.

I'd like to add that: some votes are for reactions, some votes are based on scum feelings that fade, oftentimes new/better lynch candidates can emerge.

The only time I'd be concerned is when votes are baseless, or weakly based.

@spurge
Being the host of the last game you know that saying every last thing I say makes no sense just annoys the hell out of me.

How do you think it feels for me, when you make no sense?
Maybe you should think more before you talk? Last game I was pretty confident that Mr.P was the scum, from day 1, but it was the illogical statements from you- that made me think that you were trying to manipulate the game.
Think about it like this. I have a logical idea of a series of events that will unfold. When something is mentioned that disrupts those events, then clearly something is up. Like, for example, I expect people to vote for someone they find suspicious (zero day 1 last game on trucks or mrP). Then an illogical thing happens, he votes someone else. My immediate reaction is, you knew we should have lynched. You were suspicious of both. You knew they were the only two likely to be lynched. You did the thing that not only hurt the town info, but was illogical.

To me, this says that zero is acting oddly, and then I have to figure out why, and being "stupid" is just too easy of a cover. This is why I said I was going to lynch him day 1 every game. Also, just like last game, you were making these weird accusations about me that weren't even based in fact. Some were logical, and some weren't, but none were factual. It looked like you were trying to say as much as possible in the hopes that someone would connect with something. That to me, looks then like manipulation, and then my idea of you changes.

So, thinking through your ideas before you say them is very important, because you are being judged for you allegiances based on your input. I would recommend that instead of getting mad at people who are saying you're illogical, maybe look at what you did and try to see someone's point?

Just as an example, the post about the votes is somewhat understandable, but stefl does have a point. Votes change, and yeah sometimes they don't stick because the case doesn't have enough evidence, or players specifically don't feel like the train is convincing enough. But why would that be solely a mafia behavior? This just screams to me that this game, just like last game, you already have an idea who you think is scum, and you are looking for behaviors that confirm in your mind their scummy behavior.

While this is possibly a read that you are scumhunting in your own unique way, it does nothing for other people who have to read it, nor does it provide any actual good evidence to your suspects and only serves to get people to start thinking like you. Which, at this point in the game, you don't know if you're right or wrong.

tl;dr
You're basically just making up mafia-meta strategies to confirm your own suspicions. It's no better than the people who are "looking for something that sticks".

Atleast three players are mafia. Worst case scenario (for mafia) two noobs and one pro. 

Anyways

Vote:Xander

Don't know why this guy never gets lynched.

Mostly because, when I played similar games like this (they were in real life, multiple lives per person and with no roles beyond victim and criminal) the one that started overanalyzing was a fairly safe candidate for being the culprit. And your posts analyzing things are some of the longest in this game. You also seem to know the past strategies of other players (other people here too, now that I think about it, I'm really behind in that regard).

Also, in this bit of yours:

"I'm not extremely confident, but I'd say stefl has a good chance of being mafia, or a survivor maybe, unlikely to be a power role (though he concludes there are potentially mediocre power roles).
I'll say 50% mafia, 40% survivor, 10% mediocre town power"

I don't get it. If there are 13 people playing this, shouldn't he (and any of us, really) have a more or less 60% chance of being innocent? I can't say whether he is or not guilty because I have no idea of his playstyle, but you? What's your reasoning for the numbers? Also, again, what is the survival rol?

I believe he's going off the bit where Stefl assumed what type of game this was, presumably basing it off of his own role. 

How do you cater to a madman?