-->
@Kohai
Originally Posted by Kohai on 10/13/2026 at 12:20 AM (post #110)
I'm about to go to sleep. Gonna make my final points
Regarding Luna's case:
1) Why would I "slip" the existence of a vanillaizer?
I don't think you'd have much reason to hint at the existence of a Vanillaizer if you had one on your scum team, no. It's an odd choice on your part, but not one I'd consider particularly scummy. Wouldn't call it a town tell, either, though.
2) I've shown in multiple previous games that roles like this is what I'm always thinking about especially when I have a role that is confirmable.
Kind of get this, but doesn't really tell me anything about this game.
3) Blackmail chain: I had thought that there was scum between helz / mag1c for reasons I stated earlier in the game. In the end we were forced to lynch mag1c
I'll come back to this because it looks like Luna expanded on the point.
My case:
1) I encourage you to review again the interacitons between luan / thoth. Both sussed each other but never voted or hard pushed each other. Luna had multiple opporunities to vote thoth / wagon him day 1. He chose to keep his vote on shining.
I'll go back through them, but it sounds like we basically agree based on what you've written here about what happened. I also don't view that as particularly scummy (literally everyone had a reason to sus Shining based on his lack of interaction), but Luna does seem to be trying to use their susses as an indication of distance that I'm just not seeing.
2) Mech:
Why would Hawking be in the game but Clinton not? Luna himself admitted that Clinton is likely to be in the game. Why would I, as scum, risk asking about a character that's high probability to be in the game?
The theory would be that you lucked out asking about Clinton. There are more than enough people involved with Epstein that, at least I would argue, Clinton was never guaranteed to be in this game, even though he's a very big fish. The confusion I'm having is why Luna would draw attention to the obviousness of Clinton being in this game and then flip around and say he must not be here. From Luna's perspective, I get that you have to be scum. There's no other choice. It's just weird to call out how Clinton is both the likeliest pick for Savant/Pie to be here, and then say he's also a likely choice for a scum team to ask about.
Does cop and the stated justification actually fit with Stephen Hawking? Compare his justification "I have one of the greatest minds in history, and nothing escapes my analysis" and compare that with justifications that have flipped.
Vaguely, yes. I have said it felt off, but it's not impossible. Here are the justifications so far:
Bill Gates: Because of your work improving global health, you are the 2x Doctor, which is also the name of a game you may have played with children on Epstein’s Island
Michael Jackson: Because you are widely known for your music, you are the Singer
Dean Kamen: In addition to being named hundreds of times in the Epstein Files, you invented the Segway and hold over 1,000 patents. Therefore, you are the Inventor.
David Copperfield: Because you rely on misdirection to deceive the audience and shift their attention away from your connections with Epstein, you are the 2x Redirector.
Ehud Barak: you served dutifully for 36 years in the Israel Defense Forces, so it is unlikely you would ever harm a child. Fittingly, you are the Soldier.
Those aren't very vague. Some of them are a little on the nose (Michael Jackson, Ehud Barak, Dean Kamen), and others more utilize what the characters are known for as a basis for a role (Bill Gates, David Copperfield).
By contrast, I'd argue that both of yours are pretty vague.
Stephen Hawking is a Cop because he's "one the greatest minds in history, and nothing escapes [his] analysis." It lines up with some kind of insightful role, sure, but with Cop specifically? I'd say not.
Bill Clinton is Popular because he "remained high approval ratings even after the Monica scandal." Sure, that's historically accurate, it's just a weird pull that feels different from the others on this list.
Both of you would fall into the latter category (using what the characters are known for as a basis for their role), and having any specifics and a shout out to something beyond Epstein with that kind of focus does give yours more resemblance to the likes of Ehud Barak and Bill Gates, PMs you wouldn't have known about. I'd say you have the edge at this point.