Just a quick post:

The protection thing:

I stated why I protected Dubya. I let the randomizer from randomizer.org choose. I had three townies to choose from (Dubya and Paranoia were cops, but those are now roles which don't do anything anymore), I had no idea which one you were going to target, so I thought I might as well pick randomly. And I potected Paranoia, because he could give information which would help us win the game, something no one else had.

and

Yes. And the mafia couldn't possibly think that the doc was thinking about protecting someone else either? Seriously, if the town is depending on reliable information, you make sure you get it. You don't want to give the mafia a chance to kill the only reliable information giving role in the game.

How very fortunate that you have randiomizer.org to help you decide how you play this game. It's a great answer to have. Q:"Why did you protect Dubya last night?" A:"I let Randomizer.org pick for me" It's a great answer which you don't have to answer for.

I have stated before why I protected Dubya instead of Paranoia and it paid off. You where unable to kill Dubya.

First off. Those are quotes about two different nights. The first quote is about last night and partly the night before that, the second about the night before last.

I'll restate it shall i?
I protected Paranoia when we needed his information. Because we needed the information. Because we had to know which of Etain and tick was evil. That is why I protected Paranoia. Because if he died we'd have no information to go on. But you claim you didn't think that was important.

Then there was another night (last night), with basically three townies to protect. I had no idea which of them you were going to try to kill, so I randomly picked one, because I could reason all I wanted and still get it wrong.

And about no-lynching on day one:

So. Where do I say "Hey, let's no-lynch". It's nice that you tell us that this was during day one. At the end of it. And that the second quote is my question to Amata who said "Lynch now or no-lynch" (Amata posted it in an attempt to speed up the game, she later said), which I found very odd. Could you please point out where I advocate a no-lynch at the end of day one?

I'm sorry I was thinking that giving the option of a no lynch was advocating a no lynch. And thanks for making one thing clear to me. If someone says something and you agree with it then it's fine but if someone says something and I agree with it then I am suspect.

Let me summarise those posts for you:
Amata: If we don't lynch now, I want a no-lynch!
Me: Do you really want to no-lynch? Read: Do you really think that would be a good idea?
Amata: No, not really. I just wanted to keep the tempo of the game up.
Me: Ah.
See. At no point do I say: "Hey, Amata, what a good idea, to no-lynch", or anything remotely like it. I asked if she was serious about wanting to no-lynch.

That's all I have time for for now.

um different tactics. not distant ones...

well we'll find out one way or the other soon !