Sloonei wrote:sig (whoa this page is a lot easier to use and look at on my laptop)
My focus was initially drawn to sig by
Scotty's post Night 1. I had a look at sig's posts and was a bit surprised by how few of them there were. To me that's usually a bad sign for a player, as it seemed like sig had been around the game more, which gives me the idea that maybe he's "wallflowering", to borrow a term I've seen others use in this game.
sig wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:Fashionably late to the party yet again. I picked 10 because it was still there. Most generic number here
Also, YAY GAME!!!
Also, also, MP: 1 Day truce?
The very fact that you want a 1 Day truce indicates to me that you possibly could be hiding something.
A day one truce would be more beneficently for the mafia imo. If each mafia team can kill and if any independents have kill stocks we could be down without any information on day one.
@MovingPictures07 why do you think a day one truce would be good?
This is his first game-related post and he's already guilty of the much maligned "talking about issues instead of players" sin. While I don't think that's an entirely reliable line of casing, it did catch my eye in this particular instance because I do not really get where he's coming from and it seems like he's reaching too far to maybe introduce the beginnings of a suspicion against the players involved in the "Day 1 truce" thing (speaking of which, that episode did raise some alarms for me. I was hoping MP would post more before I commented on it, but). Would you be able to explain what your reasoning was when you made this post, sig? How seriously did you take the talk about a Day 1 truce between MP and Devin? Did you think we were at risk of an abundance of Day 1 truces?
sig wrote:I don't see SVS as that suspicious what is the argument against him?
I find Epi interesting he or she? is trying to find the mafia, but with two teams he could be mafia hunting in hopes to get rid of the other team, He is leaning as not a mafia for me at the moment, but only slightly.
I have a null read on Gumshoe, I'm unsure off him from his early engagement with Cobalt. But his response to Golden seemed sound.
Sloonie has contributed alot some fluff some not I find it interesting he says he isn't a noob. You would think if he was mafia he would say he was a noob so any slip ups made could be blamed on his newbieness. Are you suspicious of a Gumshoe/Cobalt mafia team or were you just pointing it out in early posts?
I don't like XthAtGAm3RGuYX waiting until day 2 to be serious however, this doesn't mean he is mafia he could just have that play style in general. Though I don't really like this play style it isn't overly suspicious. I haven't seen a reply about how people are circumventing his methods either which I would like to see. His later replays about how his activity seem fine but, he is null at the moment.
Cobalt why do you think LC is suspicious could you summarize that and why you think Epi is clean? Or is this a gutfeeling? I'm also not so sure about the bandwagon Cobalt seems to be pushing. But then again I'm never sure about Cobalt and find him to be scummy alot.
I'm not sure about LC I'm not seeing damning evidence against him, but I don't see him as clean yet either.LC what do you think of Cobalt going after you so much? LC second post about Scotty Independence claiming is interesting, not sure if it is a joke or if he was trying to put attention on Scotty.
Hedgeowl seems interesting he (sorry if I'm not getting gender right please correct me) has posted a few times but nothing really of substance Hedgeowl what do you think of the LC votes?
Big list of reads, and all of them read like they were written by sig while sitting on a fence. This sort of wishy-washiness is only acceptable when I do it. He basically just goes through all the names that had been brought up already in the thread and says "I dunno, maybe?". Note also his "not suspicious" read against SVS. This instance is early, but he would end up voting for her over Cobalt.
sig wrote:TinyBubbles wrote: And i'm a good guy AGAIN for the third time in a row! Which really doesn't help me train my mafia hunting instincts, like they say it takes a thief to catch a thief.
This first lynch vote i'm gonna probably bandwagon on the most voted person, since i figure that is marginally better than voting a random. It's a cop out, i know. Don't shoot me.
Snipped out some stuff, What Tiny Bubbles said is about being town is sending off warning bells, as well as saying they aren't very good at catching mafia until they play as mafia. This could be what he said or not. My thoughts on this is that maybe this was a first time mafia slip up? Saying they got Civ again and won't be good at catching mafia. Could this be a set up for when they try to lynch Cobalt? Here is the scenario, Cobalt gets lynched flips civilian TIny can turn around and say "since I was never mafia I'm not good at catching them" The first portion is more suspicious then that, but I still find it worth noting, I'm also using Cobalt as the example since TIny has voted for him.
The other thing Tiny said they were most likely going to bandwagon a person the reasoning being it is better then they lynch Cobalt someone with no votes and Tiny is the third person to vote. Not following what they said in this post.
So Tiny why go from bandwagoning on the highest voted player to voting for Cobalt? Also what do you mean by "cop out"
I did read your other posts explaining your votes, but it seems strange to have that change of mind could you explain to me why I should vote for say Cobalt over LC?
Jumps on the very easy TinyBubbles case which, I admit, I'm also feeling a bit of this. I suppose this comes down to whether or not we believe sig's behavior here is authentic. I have doubts. It's really too soon to tell w/r/t TinyBubbles. I hope she posts more today.
Instead of rehashing the points Scotty already laid out, I'll repost them here with Sig's response to them. I support most of what Scotty said, and found sig's vote to be very waffley. He came in seeming to be leaning toward Cobalt, then cast a fairly weak-reasoned vote for SVS while proclaiming to be still be "rereading" Cobalt and SVS in the final 10 minutes. It was
these two posts that stood out most to me. Does sig mean to tell us that, in 9 minutes, he fully reviewed all the posts by and about SVS and Cobalt and satisfactorily came to a conclusion about them? In 9 minutes?
Anyway, here's sig's response to Scotty's post:
sig wrote:Scotty wrote:
While I'm on the topic, someone else that pinged me in the last 6 pages was Sig.
sig wrote:I don't like how Cobalt switched his vote, he went after LC like crazy yet switches that seems off. I don't think SVS is mafia, but if she is voting for herself is it a tactic to not get lynched or a genuine vote? I really would rather not lynch SVS it is a gut feeling...
OK, questioning Cobalt's merits, doesn't want to mislynch SVS.
sig wrote:I'm here but I'm unsure to vote for I will wait a few minutes, from my brief experience with CObalt he always seems like mafia to me
Uh oh, getting down to the wire. Leaning Cobalt...
sig wrote:We can't absolutely can't have a no lynch today for that reason along with others I will be voting for SVS
MAFIA IS MOST LIKELY TO TIE THE VOTE I'm very suspicious nijuukyugou right know for doing this
Suddenly, you can't have a tie, and so you lean...SVS? Because you're thinking SVS's self-vote is fishy...And then cast doubt on nijuu at the same time.
sig wrote:I have 10 minuets I will reread Cobalts and SVS posts
@Sloonie considering Dom said he has a means of deciding I'm not as worried know I just didn't want a no lynch
Now the no-lynch doesn't matter.
So you'll nonchalantly "reread" their posts to see if you want to change your mind, now that you're already currently voting for SVS and not Cobalt.
Which you stick with. Cool, sticking to your guns.
Except,
you changed your vote from Cobalt to SVS to "break the tie", and when you learned that that didn't mean a no-lynch, you just hid behind the barn. Drawing attention away from Cobalt.
And immediately after SVS was lynched:
sig wrote:Quick question do the independents count as civilians against mafia or no? Some games I've played they do others they don't
Weird thing to comment about right after a lynching. What bearing does the answer to your question have on you if you are civ? We don't know what roles independents have, but i can assure you that they are not civilians. They are independent from both mafia and civilians.
I'm on to you, my friend.
As I said Cobalt always seems like mafia to me and the games I've played with him he never is so I was willing to give him the benefit of doubt.
On websites I play on a tie vote equals a no lynch so a wasted first day, with this logic it makes sense that I would view nijuu suspicious as she was bringing it closer to a tied vote. I found the self lynch vote suspicious and I gave my reasoning behind it.
Also I never voted for Cobalt I didn't switch my vote SVS was my first and only vote, so did you misunderstand or are you trying to throw suspicion on me your either lying or have your facts wrong.
This question has a lot of bearing if the independent count as civilians then the mafia is one up, if this was the case I would be more suspicious of Cobalt for his vote switching. As well as the fact that it is good to know our numbers since I've played games were the independents do count as town and some where they do not, I don't see how this is suspicious. Also if I was mafia why would I ask this question on the thread and not in mafia chat?
Your falsehood about my voting as well as what your "pings" are is very strange, what do you Scotty think about the SVS lynch? WHat do you think of CObalt switching votes? How did I draw attention away from CObalt?
sig's follow up responses to my questions are
here and
here, and I admit I've not thought too hard about them or how they fit into my suspicion of him yet.
So should I even bother responding to your posts if you don't think hard about when I answer you?
Here I will answer your questions and points
1 I was discussing an issue since the day 1 truce was an issue, I wasn't sure of the players and weighted in on my thoughts of a day1 truce the subject at hand. What is the problem with this? This raised alarms with you, but I'm suspicious since I didn't like it either?
A day 1 truce meaning from my thoughts not lynching anyone day 1. I would just call it a no lynch but I figured different people call it different things. THis would have meant we lynched no players and got no information from the lynch while we were down at least two people. At that time I thought each mafia could kill each day. I took them very serious were they joking?
If they meant a truce between themselves such as "I won't lynch you, you won't lynch me" way then I misunderstood them.
2. I became more suspicious of her as time went on. I commented on the top people and tried to insert myself into the discussion and add something, if I didn't do this I would be accused as wallflowering and not voicing thoughts. Notice I asked some questions as well, tried to glean information. My opinion was idk maybe at that time so I said that. I didn't have any hard reads and pointed out things that were interesting and got my attention.
3
I jumped on Tiny sure I found her suspicious, You've jumped on me very easily as has Scotty if you don't jump on things that seem off to you and have those people respond you can never get additional information.
I won't go over the Scotty stuff again since I already did and since I had such little time I just clicked the read their posts and did it that way.
I'm totally going by the poll, I haven't reread the thread-progression of Golden yet... and I wasn't accusing you of anything. Just wondering about the singular fact that you got your vote in after mine, when mine was perilously last-second.
Quiet splintsy scares me.
