[ENDGAME] Bullets Over Broadway Mafia

[S~V~S]

No, we don't know that. But I believe she is. So I want to lynch her tomorrow. If I am wrong, then being pro Ninja is not a problem. If I am right, then I mainly brought this up because I was asked at night who I suspect right now other than Ninja. i don't want to evade the question, but I don't like talking about suspicions at night, either, tbh.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

i don't blame people for playing it safe during the night phase since it isn't default for dead players to be awarded wins around here. as long as Day 10 is a high-activity and thorough phase by everyone involved we should have a good chance.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

also, assuming votes will not be changeable, i would ask that people please take care with theirs. if you're confident enough to place a vote for someone early in the day, you're wrong. of course if there are time constraints it's more understandable.

[Scotty]

i don't blame people for playing it safe during the night phase since it isn't default for dead players to be awarded wins around here. as long as Day 10 is a high-activity and thorough phase by everyone involved we should have a good chance.

Wouldn't get your hopes up on everyone getting involved. If you count Neverwhere and Hedgeowl to the latest MIAs, you've got 5 no-shows out of (most likely) 15 people left.
This is my 2nd ever online mafia game, but I've done live mafia a bunch and love the aspect of no one talking during night phases.
Other things I love: full participation of the group, smaller time limits on cycles, and the ability to watch others.

You're all just a bunch of pixels to me. Beautiful, deceptive pixels.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

bummer if so, but i'm not sure we can do much about it unfortunately. it sort of leaves the mafia team(s) some easy pickings to keep around until the latest stages of the game where they tend to get lynched by default.

[Scotty]

Funny story about Andrew Lloyd Webber. I was once dining at the Chiltern Firehouse (lovely place, expensive as balls) in London and in walks ALW, by himself. I recognize him immediately by his stupid face and pompous gait. Sits down to read the paper. Orders tea. Tea comes, but it didn't have a lemon wedge. Blows up at the waiter, spewing little nuggets like " shite standards of service" and "lacking brain cells". People are trying to eat their duck confits and pretend that they don't hear this prick yelling about a missing lemon. He then gets up, and leaves. Didn't pay. Didn't wait for his lemon.

The guy's a class act.

Also, Andrew, if you're listening, don't kill me tonight. Thanks bae

[Heiots]

Funny story about Andrew Lloyd Webber. I was once dining at the Chiltern Firehouse (lovely place, expensive as balls) in London and in walks ALW, by himself. I recognize him immediately by his stupid face and pompous gait. Sits down to read the paper. Orders tea. Tea comes, but it didn't have a lemon wedge. Blows up at the waiter, spewing little nuggets like " shite standards of service" and "lacking brain cells". People are trying to eat their duck confits and pretend that they don't hear this prick yelling about a missing lemon. He then gets up, and leaves. Didn't pay. Didn't wait for his lemon.

The guy's a class act.

Also, Andrew, if you're listening, don't kill me tonight. Thanks bae

[Sloonei]

i laughed

[JaggedJimmyJay]

A number of people including me have expressed some vague misgivings about DFaraday. So I'll look into him now.

Spoiler: show

My pm mentioned Sondheim, Brown, Schwartz, and Hammerstein together. It also repeated "lyricist" and "3/4" over and over. I think it may be Schwartz's role and I don't think he's a threat to us but I obviously can't be certain.

Lyricist could apply to any of those names. And 3/4 is a time signature indicative of a waltz. Mine was something about "revived" and "most overrated". I hope that's not a shot at The King and I.

I do think it was odd that Hedge brought up bandwagons for no particular reason. I think it could be to preemptively establish herself as looking better if one player does take a lot of votes, while also not really committing to anything herself.

Epi is reading as standard throw-everything-at-the-wall Epi to me, and LC hasn't done anything to ping me either. I don't agree with Epi that LC was using inflammatory language or trying to avoid offering his thoughts. He's done quite a lot of offering that I can see.

SVS is also on my radar for how strongly she reacted to the "interesting" thing. I doubt anyone will get lynched because they used an empty term like "interesting" or such, so her reaction towards Epi seemed misplaced.

This guy seems like a pretty no-nonsense type player. Almost every single one of his posts are directly relevant to game discussion. That's just an observation, it doesn't mean anything. Anyway, I highlight his third post here because it exemplifies that: he entered Day 1 with some immediate thoughts to share. The good thing here is that he took some real stances and made decently specific observations. This indicates to me that he was paying close attention to the content of other players more than to his own content: the mark of a townie. The only negative point to be made is that the four people he chose to comment on were perhaps the 4 most often discussed in the game to that point. His originality can be questioned.

Spoiler: show

Responses in magenta, because I like magenta.

What are your thoughts on the possibility of LC and Cobalt dominating the discussion? Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Do they deserve to be the centers of attention? What makes you think Cobalt is more bad than LC?
As always, any reads on anyone else that you might have would be handy as well.
I think this kill could have been Cobalt trying to frame LC while setting himself up as the victim, and also I find his last minute vote switch to SVS very shady. I do think we need to get to the bottom of this feud or else it will continue to upstage everything else (pun intended). Not to say they have to be our only focus, but no matter what LC/Cobalt will be a major talking point for the time being.

The night kill of Epignosis 1.0 seemed to be a hot topic on Day 2, probably because of Epi's small handful of significant suspicions and the implications associated with him in his death. DFaraday suggested it might have been an intentional frame job perpetrated by Cobalt to smear Long Con. This turned out to be exactly the opposite of the truth, but DF wasn't alone in that perspective. Faraday: I'd ask you if you could revisit your mindset from this early stage and explain why you felt it was Cobalt doing the framing rather than Cobalt being framed?

Spoiler: show

Day 1:

And i'm a good guy AGAIN for the third time in a row!

I wouldn't really question that if you hadn't mentioned it...

Let's all pretend none of Cobalt, SVS, or Long Con are available to be lynched today. Who do we all vote for then?

*Whom

TB is on my radar with her eagerness to let us know she's a civ. Apparently she's done this before, but it's still pingy to me.

But for now I think I'm going to *vote SVS*. I know she definitely could manipulate voters' sentiments if she wanted to, and I think that could have happened as early as the comments about Epi's "interesting" speech.

Day 2:

Responses in magenta, because I like magenta.

Has anything changed about your feelings toward TinyBubbles?
I guess I feel slightly better, since that one comment is the only ping I've gotten from her.

Who is your top suspect right now, DFaraday? would you be willing to put an early vote on anyone right now?

I suppose still Cobalt, although his over-the-top reaction to LC surviving did seem pretty sincere. Were I to do a rainbow list, the next highest people would be TB, Hedge, and Gamer Guy (now G-Man). I think Golden may have been on to something with his find, but i agree with MM that it's not really in the spirit of Mafia to use other threads for info.

Day 3:

I've fallen behind over the last day, I need to catch up. Going off of my cursory glance so far, I'm thinking Golden/LC is civ/civ. Golden, at least, is pretty unlikely to be on one of the baddie teams.

For now I'll put my vote back on TB, since I know I'm not actually going to vote for Cobalt today.

And also, I agree with Nutella that not reading the thread and not making cases are two different things. One is lazy, one can be lazy or a strategy.

I'm not sure why I said "back" on TB, since I hadn't voted her to begin with. I need coffee.

EBWOP: Because I've already found her suspicious, and I haven't yet caught up on the Sig/LC/Golden stuff going on.

One thing that interested me about DFaraday in the first half of his ISO is this progression in his read of TinyBubbles. We know now due to her Day 6 lynch that Bubbles was town, so it's especially important to verify the thought processes people displayed in this thread leading to her lynch to determine whether they were sincerely suspicious of her. I think there is some decently suspicious content here for Faraday. He played with a decent degree of thoroughness early in the game, so that he went for this Bubbles case and placed that vote on Day 3 is troubling -- especially because this was the phase in which sig was lynched. When Faraday placed his vote for Bubbles, it placed Bubbles in a 4-2 lead over sig (before the landslide eventually swept sig away). That's a pretty bad look.

It can be forgiven if his case against Bubbles is significant enough to warrant his vote... but I don't see it. In fact -- there isn't a case at all. The only distinct negative comment Faraday made about Bubbles' content in this game was that very minor Day 1 "ping" at the top of this quote pile. Otherwise, the only things he says about her are either positive, or negative without any reason given. So, in a phase in which a mafia was eventually lynched, Faraday gave a confirmed townie a 4-2 tally lead over that mafia player without ever actually mounting any kind of case against her. Faraday is definitely going to need to answer to this.

Spoiler: show

Finally caught up. Good job, everyone, even though I probably wouldn't have voted Sig had I been around. I didn't find the case that convincing, but apparently it was right

I do agree that Splints' vote seems like it could be a teammate bandwagoning, but for that matter, Ninja's vote rubs me the wrong way too. She does straight up say it's a bandwagon vote, but I still feel pinged by it.

I hope LC and Golden can move on from the feud for next day. It feels like a whole lot of miscommunication, probably between civs.

This is the second time I've seen Faraday refer to the LC/Golden "feud" as being a likely civilian versus civilian affair. This bugs me a little bit on two fronts: it is a subtle means of linking Golden with LC, and also it obviously serves as an indirect soft defense of confirmed mafia LC.

Spoiler: show

G-Man seems to have no interest in defending himself, and it reads like a defeated baddie to me (or at best an unhelpful civvie). Speaking of unhelpful civvie, that's how I'm looking at MM. If he were bad I don't think he'd have such tunnel vision; this is definitely a departure in style for him. I'm still not convinced about LC being bad, either, so MM's sureness seems misplaced.

I will go ahead and *vote G-Man*

Yay for no death! Even though I'm probably still going to vote G-Man, his vote chart is helpful. My initial takeaway from it is that the later LC voters from Day 1 are unlikely to be Mafia 2, since the vote was fairly tight all the way up to the end. And given the way MM has played, I very much doubt if he's on that team, so I think basically all of the LC voters on Day 1 are not Mafia 2.

Similarly, I'd think the early Sig voters on Day 3 are probably not Mafia 1, but once it started to turn into a runaway, I'm thinking one or two teammates slipped in. So I'd say Sloonei, Scotty, FZ, and Bubbles look pretty good in that regard, but MM, Ninja, or FS (or more than one of them) could have been a bandwagon vote for a teammate.

I'm going to go ahead and *vote G-Man* now. Nothing has changed my mind about him.

This is somewhat curious treatment of G-Man on Day 4. It's decent enough that he placed his vote for a mafia player, but the progression here seems at least a little inconsistent. The first post asserts that G-Man has "no interest in defending himself", which in itself is really not a terribly scathing accusation. We've all seen townies do that many times I'm sure. The primary point of interest is that he said G-Man was at best an "unhelpful" civilian. So it's noteworthy then that in the next quoted post, he maintains his anti-G-Man stance despite calling his vote chart "helpful". "Helpful" is the opposite of "unhelpful", which was a key component of his prior accusation. So if that changed, I am curious why he didn't seem to budge at all in his stated suspicion (as he reiterated in the last quoted post).

This is the phase in which Long Con (the mafia team of which G-Man was not a member) ended up lynched. DFaraday's vote for G-Man made it a 5-4 tally lead for LC -- quite close and still swingable into a G-Man lynch. I think there's valid reason to suspect based on the above that Faraday's suspicion of G-Man was somewhat disingenuous. That might indicate he was bussing G-Man to improve his credibility, or it might indicate he was protecting Long Con.

Either way, that's a bad look.

G-Man was eventually lynched the next day phase, but it was such an avalanche tally that it's really not possible to give anyone credit for it based on just their votes.

Spoiler: show

Great result! Bye G-Man.

Question for DFaraday: I’ve seen you mention fingersplints in a couple of posts. What is your read on her? Could you elaborate? Also any other reads you have at this time would be helpful.

I think I'm leaning slightly bad on FS. She pretty much bandwagoned late on the LC lynch, which makes me wonder if it was just a blending tactic. Other than that, I haven't noticed her posts standing out very much, so I'm a bit worried if she's trying to fly under the radar.

Off the top of my head, Cobalt and Hedge would be my suspicions right now. Maybe MM as well, although given that he's almost certainly not Mafia 2, he is less likely to be bad.

I skipped everything else and just read the part about me, so in the morning I'll catch up and offer more detailed thoughts.

When pressed for suspects on Day 6, Faraday offered the same two names he'd been saying since Day 1. Is he known for long-term tunneling of this sort? We don't know yet how his treatment of Hedge will reflect on him, but we know Cobalt was an easy target townie.

Spoiler: show

i am sure this has been addressed already but: in a two-mafia-team game, how is it a relevant defense to survive a night kill?

It makes it unlikely that you are on the team that tried to kill you. Although, I once hosted a game where a baddie team NKed their teammate Night 2, so I wouldn't put it past any Mafia team to fake a kill.

I think Golden is probably not part of the plot, but I agree with Timmer that this sudden push for Cobalt, who's been on the backburner for days, is suspicious and comes across as a BR save. My thoughts on BR have not changed, aside from becoming even more suspicious of her, so I'll put my vote on BR for now.

*Votes BR*

His BR votes might be his strongest point of defense right now, which isn't great because I'd only call them a small positive in a game with two mafia teams. Nonetheless, they happened and that should be acknowledged. On Day 6 he helped pursue Black Rock instead of TinyBubbles; the latter ended up lynched. Faraday can't be blamed though, because his vote extended the lead for BR before others came in and took out Bubbles.

On Day 7 he stuck to his guns and helped generate the BR lynch.

Spoiler: show

I think Scotty makes a good case on Bass, but I'd want to hear from Bass before deciding. For me it's between Bass and Cobalt, since I think Ninja acquitted herself fairly well.

0 for 2.

DFaraday's rate of contribution has fallen off quite a lot in recent phases. I'll leave him to explain why. One troubling result of this is that his focus has been consistently narrowed. Over the last three day phases, he has said very little about any player other than the three in the above quote: Cobalt, Bass, and ninja. We already know two of them were town, and it's entirely plausible three of them were. Given the highly suspicious, easy nature of the Cobalt and Bass lynches and Faraday's lack of thoroughness as they were perpetrated, I view this with suspicion.

DFaraday's final votes for reference:

Day 1: S~V~S (2nd of 7)
Day 2: Cobalt (6th of 9)
Day 3: TinyBubbles (4th of 4)
Day 4: G-Man (4th of 6)
Day 5: G-Man (4th of 13)
Day 6: Black Rock (4th of 4)
Day 7: Black Rock (2nd of 7)
Day 8: No vote
Day 9: Bass_the_Clever (3rd of 6)

~~~

Overall, I think DFaraday plays a tight game. He conveys the right sort of pro-town persona. However, there is a significant amount of dirt I just dragged up without having to look very deep. He has 42 posts in this thread, and I still had all of those issues with his content. I think he's suspicious and will call him an anti-town read.

I encourage him to address my points. I'm always open to hear rebuttals.

[nutella]

Ninja's defenses keep reading genuine to me, so I'm going back and forth on her and right now thinking she's more likely civvie. As for my comment about her teammate(s) piling on, I realized if she's bad she almost certainly only has one teammate, but I still think that if so then that player could possibly be one of the last Bass votes. But yeah it's not enough to make that a reason to suspect her further.

Right now I am more interested in lynching Splints, the case on her just gets more and more solid. JJJ has interesting thoughts on DF as well, DF has totally blended into the background for me and I could see him either way.

[Scotty]

Let's not forget about nutella, ladies and gents. Between splints and nutella is at least one mafia. I can just smell it.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

JJJ has interesting thoughts on DF as well

Please highlight the thoughts you found interesting in a 5-minute span.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I don't understand the assertion that people voted for Bass as a means of protecting ninja. The 2nd vote for ninja came after the 6th and final vote for Bass.

[Scotty]

I don't understand the assertion that people voted for Bass as a means of protecting ninja. The 2nd vote for ninja came after the 6th and final vote for Bass.

Maybe not protecting ninja, but as you said, opportunists. mafia recognizing a potential landslide could vote preemptively and still appear like they have an opinion.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I don't understand the assertion that people voted for Bass as a means of protecting ninja. The 2nd vote for ninja came after the 6th and final vote for Bass.

Maybe not protecting ninja, but as you said, opportunists. mafia recognizing a potential landslide could vote preemptively and still appear like they have an opinion.

Yeah, that perspective makes more sense to me. It suits the Cobalt lynch too since they both proceeded quietly and painlessly (until the last two hours of Day 9). That's opportunism in the form of voting for someone not on one's own team without having to stand out in doing so. Going with the flow under no pressure.

[nutella]

JJJ has interesting thoughts on DF as well

Please highlight the thoughts you found interesting in a 5-minute span.

Okay, yes I skimmed it, because it came up while I was posting, but I chose to comment because I thought he was a good name to bring up and from my skim you had some good points about him regarding LC, his vote record, and his generally "safe" play so far (I really agree especially with that since he's totally blended in).

linki: well I admit I hadn't actually examined the actual vote order, I had just noticed that there was a big push for niju at the end but that bass was still lynched and I drew a false conjecture. Or the teammate saw that niju had suspicion and decided to go with the other popular suspicion to be safe. But again at this point I'm really not assuming that niju's bad, so this is all ridiculous speculation.

[nutella]

Where is the challenge?

[Golden]

I find JJ's case on DF to be incredibly persuasive.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I find JJ's case on DF to be incredibly persuasive.

Based on what?

[Scotty]

Getting in as much as I can in this limbo time before Dom wakes up

JJJ has interesting thoughts on DF as well

Please highlight the thoughts you found interesting in a 5-minute span.

Okay, yes I skimmed it, because it came up while I was posting, but I chose to comment because I thought he was a good name to bring up and from my skim you had some good points about him regarding LC, his vote record, and his generally "safe" play so far (I really agree especially with that since he's totally blended in).

linki: well I admit I hadn't actually examined the actual vote order, I had just noticed that there was a big push for niju at the end but that bass was still lynched and I drew a false conjecture. Or the teammate saw that niju had suspicion and decided to go with the other popular suspicion to be safe. But again at this point I'm really not assuming that niju's bad, so this is all ridiculous speculation.

Faraday is an interesting one. He DOES have so few votes and I hadn't realized it before. Sloonei said something like Day 3 to the likes of "He doesn't post much, but when he does, it's helpful" then the next day went back on his notes and said something like, "Well, actually he hasn't been all that helpful come to think of it." He's been like the assistant to the assistant head coach of a football team. Backs up the most like-minded suspicions and yet shouldn't be on payroll.

[Scotty]

By votes of course I mean *posts.

I would definitely like to hear a distinctive voice from DFaraday. He has been lurking in the shadows for a while now and I want to know who his biggest suspects are now that Cobalt and Bass are out

[Scotty]

The Trivia Game will go up tomorrow at 10:30 PM EST

I guess EST stood for "estimated"

[Golden]

I find JJ's case on DF to be incredibly persuasive.

Based on what?

Actually you know what? I'm not sure it's your case at all. It's the posts you've pulled out. In which case I should look for myself and see what it is you've left out.

I think DF could well be Team Webber. I want to look back and see what he had to say about sig, but he seemed to be much more willing to talk about people who were speculated to be on team 2. His BR vote looks good. Most of the suspicion of LC was that he was on Team Webber, so I think DF could have been in a very good position to see the LC/golden feud as civ/civ (there was a NK attempt on me by mafia 2)... At around that time I had theorised a webber team of LC/sig/TB/G-Man - I tihnk the focus on TB could be very indicative of someone who wanted to keep the focus off the people who actually were on team one and potentially undermine the whole idea at the source.

The G-Man stuff feels particularly disingenuous and like a bus.

I'll read back, but I see a legitimate webber team possibility there.

[Golden]

DF is the master at posting low, sounding civilian, and providing actual views in the posts he does post.

I can't remember having played with him when he is bad. It would have been many years ago if I have. I don't see much different from his civ meta.

[Marmot]

DF is the master at posting low, sounding civilian, and providing actual views in the posts he does post.

I can't remember having played with him when he is bad. It would have been many years ago if I have. I don't see much different from his civ meta.

He was bad in Flash Mafia, but was NK'd Night 1, so that's not a good sample. After that, I can't remember a game where DF was bad.

But I would agree with you, he has a self-described style of low posting and becoming more active as the game goes on [source not available].

[Marmot]

What is MovingPictures07 doing in this game?

[Scotty]

What is MovingPictures07 doing in this game?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Also, I hope Dom is ok

[Epignosis]

DF is the master at posting low, sounding civilian, and providing actual views in the posts he does post.

I can't remember having played with him when he is bad. It would have been many years ago if I have. I don't see much different from his civ meta.

He was bad in Flash Mafia, but was NK'd Night 1, so that's not a good sample. After that, I can't remember a game where DF was bad.

But I would agree with you, he has a self-described style of low posting and becoming more active as the game goes on [source not available].

"DFaraday is one of those consistent hobgoblins. The tone of his posts when he is bad matches the tone of his posts when he is good. I have been evil with him a few times, and even now I couldn't tell you much about him. His general Mafia strategy is to lie low and become more active when the herd is culled, but that is what he does when he is good. Consistent hobgoblin."

Who says that? I say that.

[Marmot]

What is MovingPictures07 doing in this game?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Also, I hope Dom is ok

I know what I'm talking about!

He's listed in the living players list.

[Scotty]

What is MovingPictures07 doing in this game?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Also, I hope Dom is ok

I know what I'm talking about!

He's listed in the living players list.

lol according to that list, SVS and Epi are dead, while Bullzeye and birdwithteeth (who??) are getting back massages in Maui

[Dom]

Guys, i'm gonna extend the night 24 hours. I just got home from work and I went in at 8AM my time (it's 12:35 AM the next day).


The trivia will start TOMORROW.

[Marmot]

Guys, i'm gonna extend the night 24 hours. I just got home from work and I went in at 8AM my time (it's 12:35 AM the next day).


The trivia will start TOMORROW.

Hi Dom!

I work late tomorrow, so if the trivia contest is a time-based thing, I may miss it.

[Scotty]

OK thanks for the update Dom! I'm assuming it's at 10:30p est?

Hopefully I'm back from the movies. Going to see Inside Out tomorrow.

[DFaraday]

Night 9, the time in the Mafia cycle when everyone inevitably starts suspecting me all at once. Responses in magenta.

A number of people including me have expressed some vague misgivings about DFaraday. So I'll look into him now.

Spoiler: show

My pm mentioned Sondheim, Brown, Schwartz, and Hammerstein together. It also repeated "lyricist" and "3/4" over and over. I think it may be Schwartz's role and I don't think he's a threat to us but I obviously can't be certain.

Lyricist could apply to any of those names. And 3/4 is a time signature indicative of a waltz. Mine was something about "revived" and "most overrated". I hope that's not a shot at The King and I.

I do think it was odd that Hedge brought up bandwagons for no particular reason. I think it could be to preemptively establish herself as looking better if one player does take a lot of votes, while also not really committing to anything herself.

Epi is reading as standard throw-everything-at-the-wall Epi to me, and LC hasn't done anything to ping me either. I don't agree with Epi that LC was using inflammatory language or trying to avoid offering his thoughts. He's done quite a lot of offering that I can see.

SVS is also on my radar for how strongly she reacted to the "interesting" thing. I doubt anyone will get lynched because they used an empty term like "interesting" or such, so her reaction towards Epi seemed misplaced.

This guy seems like a pretty no-nonsense type player. Almost every single one of his posts are directly relevant to game discussion. That's just an observation, it doesn't mean anything. Anyway, I highlight his third post here because it exemplifies that: he entered Day 1 with some immediate thoughts to share. The good thing here is that he took some real stances and made decently specific observations. This indicates to me that he was paying close attention to the content of other players more than to his own content: the mark of a townie. The only negative point to be made is that the four people he chose to comment on were perhaps the 4 most often discussed in the game to that point. His originality can be questioned.

I'm glad you like my early posts. And I'm not one for closely examining posts, so I typically only bring up people who have either done something egregiously shady or who have already been brought up, at which point I'll look at them more. Hence my lack of original suspects.

Spoiler: show

Responses in magenta, because I like magenta.

What are your thoughts on the possibility of LC and Cobalt dominating the discussion? Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Do they deserve to be the centers of attention? What makes you think Cobalt is more bad than LC?
As always, any reads on anyone else that you might have would be handy as well.
I think this kill could have been Cobalt trying to frame LC while setting himself up as the victim, and also I find his last minute vote switch to SVS very shady. I do think we need to get to the bottom of this feud or else it will continue to upstage everything else (pun intended). Not to say they have to be our only focus, but no matter what LC/Cobalt will be a major talking point for the time being.

The night kill of Epignosis 1.0 seemed to be a hot topic on Day 2, probably because of Epi's small handful of significant suspicions and the implications associated with him in his death. DFaraday suggested it might have been an intentional frame job perpetrated by Cobalt to smear Long Con. This turned out to be exactly the opposite of the truth, but DF wasn't alone in that perspective. Faraday: I'd ask you if you could revisit your mindset from this early stage and explain why you felt it was Cobalt doing the framing rather than Cobalt being framed?

I'd say it was a combination of tone (Cobalt's aggression made me think badly of him) and his vote switch which seemed contrary to all of his posts up until then. Since he came off as more suspicious to me already, I thought it was more likely that Cobalt would be framing LC rather than vice versa.

Spoiler: show

Day 1:

And i'm a good guy AGAIN for the third time in a row!

I wouldn't really question that if you hadn't mentioned it...

Let's all pretend none of Cobalt, SVS, or Long Con are available to be lynched today. Who do we all vote for then?

*Whom

TB is on my radar with her eagerness to let us know she's a civ. Apparently she's done this before, but it's still pingy to me.

But for now I think I'm going to *vote SVS*. I know she definitely could manipulate voters' sentiments if she wanted to, and I think that could have happened as early as the comments about Epi's "interesting" speech.

Day 2:

Responses in magenta, because I like magenta.

Has anything changed about your feelings toward TinyBubbles?
I guess I feel slightly better, since that one comment is the only ping I've gotten from her.

Who is your top suspect right now, DFaraday? would you be willing to put an early vote on anyone right now?

I suppose still Cobalt, although his over-the-top reaction to LC surviving did seem pretty sincere. Were I to do a rainbow list, the next highest people would be TB, Hedge, and Gamer Guy (now G-Man). I think Golden may have been on to something with his find, but i agree with MM that it's not really in the spirit of Mafia to use other threads for info.

Day 3:

I've fallen behind over the last day, I need to catch up. Going off of my cursory glance so far, I'm thinking Golden/LC is civ/civ. Golden, at least, is pretty unlikely to be on one of the baddie teams.

For now I'll put my vote back on TB, since I know I'm not actually going to vote for Cobalt today.

And also, I agree with Nutella that not reading the thread and not making cases are two different things. One is lazy, one can be lazy or a strategy.

I'm not sure why I said "back" on TB, since I hadn't voted her to begin with. I need coffee.

EBWOP: Because I've already found her suspicious, and I haven't yet caught up on the Sig/LC/Golden stuff going on.

One thing that interested me about DFaraday in the first half of his ISO is this progression in his read of TinyBubbles. We know now due to her Day 6 lynch that Bubbles was town, so it's especially important to verify the thought processes people displayed in this thread leading to her lynch to determine whether they were sincerely suspicious of her. I think there is some decently suspicious content here for Faraday. He played with a decent degree of thoroughness early in the game, so that he went for this Bubbles case and placed that vote on Day 3 is troubling -- especially because this was the phase in which sig was lynched. When Faraday placed his vote for Bubbles, it placed Bubbles in a 4-2 lead over sig (before the landslide eventually swept sig away). That's a pretty bad look.

It can be forgiven if his case against Bubbles is significant enough to warrant his vote... but I don't see it. In fact -- there isn't a case at all. The only distinct negative comment Faraday made about Bubbles' content in this game was that very minor Day 1 "ping" at the top of this quote pile. Otherwise, the only things he says about her are either positive, or negative without any reason given. So, in a phase in which a mafia was eventually lynched, Faraday gave a confirmed townie a 4-2 tally lead over that mafia player without ever actually mounting any kind of case against her. Faraday is definitely going to need to answer to this.

Do players never vote on vibes where you come from? TB insisting she was civ and doing nothing to defend herself struck me the wrong way. I didn't have a stronger suspicion at the time, since I hadn't caught up on the Sig case when I voted (and by the time I did catch up, I still wasn't convinced about Sig).

Spoiler: show

Finally caught up. Good job, everyone, even though I probably wouldn't have voted Sig had I been around. I didn't find the case that convincing, but apparently it was right

I do agree that Splints' vote seems like it could be a teammate bandwagoning, but for that matter, Ninja's vote rubs me the wrong way too. She does straight up say it's a bandwagon vote, but I still feel pinged by it.

I hope LC and Golden can move on from the feud for next day. It feels like a whole lot of miscommunication, probably between civs.

This is the second time I've seen Faraday refer to the LC/Golden "feud" as being a likely civilian versus civilian affair. This bugs me a little bit on two fronts: it is a subtle means of linking Golden with LC, and also it obviously serves as an indirect soft defense of confirmed mafia LC.

I think you're giving me too much credit if you think I'm trying to psychologically manipulate people into associating them. Also, when I have teammates I never post repeatedly that I think they're civ. On that point I think you're giving me too little credit.

Spoiler: show

G-Man seems to have no interest in defending himself, and it reads like a defeated baddie to me (or at best an unhelpful civvie). Speaking of unhelpful civvie, that's how I'm looking at MM. If he were bad I don't think he'd have such tunnel vision; this is definitely a departure in style for him. I'm still not convinced about LC being bad, either, so MM's sureness seems misplaced.

I will go ahead and *vote G-Man*

Yay for no death! Even though I'm probably still going to vote G-Man, his vote chart is helpful. My initial takeaway from it is that the later LC voters from Day 1 are unlikely to be Mafia 2, since the vote was fairly tight all the way up to the end. And given the way MM has played, I very much doubt if he's on that team, so I think basically all of the LC voters on Day 1 are not Mafia 2.

Similarly, I'd think the early Sig voters on Day 3 are probably not Mafia 1, but once it started to turn into a runaway, I'm thinking one or two teammates slipped in. So I'd say Sloonei, Scotty, FZ, and Bubbles look pretty good in that regard, but MM, Ninja, or FS (or more than one of them) could have been a bandwagon vote for a teammate.

I'm going to go ahead and *vote G-Man* now. Nothing has changed my mind about him.

This is somewhat curious treatment of G-Man on Day 4. It's decent enough that he placed his vote for a mafia player, but the progression here seems at least a little inconsistent. The first post asserts that G-Man has "no interest in defending himself", which in itself is really not a terribly scathing accusation. We've all seen townies do that many times I'm sure. The primary point of interest is that he said G-Man was at best an "unhelpful" civilian. So it's noteworthy then that in the next quoted post, he maintains his anti-G-Man stance despite calling his vote chart "helpful". "Helpful" is the opposite of "unhelpful", which was a key component of his prior accusation. So if that changed, I am curious why he didn't seem to budge at all in his stated suspicion (as he reiterated in the last quoted post).

As far as I could tell, G-Man had no interest in finding suspects or contributing to discussion, and was unhelpful as such. But since I don't like parsing through players' posts and vote records, that chart was helpful to me, just because I didn't have to scan through all the other stuff. I didn't take G-Man's chart as an attempt at contributing to the game in any significant degree, I just found it convenient for myself.

This is the phase in which Long Con (the mafia team of which G-Man was not a member) ended up lynched. DFaraday's vote for G-Man made it a 5-4 tally lead for LC -- quite close and still swingable into a G-Man lynch. I think there's valid reason to suspect based on the above that Faraday's suspicion of G-Man was somewhat disingenuous. That might indicate he was bussing G-Man to improve his credibility, or it might indicate he was protecting Long Con.

Either way, that's a bad look.

G-Man was eventually lynched the next day phase, but it was such an avalanche tally that it's really not possible to give anyone credit for it based on just their votes.

There's nothing I can really say here, since apparently it would have been suspicious if I'd voted for either of the baddies on the chopping block that day.

Spoiler: show

Great result! Bye G-Man.

Question for DFaraday: I’ve seen you mention fingersplints in a couple of posts. What is your read on her? Could you elaborate? Also any other reads you have at this time would be helpful.

I think I'm leaning slightly bad on FS. She pretty much bandwagoned late on the LC lynch, which makes me wonder if it was just a blending tactic. Other than that, I haven't noticed her posts standing out very much, so I'm a bit worried if she's trying to fly under the radar.

Off the top of my head, Cobalt and Hedge would be my suspicions right now. Maybe MM as well, although given that he's almost certainly not Mafia 2, he is less likely to be bad.

I skipped everything else and just read the part about me, so in the morning I'll catch up and offer more detailed thoughts.

When pressed for suspects on Day 6, Faraday offered the same two names he'd been saying since Day 1. Is he known for long-term tunneling of this sort? We don't know yet how his treatment of Hedge will reflect on him, but we know Cobalt was an easy target townie.

Yeah. I usually don't go out of my way looking for new suspicions.

Spoiler: show

i am sure this has been addressed already but: in a two-mafia-team game, how is it a relevant defense to survive a night kill?

It makes it unlikely that you are on the team that tried to kill you. Although, I once hosted a game where a baddie team NKed their teammate Night 2, so I wouldn't put it past any Mafia team to fake a kill.

I think Golden is probably not part of the plot, but I agree with Timmer that this sudden push for Cobalt, who's been on the backburner for days, is suspicious and comes across as a BR save. My thoughts on BR have not changed, aside from becoming even more suspicious of her, so I'll put my vote on BR for now.

*Votes BR*

His BR votes might be his strongest point of defense right now, which isn't great because I'd only call them a small positive in a game with two mafia teams. Nonetheless, they happened and that should be acknowledged. On Day 6 he helped pursue Black Rock instead of TinyBubbles; the latter ended up lynched. Faraday can't be blamed though, because his vote extended the lead for BR before others came in and took out Bubbles.

On Day 7 he stuck to his guns and helped generate the BR lynch.

Yes I did.

Spoiler: show

I think Scotty makes a good case on Bass, but I'd want to hear from Bass before deciding. For me it's between Bass and Cobalt, since I think Ninja acquitted herself fairly well.

0 for 2.

DFaraday's rate of contribution has fallen off quite a lot in recent phases. I'll leave him to explain why. One troubling result of this is that his focus has been consistently narrowed. Over the last three day phases, he has said very little about any player other than the three in the above quote: Cobalt, Bass, and ninja. We already know two of them were town, and it's entirely plausible three of them were. Given the highly suspicious, easy nature of the Cobalt and Bass lynches and Faraday's lack of thoroughness as they were perpetrated, I view this with suspicion.

I think it's probably because so many of the vocal players have died, and when the thread is dead, I tend not to come in and draw attention to myself. But hey, you've got me talking again!

DFaraday's final votes for reference:

Day 1: S~V~S (2nd of 7)
Day 2: Cobalt (6th of 9)
Day 3: TinyBubbles (4th of 4)
Day 4: G-Man (4th of 6)
Day 5: G-Man (4th of 13)
Day 6: Black Rock (4th of 4)
Day 7: Black Rock (2nd of 7)
Day 8: No vote
Day 9: Bass_the_Clever (3rd of 6)

~~~

Overall, I think DFaraday plays a tight game. He conveys the right sort of pro-town persona. However, there is a significant amount of dirt I just dragged up without having to look very deep. He has 42 posts in this thread, and I still had all of those issues with his content. I think he's suspicious and will call him an anti-town read.

I encourage him to address my points. I'm always open to hear rebuttals.

I think the general gist of my response is that I often play intuitively and defensively, neither of which are a super civvie look.

[S~V~S]

Faraday, I do not suspect you for your inherent Faraday-ness. Before last night, you had 40 posts, and of them 10 mention Ninja. I found it interesting and rather slippery reading. That is why I suspect you.

If it turns out that I am wrong about Ninja, my suspicion of you will pretty much evaporate, since it is mainly based on a bad Ninja.

If not Ninja, who would you have us look at? What alternative to Ninja in tomorrows lynch do you think you may vote for?

[DFaraday]

Faraday, I do not suspect you for your inherent Faraday-ness. Before last night, you had 40 posts, and of them 10 mention Ninja. I found it interesting and rather slippery reading. That is why I suspect you.

If it turns out that I am wrong about Ninja, my suspicion of you will pretty much evaporate, since it is mainly based on a bad Ninja.

If not Ninja, who would you have us look at? What alternative to Ninja in tomorrows lynch do you think you may vote for?

My top suspects are Splints, who is coming off as opportunistic and blendy, and Nutella, who has seemed to have very few original thoughts this game (if she has I just haven't noticed them). If I'm alive I'll be voting for one of them tomorrow.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

My own responses to DFaraday's defenses in bold sky blue. I've rearranged his responses into a new order so I can categorize them in a way I find sensible. Refer to his original post for the proper context if necessary.

I'm glad you like my early posts. And I'm not one for closely examining posts, so I typically only bring up people who have either done something egregiously shady or who have already been brought up, at which point I'll look at them more. Hence my lack of original suspects.

I think it's probably because so many of the vocal players have died, and when the thread is dead, I tend not to come in and draw attention to myself. But hey, you've got me talking again!

Yeah. I usually don't go out of my way looking for new suspicions.

I think the general gist of my response is that I often play intuitively and defensively, neither of which are a super civvie look.

I place all of these responses together because there is a troubling theme among them: you're describing your own meta in such a way that it excuses you for doing things that are inherently suspicious. I underlined some specific sentences in which you describe your own style in the same way I might describe the quentissential anti-town player. You acknowledge this in the last comment here: your style does not give you a "super civvie look". Indeed, to focus specifically on players who are already being discussed by most others is counterproductive for a townie. To avoid drawing attention to oneself is one of the basic tenants of how an anti-town player is supposed to perform. To avoid "going out of your way" looking for new suspicions is essentially to say you just pick a few names to cast suspicion on and hope you've rolled the dice well.

I struggle to see how a civilian can consistently play this way -- even in this Syndicate environment where townies sometimes seem to hate playing openly.

Do players never vote on vibes where you come from? TB insisting she was civ and doing nothing to defend herself struck me the wrong way. I didn't have a stronger suspicion at the time, since I hadn't caught up on the Sig case when I voted (and by the time I did catch up, I still wasn't convinced about Sig).

Players do vote on vibes where I come from, sure. Many of them are mafia-aligned. "Vibes" represent the vaguest possible suspicion anyone can have of anyone else, and it doesn't make me feel good when people employ them as a reason for a vote. Moreover, genuine "bad vibes" have to be inspired by something specific. You didn't merely look at TinyBubbles' username and say to yourself "Hmmm, she looks fishy". The vibes must have a real origin that you can point to which would justify her being your Day 3 vote. And if it's just that one little ping you mentioned from Day 1 -- I'm not satisfied with that.

I think you're giving me too much credit if you think I'm trying to psychologically manipulate people into associating them. Also, when I have teammates I never post repeatedly that I think they're civ. On that point I think you're giving me too little credit.

The former point here is fair. Not everyone would think to try this particular method of manipulation. The latter point is not something I can do anything with though. I don't think it would be a foolish maneuver for you to play a little defense for at least one mafia team mate. When a player insists upon his or her own mafia methods, I tend to just drone it out. At face value, how am I supposed to trust that assertion?

There's nothing I can really say here, since apparently it would have been suspicious if I'd voted for either of the baddies on the chopping block that day.

This isn't necessarily true. I wasn't suspicious of you because you voted for G-Man. I was suspicious because the progression of your suspicion against him struck me as awkward for the reasons I mentioned. And if there is reason to wonder about your sincerity when you cast suspicion, there is reason to be suspicious of you -- even when you help lynch a mafioso.

I'd say it was a combination of tone (Cobalt's aggression made me think badly of him) and his vote switch which seemed contrary to all of his posts up until then. Since he came off as more suspicious to me already, I thought it was more likely that Cobalt would be framing LC rather than vice versa.

This is fair. You state the truth when you assert that you'd voiced suspicion of Cobalt prior to the Epignosis 1.0 kill, so I can believe that you really felt this way.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

There are a couple points I want to make about Golden regarding his involvement in the last two lynches. We all know Golden is a very capable town player, and in my experience playing with him he typically seems to mount some kind of significant case against a player before or during the pursuit of that player's lynch. So, given that he was a part of two consecutive town lynches here, we have to critically assess his role in them.

Spoiler: show

The biggest reason I have for bass being bad?

Team 2 tried to get him lynched (eg BR) and when it hadn't succeeded they tried to NK him. I think they might have known something.

i get the feeling Bass is a pretty easy target on a consistent basis, primarily because of the silly-reasons-for-lynches he leaves everyone with. disengagement, maybe laziness, lack of substantive self-defense. Team 2 tried to lynch him perhaps, but i would assert that numerous players alive and dead have been trying to lynch him in some capacity for a while now.

They tried to lynch him... and then tried to NK him...

Why the persistence?

I'm not saying it's overly persuasive, but even at the time it struck me as oddly persistent.

Golden said the "biggest reason" he had for suspecting Bass was this bit about Mafia 2 making an effort both to lynch him and then to night kill him, suggesting this meant they knew something. This is a vague notion which demands expansion by Golden ASAP, within the intended spirit of the rules. The underlined bit is a little confusing to me as well. Golden: why did this strike you as "oddly persistent" at the time, as this would suggest you were aware he was being pursued by Mafia 2 during the lynch attempt at the time. How could you have known that?

Moreover, I'm looking back and not seeing obvious evidence of any attempt to lynch Bass by non-townies before he was actually lynched. The only phases in which he received votes by players other than himself were Day 2 (Black Rock and fingersplints, exact alignments still unknown) and Day 7 (Cobalt and JJJ). This excludes the phase in which he was actually lynched. So, Golden, could you please show me exactly what you're referring to when you talk about this attempt by Mafia 2 to lynch Bass?

It's crucially important as it's a critical component of the "case" you proposed against Bass.

Spoiler: show

is there significant evidence against Cobalt, or has he drawn the ire of players primarily because of his abrasive style?

My evidence is this - apologies for it being slightly long winded.

TGG quit the game after epi subbed in for MP. After some time, some thinking, and some reading of posts by TGG in other places, I came to the view that the reason TGG quit was not entirely because of internet issues (as he claimed in the thread). Rather, I thought that at least part of the reason for his quit was because he was in the team that killed epi, and was upset that he had been allowed to sub back in.

This led me to suggest G-Man (TGG's replacement) was on team 1, which when he was lynched proved to be correct.

Epi's first two posts after subbing back in, and just before TGG quit, were to say 'I know who killed me' and 'my suspicions haven't changed'. This led me to believe that epi was killed because he was on to one of mafia team 1 on day one, and TGG was specifically upset because they had killed him to get rid of a threat.

So then the question becomes, who was TGG's teammate that they killed epi to protect? SVS was indy, LC on team 2. If you were to reread epi's posts from day one, something I do suggest you do, I'd be interested to know if you come up with cobalt as I have.

This was Golden's case for Cobalt being mafia, eventually leading to Golden starting the bandwagon that became a lynch. The main issue I have with this is that Golden is voicing suspicion of Cobalt without actually referencing anything Cobalt himself did. He is throwing shade on Cobalt because of a theory he has constructed on the behavior of Epignosis 1.0/2.0 and TGG -- one that demands we assume Mafia 1 was specifically interested in protecting their own when they killed Epignosis 1.0. DFaraday proposed earlier that he thought the kill might have been intended to frame Long Con (something Mafia 1 was fully capable of doing to a Mafia 2 player). Moreover, Epignosis is just a threatening presence either way because of his style, and it seems to get him killed early in games regardless of who he suspects.

So this doesn't strike me as the most Golden-caliber case, especially since Cobalt had a large post history which should have somehow been incorporated into this. I question the sincerity and think there's potential for opportunism in both of these Golden votes for Cobalt and Bass during their respective lynches.

[DFaraday]

Responses to the responses in lime green.

My own responses to DFaraday's defenses in bold sky blue. I've rearranged his responses into a new order so I can categorize them in a way I find sensible. Refer to his original post for the proper context if necessary.

I'm glad you like my early posts. And I'm not one for closely examining posts, so I typically only bring up people who have either done something egregiously shady or who have already been brought up, at which point I'll look at them more. Hence my lack of original suspects.

I think it's probably because so many of the vocal players have died, and when the thread is dead, I tend not to come in and draw attention to myself. But hey, you've got me talking again!

Yeah. I usually don't go out of my way looking for new suspicions.

I think the general gist of my response is that I often play intuitively and defensively, neither of which are a super civvie look.

I place all of these responses together because there is a troubling theme among them: you're describing your own meta in such a way that it excuses you for doing things that are inherently suspicious. I underlined some specific sentences in which you describe your own style in the same way I might describe the quentissential anti-town player. You acknowledge this in the last comment here: your style does not give you a "super civvie look". Indeed, to focus specifically on players who are already being discussed by most others is counterproductive for a townie. To avoid drawing attention to oneself is one of the basic tenants of how an anti-town player is supposed to perform. To avoid "going out of your way" looking for new suspicions is essentially to say you just pick a few names to cast suspicion on and hope you've rolled the dice well.

I struggle to see how a civilian can consistently play this way -- even in this Syndicate environment where townies sometimes seem to hate playing openly.

I can consistently play that way because when it comes to Mafia, I'm usually more concerned with staying alive than putting myself out there to try to help the town. If I survive to the late game, I feel better about taking a front and center role. I also avoid making attention-grabbing comments because I very much dislike confrontation, although since I have no intention of changing my playstyle we will probably have this discussion in every game we play together going forward.

I'm sure this response is not satisfying to you, but I'm just going to accept now that you will never like my style and leave it at that.

Do players never vote on vibes where you come from? TB insisting she was civ and doing nothing to defend herself struck me the wrong way. I didn't have a stronger suspicion at the time, since I hadn't caught up on the Sig case when I voted (and by the time I did catch up, I still wasn't convinced about Sig).

Players do vote on vibes where I come from, sure. Many of them are mafia-aligned. "Vibes" represent the vaguest possible suspicion anyone can have of anyone else, and it doesn't make me feel good when people employ them as a reason for a vote. Moreover, genuine "bad vibes" have to be inspired by something specific. You didn't merely look at TinyBubbles' username and say to yourself "Hmmm, she looks fishy". The vibes must have a real origin that you can point to which would justify her being your Day 3 vote. And if it's just that one little ping you mentioned from Day 1 -- I'm not satisfied with that.

I was hardly the only person to vote TB because of her over-insistence on being a civvie. If you don't think that's a good enough reason to vote someone, fine, but people have voted for flimsier reasons than that in this and every other game. I still maintain that it was better to vote for someone I had a slight suspicion of than someone I had no read on at all (in that case Sig).

I think you're giving me too much credit if you think I'm trying to psychologically manipulate people into associating them. Also, when I have teammates I never post repeatedly that I think they're civ. On that point I think you're giving me too little credit.

The former point here is fair. Not everyone would think to try this particular method of manipulation. The latter point is not something I can do anything with though. I don't think it would be a foolish maneuver for you to play a little defense for at least one mafia team mate. When a player insists upon his or her own mafia methods, I tend to just drone it out. At face value, how am I supposed to trust that assertion?

There's nothing I can really say here, since apparently it would have been suspicious if I'd voted for either of the baddies on the chopping block that day.

This isn't necessarily true. I wasn't suspicious of you because you voted for G-Man. I was suspicious because the progression of your suspicion against him struck me as awkward for the reasons I mentioned. And if there is reason to wonder about your sincerity when you cast suspicion, there is reason to be suspicious of you -- even when you help lynch a mafioso.

But you set it up so as to indicate that my vote suggested me as a possible teammate for both teams.

I'd say it was a combination of tone (Cobalt's aggression made me think badly of him) and his vote switch which seemed contrary to all of his posts up until then. Since he came off as more suspicious to me already, I thought it was more likely that Cobalt would be framing LC rather than vice versa.

This is fair. You state the truth when you assert that you'd voiced suspicion of Cobalt prior to the Epignosis 1.0 kill, so I can believe that you really felt this way.

Good deal.

[Marmot]

I've noticed something while looking through the lynch votes.

Nijuukyugou and nutella have almost the exact same vote record. Here's a look at their votes below. (nijuu's vote first, nutella's vote second, the numbers stand for the nth vote placed on the corresponding day).

Day 1 - Long Con (18), Cobalt (20) (This is the only time they voted differently)
Day 2 - Cobalt (7), Cobalt (14)
Day 3 - sig (19), sig (23)
Day 4 - Long Con (16), Long Con (18)
Day 5 - G-Man (17), G-Man (10)
Day 6 - TinyBubbles (13), TinyBubbles (12)
Day 7 - Cobalt (5), (nutella missed this vote)
Day 8 - Cobalt (11), Cobalt (17)
Day 9 - Bass_the_Clever (10), Bass_the_Clever (7)

Except for Day 1 when they voted separately and Day 7 where nutella missed the vote, every single day, they voted for the player that was eventually lynched that day.

Food for thought.



Another thing I noticed, Scotty has the exact same vote record as nutella with two exceptions.

1) Scotty did not vote for G-Man on Day 5 in G-Man's landslide lynch. Curiously, Scotty proposed that we accelerate the day phase due to G-Man being a runaway lynch. Votes were changeable that day, but Scotty didn't even bother to put his vote on G-Man in the process.
2) The day nutella missed the vote, Scotty voted FOR nutella. Nutella appeared to be silenced that day.



Now with all of these votes being placed on lynched players, this may just be coincidental as a result of similar playstyles and reactions. I think there may be something more there with the nutella/Scotty pattern though.

[nutella]

I was never silenced -- did I really not post for a whole day? I know I was busy/MIA that day and missed the vote completely by accident, but I wasn't silenced.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I'd like to hear what everyone thinks of the discussion between DFaraday and I.

[Epignosis]

I don't suspect DFaraday.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Marsh, what conclusions would you draw from your discoveries regarding the votes between ninja, nutella, and Scotty?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I don't suspect DFaraday.

I don't suspect Epignosis.

[Scotty]

Another thing I noticed, Scotty has the exact same vote record as nutella with two exceptions.

1) Scotty did not vote for G-Man on Day 5 in G-Man's landslide lynch. Curiously, Scotty proposed that we accelerate the day phase due to G-Man being a runaway lynch. Votes were changeable that day, but Scotty didn't even bother to put his vote on G-Man in the process.
2) The day nutella missed the vote, Scotty voted FOR nutella. Nutella appeared to be silenced that day.



Now with all of these votes being placed on lynched players, this may just be coincidental as a result of similar playstyles and reactions. I think there may be something more there with the nutella/Scotty pattern though.

CASE 1)
I was reading light civ on ninja yesterday until those 2 hours before the deadline last night, when at least 4 people were confident on her being bad.
nutella and ninja have almost identical voting records. That's interesting to me. The only recordable difference is their Day 1 votes. The main evidential difference is how systematic and strategic ninja's looks.
Day 3- one of the last to vote for sig. Her entire sig suspicion was a blurb in one post Day 2, where she says there may be some merit to
Day 4- Broke the tie on GMan/LC to vote for LC.
Day 5- one of the last to vote for GMan.

Thanks for restating what I said yesterday, MM

1) As for my voting and wishing to speed up the vote, I still stand by that because I was growing impatient. GMan had basically showed his hand at that point. And that was a landslide. I was willing to bet no one was changing their votes.
2) As she said, she wasn't silenced, and that was also the time I got pinged from her and that's when I started tunneling hard on her.
3) I hate doing this on my phone. God help anyone attempting to quote specific posts on the phone.

[Scotty]

I no longer suspect MM

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Gonna look into Hedgeowl. So many creepy quiet players in this game.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I must acknowledge that I have found what I consider to be at least decent reasons to suspect everyone I've analyzed so far. I don't know if it's the Syndicate survival instinct disagreeing with my natural inclination to play with my hand flipped up at all times or if all of y'all really are suspicious.

[Scotty]

Gonna look into Hedgeowl. So many creepy quiet players in this game.

She sorta disappeared after Day 6. Most of her game was her dealing with the anxiety of catching up every time she'd come in. I had her as genuinely flustered all the time, and light civ. Probably on the play level of Tiny Bubbles except she didn't keep affirming that she was civ like Tiny was wont to do