Phenon: Origins Mafia [END]

[Kent Brockman]

As a component of this hypothetical dick, I must admit that I fail to appreciate its relevance to our objective. I shall not promise that I will not participate should a timely opportunity present itself, but I shall heretofore assume that any participant who focuses disproportionately on that goal to have insufficient priorities and that they are taking advantage of the sophomoric spelling mission to distract from the true and correct mission: the search for those among us who seek to destroy.

*Charlie*

[Kent Brockman]

it was hyperbole my dude. it's day one there's no harm in fucking around a little.

Charlie, is your over-the-top Knights Templar thing real or is it just an act to seem more civ?

Is there a way for us to find out? Is such behavior something we can point out as indicative?

[Kent Brockman]

I, for one, would like to see more jabs.

Like this jab, at Alpha: take my vote until you can come up with a non-dick-related reason to vote someone that I like more than my vote for you. You don't have to waver from your excellent dick plan, but you can't hide behind it.

*vote Alpha*

This is dumb. Echo what word do you wanna spell?

[Kent Brockman]

Kilo, I hereby accuse you of placing a flier vote on a non-checker-inner for the sake of appearing loose with your vote and not for the sake of doing anything productive with it.

Bravo, I nearby accuse you of being cute.

What say you to these charges?

[Chuck]

We could have waited for day two to pull that. Then the oracle would have a choice regarding who to reveal. How unfortunate.

And furthermore, since the oracle is vanilla so long as it lives, I would imagine that the bad guys would avoid killing it. And the good guys would avoid lynching it as well.

So, I don't really want to believe you, Echo. I wonder what your motive is. Bad guy, trying to avoid being lynched? Good guy, trying not to get lynched or killed? Or are you a genuine Oracle, though very short-sighted?

It's not short-sighted, it's a pretty, solid plan,
What would you have done if you were dealt that hand?
Do you have some thoughts on why he took this stand?
I think it's legit, and he/she's a cool little can.

I have stated the possible motives. I dare not put words in the mouth of Echo. Such would be ironic.

You ask what I, as Oracle, would have done? I could consider this to be role phishing. But I will answer regardless or your motive.
Oracle, should they desire to do well and be killed rather than lynched, should be as town-centric in action as possible. I believe the term is 'supah-town,' if you will forgive my use of non-words. The gambit that Echo has enacted is not ideal for a real Oracle.

[Kent Brockman]

Voting Charlie until I see evidence that their hardline crusade is real.

Ooh boy, Alpha has thrown an ultimatum. WHERE IS OMEGA WHEN WE NEED THEM.

[Kent Brockman]

Voting Charlie until I see evidence that their hardline crusade is real.

Ooh boy, Alpha has thrown an ultimatum. WHERE IS OMEGA WHEN WE NEED THEM.

I guess it would be Oscar not Omega. Derp.

[Paprika]

Well, India, I guess we'll see where this gambit gets me. You may be right and you may be wrong.

Welcome Foxtrot - your avatar is the shit!

[dunya]

There is no reveal upon death of any kind

Hey wait so how do we do this? How do we..... anything?

oh my...and I thought we had it bad.

[Spooky Ghost]

I challenged you to give me a better reason to vote someone, and you did.

1. You shouldn't be taking my advice on who to vote for, 20% of my posts have been about spelling rude words on the internet.

I wasn't taking your advice. I was judging the voting reason you gave under pressure against my reason for voting you. My judgement, not your advice.

2. Isn't it a little weird to settle your vote on someone just cus someone else gave you a reason to vote for them? It doesn't fit with the pro-jabbing stance you had earlier.

"Pro-jabbing stance":

On this page so far we have spelled CISPRITYOJIABB, which is one of my absolute favorite words

If we play our cards right, we can fill this game with lots of jibs.

Did I say jib? I meant gibe.

I, for one, would like to see more jabs.

Like this jab...

That's what is known as a "segue", often misspelled "segway".

That's not the point. Are you voting for Charlie cus you agree or because you just wanted a reason to vote for someone?

[Spooky Ghost]

Without any reliable flips in this game it's more important than ever for everyone to be pretty dang clear about why they're voting for who they're voting for.

[Paprika]

I challenged you to give me a better reason to vote someone, and you did.

1. You shouldn't be taking my advice on who to vote for, 20% of my posts have been about spelling rude words on the internet.

I wasn't taking your advice. I was judging the voting reason you gave under pressure against my reason for voting you. My judgement, not your advice.

2. Isn't it a little weird to settle your vote on someone just cus someone else gave you a reason to vote for them? It doesn't fit with the pro-jabbing stance you had earlier.

"Pro-jabbing stance":

On this page so far we have spelled CISPRITYOJIABB, which is one of my absolute favorite words

If we play our cards right, we can fill this game with lots of jibs.

Did I say jib? I meant gibe.

I, for one, would like to see more jabs.

Like this jab...

That's what is known as a "segue", often misspelled "segway".

That's not the point. Are you voting for Charlie cus you agree or because you just wanted a reason to vote for someone?

Well, both. If I didn't agree, then it wouldn't be a reason for me to vote for him.

I see Foxtrot has also voted Charlie, currently tied with Golf at three votes apiece.

[Paprika]

Without any reliable flips in this game it's more important than ever for everyone to be pretty dang clear about why they're voting for who they're voting for.

Without any flips - reliable or unreliable - it will be harder than most other games to determine which voting reasons are genuine.

[Spooky Ghost]

Without any reliable flips in this game it's more important than ever for everyone to be pretty dang clear about why they're voting for who they're voting for.

Without any flips - reliable or unreliable - it will be harder than most other games to determine which voting reasons are genuine.

Which is why it's so important that everyone take responsibility for their votes.

[Lunatella]

We're past the deadline?

Golf

Cause chance is for suckers.

Please explain.

My internet was down for the better part of the day yesterday, which is why I was absent. I'm casting a vote for Charlie.

[Lunatella]

I should hope someone wises up because I am not bad.

[Chuck]

I have now voted for Golf.

Charlie has made the one off-kilter post. I can understand voting Charlie for that. I do understand, yes. But in lynching Charlie on this day, in this situation, we are limiting discussion. Charlie is one who talks. Golf, perhaps due to unfortunate circumstance, is or was less able to speak.

That said, I reason that Charlie is an acceptable option for lynch. But I don't think it should be an easy one, with votes simply placed by those that held issue with the one post. If you are voting for Charlie, and you really think they should be lynched, now is the time to convince others. Put effort into that before it dies in the water, so to speak.

Concerning my own vote: I am at the present moment more interested in being obstinate and forcing you all to push arguments than I am in voting for Charlie. Convince me otherwise, or change course and present a case on another.

linki: Ah, it seems Golf has returned. Fear not. I shall not remain here all day lest you give me reason to do so.

[Julinook]

Kilo, I hereby accuse you of placing a flier vote on a non-checker-inner for the sake of appearing loose with your vote and not for the sake of doing anything productive with it.

This is the only part of the statement I disagree with. To what end are you accusing me of doing this?

It is an accusation near and dear to my heart.

Really, the assertion is that care-free voting behavior is sometimes associated with a civilian mindset, and it's an easy way to try to grab credit. Generally even that kind of flier vote has purpose though. In truth there can be some measure of purpose in your vote, even for a non-poster. Would you say it had purpose?

[Principal Skinner]

I agree with India that justifying votes is important. Some of the votes for me have not really been justified. I am particularly concerned with Foxtrot, who appeared to vote for me while in the midst of a catch-up and then failed to acknowledge my later posts. F, please elaborate and/or reconsider.

[Julinook]

I've a theory. I want Charlie to answer to your assertion as well as Alpha's before I proceed.

I'd said this in response to the assertion that Charlie's posh language was a concern. My theory was just that he was adopting that kind of language for the sake of it, i.e. for fun. Charlie's comment corroborates that more or less:

Ok lemme just go ahead and say I'mma not do that fancy posh verbiage heavy style. At first I was thinkin I was gonna do a different style every post and just keep changin' up the way I speak, but thinking about it now in light of india's thoughts, that's probably not the right choice here and would just make it easier for the disguiser. So I'll try to settle into a more normal style.

Alpha and India, I kind of get why you voted for me, but I wasn't trying to hide behind the style (well kind of in that I think it's fun to see how long one's sock puppet can last without being obviously identified as one's own style) I was just having a bit of fun with it. Alpha, I don't actually think you're particularly suspicious after all as you are one of the most active so far and your jokeyness is genuine. Thus I'll change my vote, not to a non-poster but to someone who has at least checked in but has not yet participated much. IIRC Golf fits that description.

I'm not thrilled though at this, Charlie. After stepping away from your Alpha accusation, you defaulted to the low-poster option (specifically the one who checked in). The strategy isn't necessarily a bad one, but it's better left for late in a day when other conversations have not produced a more substantial suspicion. I'm not sure you did much to encourage that conversation.

[Julinook]

People I wouldn't vote for today: Alpha, India, Juliet

[Julinook]

We only get information if the Oracle gets nightkilled. As information-starved letters, the clear path is to out the Oracle so that they can be nightkilled. I am the Oracle.

I don't get it. Why claim that right now?

[Julinook]

Kilo, I hereby accuse you of placing a flier vote on a non-checker-inner for the sake of appearing loose with your vote and not for the sake of doing anything productive with it.

Bravo, I nearby accuse you of being cute.

What say you to these charges?

You're nearby?

[Spooky Ghost]

I am concerned. I know this is day one. Ordinarily, for example, if four players vote for Charlie and he flips bad, conclusions can be drawn about those 4 players regardless of how strong their convictions were.

In this game there are no flips. So the only thing we can use to judge people's character is their reasons for voting whomever.

[Julinook]

Please explain.

My internet was down for the better part of the day yesterday, which is why I was absent. I'm casting a vote for Charlie.

Why Charlie?

[Principal Skinner]

I've a theory. I want Charlie to answer to your assertion as well as Alpha's before I proceed.

I'd said this in response to the assertion that Charlie's posh language was a concern. My theory was just that he was adopting that kind of language for the sake of it, i.e. for fun. Charlie's comment corroborates that more or less:

Ok lemme just go ahead and say I'mma not do that fancy posh verbiage heavy style. At first I was thinkin I was gonna do a different style every post and just keep changin' up the way I speak, but thinking about it now in light of india's thoughts, that's probably not the right choice here and would just make it easier for the disguiser. So I'll try to settle into a more normal style.

Alpha and India, I kind of get why you voted for me, but I wasn't trying to hide behind the style (well kind of in that I think it's fun to see how long one's sock puppet can last without being obviously identified as one's own style) I was just having a bit of fun with it. Alpha, I don't actually think you're particularly suspicious after all as you are one of the most active so far and your jokeyness is genuine. Thus I'll change my vote, not to a non-poster but to someone who has at least checked in but has not yet participated much. IIRC Golf fits that description.

I'm not thrilled though at this, Charlie. After stepping away from your Alpha accusation, you defaulted to the low-poster option (specifically the one who checked in). The strategy isn't necessarily a bad one, but it's better left for late in a day when other conversations have not produced a more substantial suspicion. I'm not sure you did much to encourage that conversation.

That's fair. As I said, my main reason for voting then was that I wanted to move my vote off of Alpha. Now that Golf is back I feel a little bad about it, but unfortunately it's now a tie with me so I am incentivized to keep my vote on G unless something more promising comes up. So, now that there's been a little bit more discussion, do you have any suggestions? I don't, honestly.

[Spooky Ghost]

How long until day phase ends?

[Julinook]

I am concerned. I know this is day one. Ordinarily, for example, if four players vote for Charlie and he flips bad, conclusions can be drawn about those 4 players regardless of how strong their convictions were.

In this game there are no flips. So the only thing we can use to judge people's character is their reasons for voting whomever.

This dynamic definitely poses a unique challenge, but I don't think we're quite so handicapped as that. Any post can be judged in the ways they might be judged in any other game. The feedback on those judgments (corrective or affirmative) won't happen, but we can still make them. Also, as India has discussed: the disguiser role appears very powerful but it also provides angles of investigation. Whoever has that role may have to play this game in a way that does not come naturally to them, by impersonation in addition to whatever other usual strategic intentions. That's something that can be hunted.

[Principal Skinner]

Man, having lynches with no flips is gonna be weird as heck.

[Julinook]

That's fair. As I said, my main reason for voting then was that I wanted to move my vote off of Alpha. Now that Golf is back I feel a little bad about it, but unfortunately it's now a tie with me so I am incentivized to keep my vote on G unless something more promising comes up. So, now that there's been a little bit more discussion, do you have any suggestions? I don't, honestly.

I suspect Kilo. I'll say why in more substantive terms shortly.

[Principal Skinner]

[mention]sprityo[/mention] when the disguiser does its thing, will that player have to keep playing as themself as well as the disguised victim at the same time?

if so i feel kinda bad for that person, that sounds hard and stressful making sure I'm logged into the one sockpuppet is stressful enough, and the disguiser will have to post enough for two players. Bravo definitely has a point, I think the disguiser should be something we'll be able to tell based on style and maybe even frequency or timing of posts

[Paprika]

We only get information if the Oracle gets nightkilled. As information-starved letters, the clear path is to out the Oracle so that they can be nightkilled. I am the Oracle.

I don't get it. Why claim that right now?

Why not now?

By the way, you guys just did a double ABC. Great work!!

[Julinook]

I'm ready and willing to spell out dick.

Well fuck those guys then eh?

*Foxtrot*

It's a small point because entry posts from a sock can only be judged at face value. Kilo was gleeful to dive right into "fuck around" mode when given the opportunity (first by Alpha re: spelling dick and second by Alpha identifying those who hadn't checked in).

*Foxtrot*

Hey Kilo, talk to me about what this vote means to you. Share your deepest, most personal feelings about this vote. Let your emotions run free over me. Or just tell me what you'd like for it to accomplish.

This is a vote that is near and dear to my heart. It's meaning is metaphysical.

My question was a serious one. Instead of answering it, Kilo played into the goofy language I elected to use to ask it.

Now that I think about it, I don't like C voting G very much.

You complain about ties, while turning a X way tie into an X+1 way tie? Why? For everything to dislike about ties, this is worse. For everything to like about ties, this is no better.

C, tell me more about your vote. I have theories.

This one seems rather bunk to me. Charlie commented on the voting spread and then noted that there is still plenty of time. The alternative assertion here would be that Charlie would have then had to force himself to vote for whoever among those already with a vote, and I don't think that's a reasonable product of what Charlie said. Kilo's accusation is based on a dubious notion of inconsistency/hypocrisy and I'm not into it.

[Julinook]

Why not now?

I question the strategic utility and the sensibility of blurting the claim as you did.

[Paprika]

I think it's less likely the Mafia will kill me because they don't want info out there. Also, it was a little spontaneous. Tell me about a better way for more strategic utility.

[Julinook]

I think it's less likely the Mafia will kill me because they don't want info out there. Also, it was a little spontaneous. Tell me about a better way for more strategic utility.

The spontaneity I won't argue. The first thing you said there is my concern. If that comes to fruition the role is useless, right?

[Principal Skinner]

B, I'll join you in voting K. Though I hope some of the me-voters do too.

[Principal Skinner]

And I did say justification was important so I should qualify that vote change. I like Bravo's perspective on Kilo and I can see scum potential in the level of K's participation, which is not too much and not too little. I don't actually suspect Golf that much now that they have returned and claimed bad internet, so I want to vote for someone more in the mid-posting range because scum often blend in like that. And since B is already voting there it has somewhat more chance of competing with my current lead in votes.

[Spooky Ghost]

I don't necessarily see my vote staying on Charlie. My issue with Charlie was their puffed up civvie pride attitude not being backed up by any actually scum hunting footwork. Now that they've actually done some stuff it doesn't look quite as damning.

[Celeste]

Without any reliable flips in this game it's more important than ever for everyone to be pretty dang clear about why they're voting for who they're voting for.

Without any flips - reliable or unreliable - it will be harder than most other games to determine which voting reasons are genuine.

Hello friends, Dr. J is back
I saw this post, and I gotta react
I like your pause, I think it's got good tact
But reasons are reasons, scum will still slack
It's a game about the mind and a game about deceit
Take a seat, watch 'em speak, or accept defeat
If we talk and talk, keep 'em out on the street
We'll nab those wolves dead on their feet.

[Lunatella]

Please explain.

My internet was down for the better part of the day yesterday, which is why I was absent. I'm casting a vote for Charlie.

Why Charlie?

Self preservation. Plus I know I am civilian so that means it's entirely possible that the bandwagon formed on me to protect Charlie.

[Chuck]

I think it's less likely the Mafia will kill me because they don't want info out there. Also, it was a little spontaneous. Tell me about a better way for more strategic utility.

I already have given you a more strategic way to utilize this role, in my initial response. Do you lack the ability to do so? Or the desire?

[Julinook]

The poll is wacked up right now. It shows 3-3-2, but the names I see should make it 3-3-3.

[sprityo]

@sprityo when the disguiser does its thing, will that player have to keep playing as themself as well as the disguised victim at the same time?

if so i feel kinda bad for that person, that sounds hard and stressful making sure I'm logged into the one sockpuppet is stressful enough, and the disguiser will have to post enough for two players. Bravo definitely has a point, I think the disguiser should be something we'll be able to tell based on style and maybe even frequency or timing of posts

simply put: Someone has to die because someone is always killed

[Julinook]

Please explain.

My internet was down for the better part of the day yesterday, which is why I was absent. I'm casting a vote for Charlie.

Why Charlie?

Self preservation. Plus I know I am civilian so that means it's entirely possible that the bandwagon formed on me to protect Charlie.

Do you have any reads on the people voting for you?

[Lunatella]

No unfortunately I do not.

[Julinook]

No unfortunately I do not.

Is that a product of not knowing what to do with what they've said, not having caught up, or something else?

[Spooky Ghost]

Placing my vote on Kilo basically to see what happens. I'm interested in what reactions might come out of a 3-way tie here.

[Spooky Ghost]

The poll is wacked up right now. It shows 3-3-2, but the names I see should make it 3-3-3.

I think I broke the poll when I switched my vote.... I moved it around a bunch to see if vote order had been implemented yet and now it's broken.

[Julinook]

Placing my vote on Kilo basically to see what happens. I'm interested in what reactions might come out of a 3-way tie here.

Do you have any perspective to share on the suspicions I stated about Kilo?