Fargo Mafia [Game Ends]

[Long Con]

Odd, you honestly think that scum like to vote together in a situation like this?

Why would that be a thing? What logic are you supposedly employing here? This is suspicious.

Why wouldn't mafia vote together in a situation like this? What kind of situation is this?

One reason mafia wouldn't vote together is that they don't want to be associated, but that's neither here nor there - your reverse question isn't pertinent.

The situation is voting for a player who has no other votes, in the first half of day 1.

In the last game we played, Bee Mafia, two mafia voted together for their third mafia member Day 1. This allowed them to win.

I’m not saying this is exactly the same situation, but I definitely am rethinking what “mafia wouldn’t do” after that game.

It's true. And LC saw it happen, so I'm not sure why he's acting like it's not a possibility

You've lost track of my point entirely.

[BoKnows]

Funnily enough that whole 2 mafia votes on me in Bee mafia wasn't planned. I think it just kinda helped.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

[Long Con]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

I'm not clear - what idea am I dismissing?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

I'm not clear - what idea am I dismissing?

The notion that two mafia would act as the only two votes for the same player halfway through Day 1. I would find that rather unremarkable.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

To be fair I tend to think wagon formations and "wagonomics" and those sorts of things are not nearly as useful as they'd need to be to justify how often they are assessed. I just don't care much about that kind of stuff.

[Long Con]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

I'm not clear - what idea am I dismissing?

The notion that two mafia would act as the only two votes for the same player halfway through Day 1. I would find that rather unremarkable.

I'm not dismissing that. You asked me for a reason why two mafia might want to NOT vote the same person. I came up with one and told you that the point isn't relevant.

[Long Con]

I mean "pertinent". I also like "relevant".

[JaggedJimmyJay]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

I'm not clear - what idea am I dismissing?

The notion that two mafia would act as the only two votes for the same player halfway through Day 1. I would find that rather unremarkable.

I'm not dismissing that. You asked me for a reason why two mafia might want to NOT vote the same person. I came up with one and told you that the point isn't relevant.

I'm referring to your initial response to Oddmerta's gripe. Whatever though, I don't view this dialogue as being especially informative.

[fingersplints]

In the last game we played, Bee Mafia, two mafia voted together for their third mafia member Day 1. This allowed them to win.

I’m not saying this is exactly the same situation, but I definitely am rethinking what “mafia wouldn’t do” after that game.

Howdy splints, would you be willing to throw together a reads list for everyone, or at least name a top 3-5 town and top 3-5 mafia? It would help to frame your current view of business.

I still got lots of pages to catch up on, but I’ll definitely try to get to it today because I think I probably have a lot of neutrals still, so looking at the list might help me.

I’m very slow today. It was a horrible night for me and today has been blah

[JaggedJimmyJay]

In the last game we played, Bee Mafia, two mafia voted together for their third mafia member Day 1. This allowed them to win.

I’m not saying this is exactly the same situation, but I definitely am rethinking what “mafia wouldn’t do” after that game.

Howdy splints, would you be willing to throw together a reads list for everyone, or at least name a top 3-5 town and top 3-5 mafia? It would help to frame your current view of business.

I still got lots of pages to catch up on, but I’ll definitely try to get to it today because I think I probably have a lot of neutrals still, so looking at the list might help me.

I’m very slow today. It was a horrible night for me and today has been blah

Take your time, we have 31 hours!

[fingersplints]

Odd, you honestly think that scum like to vote together in a situation like this?

Why would that be a thing? What logic are you supposedly employing here? This is suspicious.

Why wouldn't mafia vote together in a situation like this? What kind of situation is this?

One reason mafia wouldn't vote together is that they don't want to be associated, but that's neither here nor there - your reverse question isn't pertinent.

The situation is voting for a player who has no other votes, in the first half of day 1.

In the last game we played, Bee Mafia, two mafia voted together for their third mafia member Day 1. This allowed them to win.

I’m not saying this is exactly the same situation, but I definitely am rethinking what “mafia wouldn’t do” after that game.

That's probably a good thing, but do you suspect two players that vote for the same player because of it, moving forward?

I wouldn’t suspect two players for ONLY the reason of voting for the same person

[Long Con]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

I'm not clear - what idea am I dismissing?

The notion that two mafia would act as the only two votes for the same player halfway through Day 1. I would find that rather unremarkable.

I'm not dismissing that. You asked me for a reason why two mafia might want to NOT vote the same person. I came up with one and told you that the point isn't relevant.

I'm referring to your initial response to Oddmerta's gripe. Whatever though, I don't view this dialogue as being especially informative.

Would you like it to be? I can explain my point again, since you missed it.

My point is that Oddmerta is using the fact that I voted alongside someone that Odd suspects, as evidence that I'm bad.

I don't think that's genuine logic. Two scum CAN vote together, but is such a thing SO LIKELY that you form a suspicion on one player merely because that player voted alongside another? Of course not, that is not logical at all. Furthermore, Oddmerta fluffed it off and didn't confront or clarify that accusation, which looks bad.

[Long Con]

Odd, you honestly think that scum like to vote together in a situation like this?

Why would that be a thing? What logic are you supposedly employing here? This is suspicious.

Why wouldn't mafia vote together in a situation like this? What kind of situation is this?

One reason mafia wouldn't vote together is that they don't want to be associated, but that's neither here nor there - your reverse question isn't pertinent.

The situation is voting for a player who has no other votes, in the first half of day 1.

In the last game we played, Bee Mafia, two mafia voted together for their third mafia member Day 1. This allowed them to win.

I’m not saying this is exactly the same situation, but I definitely am rethinking what “mafia wouldn’t do” after that game.

That's probably a good thing, but do you suspect two players that vote for the same player because of it, moving forward?

I wouldn’t suspect two players for ONLY the reason of voting for the same person

EXACTLY. But Oddmerta is. Is that not worth thinking about?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Would you like it to be? I can explain my point again, since you missed it.

My point is that Oddmerta is using the fact that I voted alongside someone that Odd suspects, as evidence that I'm bad.

I don't think that's genuine logic. Two scum CAN vote together, but is such a thing SO LIKELY that you form a suspicion on one player merely because that player voted alongside another? Of course not, that is not logical at all. Furthermore, Oddmerta fluffed it off and didn't confront or clarify that accusation, which looks bad.

I tend to see that as confirmation bias. I think confirmation bias would be the story of Oddmerta's entire post history if he is a civilian.

@Oddmerta should answer this for himself anyway.

[fingersplints]

Everything is worth thinking about.

[BoKnows]

My first instinct is that Long Con is doing that incredulous town thing where you dismiss an idea that sounds unlikely on the surface even if it really isn't farfetched. I probably won't take that read anywhere though, because it's tiny and weak. Long Con told me not to force it.

I'm not clear - what idea am I dismissing?

The notion that two mafia would act as the only two votes for the same player halfway through Day 1. I would find that rather unremarkable.

I'm not dismissing that. You asked me for a reason why two mafia might want to NOT vote the same person. I came up with one and told you that the point isn't relevant.

I'm referring to your initial response to Oddmerta's gripe. Whatever though, I don't view this dialogue as being especially informative.

Would you like it to be? I can explain my point again, since you missed it.

My point is that Oddmerta is using the fact that I voted alongside someone that Odd suspects, as evidence that I'm bad.

I don't think that's genuine logic. Two scum CAN vote together, but is such a thing SO LIKELY that you form a suspicion on one player merely because that player voted alongside another? Of course not, that is not logical at all. Furthermore, Oddmerta fluffed it off and didn't confront or clarify that accusation, which looks bad.

I agree. Oddmerta also hasn't explained their scum reads. So far it's just "i think they're bad" with zero context. Not providing context to your reads/thoughts makes ther game 10x harder to solve.

[Oddmerta]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

[BoKnows]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

[Oddmerta]

@Oddmerta why are you being different than you were in Radiohead?

It's a different game


Return question, what did you think as the host of my scumhunting that game?

[Long Con]

Everything is worth thinking about.

[Long Con]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

I vocalized my non-elimination vote in the thread. That's the other big gotcha moment Odd caught me in - besides voting alongside my teammate.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Let's play a game:

Is this low-hanging fruit, or is this a justifiable suspect?

AL_sama
BoKnows
fingersplints
JPIC
KZA
Long Con
Marmot
tedxtr

I extract these specific names because they strike me as applicable to the question -- either facing generic suspicions or otherwise pretty blank slates.

[Oddmerta]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

Number of things, bad entrances, not solving etc. Call it confirmation bias if you want, I usually end up being right

[Long Con]

Would you like it to be? I can explain my point again, since you missed it.

My point is that Oddmerta is using the fact that I voted alongside someone that Odd suspects, as evidence that I'm bad.

I don't think that's genuine logic. Two scum CAN vote together, but is such a thing SO LIKELY that you form a suspicion on one player merely because that player voted alongside another? Of course not, that is not logical at all. Furthermore, Oddmerta fluffed it off and didn't confront or clarify that accusation, which looks bad.

I tend to see that as confirmation bias. I think confirmation bias would be the story of Oddmerta's entire post history if he is a civilian.

What is it if he's not?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

What is it if he's not?

Then the accusation is b/s. Not much else to say about that. When I look at the post, confirmation bias is the first interpretation I come to.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Oddmerta, what is your read on Alison?

[BoKnows]

Let's play a game:

Is this low-hanging fruit, or is this a justifiable suspect?

AL_sama
BoKnows
fingersplints
JPIC
KZA
Long Con
Marmot
tedxtr

I extract these specific names because they strike me as applicable to the question -- either facing generic suspicions or otherwise pretty blank slates.

AL_sama - null
BoKnows - Town
fingersplints - low-hanging
JPIC - null
KZA - low-hanging
Long Con - low-hanging
Marmot - null
tedxtr - null

I don't have a solid scum suspect yet, but Oddmerta is starting to cross my mind

[BoKnows]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

I vocalized my non-elimination vote in the thread. That's the other big gotcha moment Odd caught me in - besides voting alongside my teammate.

Those don't seem like real reasons to me.

[Long Con]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

I vocalized my non-elimination vote in the thread. That's the other big gotcha moment Odd caught me in - besides voting alongside my teammate.

Those don't seem like real reasons to me.

Me neither. Are you... listening to me?

[Oddmerta]

Oddmerta, what is your read on Alison?

Town

[fingersplints]

A few things have thrown me off from the beginning but his current vote for Marmot is something that inclines me to think that way as well. I also just don't think his iso is carrying the proper tone and I'm wondering if his read on sloonei was developed improperly. He also also seems hesistant to say things that I wouldn't usually think he'd be hesitant to say. I did like the post he made where he talked about sloonei/jay mutual TRs and how seriously they're taken or something though idk

this is probably just the usual day 1 jay tinfoil but that's where I'm at

yes I know. His tone is way too serious, as if he's very much tryharding.

I think I’ve finally reached the one you were asking why i didn’t comment on.

If you haven’t answered it already - why is a serious tone a bad thing? Do you think a serious tone is abnormal for jjj?

I prefer more serious to more fluff posts, so I don’t find anything wrong with jjj posts, and I find the content quite normal and similar to other town games I have seen from him.

[BoKnows]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

Number of things, bad entrances, not solving etc. Call it confirmation bias if you want, I usually end up being right

I don't think "bad" entrances are AI.
Not solving is a legitimate reason. I wouldn't say that Long Con isn't solving tbh.

[fingersplints]

Jay is definitely try harding, whether you think that's mafia or not...ymmv

What does “ymmv” mean?

[BoKnows]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

I vocalized my non-elimination vote in the thread. That's the other big gotcha moment Odd caught me in - besides voting alongside my teammate.

Those don't seem like real reasons to me.

Me neither. Are you... listening to me?

Yeah I'm just agreeing with you :P

[Oddmerta]

Alright, it's been long enough now. Does anybody still think that JPIC is civilian?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

AL_sama - null
BoKnows - Town
fingersplints - low-hanging
JPIC - null
KZA - low-hanging
Long Con - low-hanging
Marmot - null
tedxtr - null

I don't have a solid scum suspect yet, but Oddmerta is starting to cross my mind

Thanks for your response. I'm still wiggling them around in the old noodle. The old pasta.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Alright, it's been long enough now. Does anybody still think that JPIC is civilian?

I wouldn't be comfortable calling him a civilian.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Jay is definitely try harding, whether you think that's mafia or not...ymmv

What does “ymmv” mean?

your mileage may vary

[BoKnows]

AL_sama - null
BoKnows - Town
fingersplints - low-hanging
JPIC - null
KZA - low-hanging
Long Con - low-hanging
Marmot - null
tedxtr - null

I don't have a solid scum suspect yet, but Oddmerta is starting to cross my mind

Thanks for your response. I'm still wiggling them around in the old noodle. The old pasta.

For what it's worth everyone I marked with null I haven't seen much or any of their posts.

[Oddmerta]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

Number of things, bad entrances, not solving etc. Call it confirmation bias if you want, I usually end up being right

I don't think "bad" entrances are AI.
Not solving is a legitimate reason. I wouldn't say that Long Con isn't solving tbh.

Where I come from entrances are alignment indicative, it's called oneposting. Where you catch a wolf from a single post they make, the entry post is a good place to do that

[fingersplints]

Everything is worth thinking about.

I knew you would like that.
Don’t worry. Reviewing the you/oddmerta situation is on my to do list.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

Number of things, bad entrances, not solving etc. Call it confirmation bias if you want, I usually end up being right

I don't think "bad" entrances are AI.
Not solving is a legitimate reason. I wouldn't say that Long Con isn't solving tbh.

Where I come from entrances are alignment indicative, it's called oneposting. Where you catch a wolf from a single post they make, the entry post is a good place to do that

Nice opportunity for a perspective from @MacDougall, resident first-post-grader.

[TonyStarkPrime]

POE: AL_sama, JPIC, KZA, TonyStarkPrime, tedxtr

doesn't get any more syndicate than this

yep

[TonyStarkPrime]

i was hoping that the heat getting off of JPIC for a while would encourage him to scumhunt and solve the game on his own time - but it seems to have done the complete opposite. it worries me that JPIC's motivation in the thread was the highest when he was under suspicion

JPIC at some point had thread motivation?
Or suspicion?

[BoKnows]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

Number of things, bad entrances, not solving etc. Call it confirmation bias if you want, I usually end up being right

I don't think "bad" entrances are AI.
Not solving is a legitimate reason. I wouldn't say that Long Con isn't solving tbh.

Where I come from entrances are alignment indicative, it's called oneposting. Where you catch a wolf from a single post they make, the entry post is a good place to do that

Fair enough, it's my first hearing about this. I generally think that judging ones entry post is useful to move the game along from the early meme stage.

[Long Con]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

I vocalized my non-elimination vote in the thread. That's the other big gotcha moment Odd caught me in - besides voting alongside my teammate.

Those don't seem like real reasons to me.

Me neither. Are you... listening to me?

Yeah I'm just agreeing with you :P

Wow.

So that's what that feels like.

[TonyStarkPrime]

Spoiler: show

Town reads
falcon
Mac
Sloonei
Strawhenge

Semi-town reads
SPF
fingersplints
Alison
Nanook

In flux maybe town reads
Michelle
Esooa
tutuu

Defer to others "town read"
Oddmerta

POE pool
KZA
Long Con
Dom
Marmot
Tony
JPIC
BoKnows
Al_Sama
tedxtr

~~~

Which read(s) in the spoiler am I wrong about, gang?

Now THERES the syndicate POE

[BoKnows]

I suspected them first, of course I'm going to notice them voting for the same person

What was the original reasoning for you suspecting them?

I vocalized my non-elimination vote in the thread. That's the other big gotcha moment Odd caught me in - besides voting alongside my teammate.

Those don't seem like real reasons to me.

Me neither. Are you... listening to me?

Yeah I'm just agreeing with you :P

Wow.

So that's what that feels like.

Soak it in

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Now THERES the syndicate POE

There's a reason the deep ones are called deep. Those who think they can snare them earlier usually lose games.