[ENDGAME] Triskaidekaphobia Mafia

[Ricochet]

I handled the polls without a hitch back in E.S.T. Mafia, but I guess it was finally time to derp a little.

Ok, game on, Tolstoy out.

[G-Man]

Busy evening ahead of me tonight. I'll check in tomorrow over breakfast.



1.01

[Vompatti]

When you really think about it, all text is in some colour. Yet it could be argued that colour is not an essential property of text.

[rabbit8]

@HOST why is there no rule number 3?



Also I'd like to bring attention to this.

5. The Mafia team can only interact in BTSC during the Night phase.

I'm not sure how much this helps us, I know the last game we had with this was the Scrimmag, I was mafia and it did make things more hectic and we had much less planning. However, it also made the links less clear. So I think we should keep in mind the mafia doesn't have day chat.



Any thoughts on this?

Rule number 4 not 3.

I agree with you here. I, for one, love my chatzy BTSC when I am bad. Not only for planning and scheming, but for chatty fun. I have been bad in a game (or two perhaps, you guys know my memory) where the BTSC only took place in a separate thread and only during the night. It was a little chaotic, disconnected, and planning and scheming was quite difficult imo. I really hated it, honestly. I didn't even really feel as if I was part of a team. That said, I don't think we need to underestimate the mafia b/c of this. We have some really good players in this game - JJJ, Epi, Scotty, YOU...to name a few. I am sure these are some players that will be able to work with what they're given.

I do like that Elo not only agrees with me, but gets my reasoning. However, I do find it a little odd she'd include me with Epi and JJJ flattered yes, but still a little odd.

@HOST why is there no rule number 3?



Also I'd like to bring attention to this.

5. The Mafia team can only interact in BTSC during the Night phase.

I'm not sure how much this helps us, I know the last game we had with this was the Scrimmag, I was mafia and it did make things more hectic and we had much less planning. However, it also made the links less clear. So I think we should keep in mind the mafia doesn't have day chat.

Any thoughts on this?

Rule number 4 not 3.

This is the only thing to get my attention so far,and as pings go, it's *meh*, so just saying it to say it, basically. It actually could be making me think sig is civ more so than the other way around, but it is hard to say this early. It just stuck out to me.

Sig has obviously read the rules including the on famous rule 10,

10. >>>Players are advised not to end any phase throughout their game with 4, 9, 13 written posts or multiples of those numbers.<<<

There isn't a rule 9, either. This seemed like saying something for the sake of being seen having something to say, BUT like I said, *meh*. This seems like a thread full of people playing it safe so far. So I am liking risk taking more than not.

I was not expecting to be playing, and have a crapton of stuff to do tonight (which is why I stole Ricos thunder and self announced, I only had a limited time to post). Toodles, citizens & Mafioso.

Linki, I hate no lynch. Grrr.

This does seem a little odd of SVS to point out about me.


I'm agaisnt no lynching, but don't find people who vote to no lynch to be more scummy/pingy.

I don't think there is any purpose in discussing the merits of lynching vs no lynching day 1 since nobody is going to change anyone's mind.

I don't know what it is but I found both these interactions very weird.

@ Sig: Why is it odd to lump you with JJJ and Epig? Do you feel you're not on their mafia level? Is that why Eloh lumping you in with them is odd? Or is there another reason?

@SVS: "saying something for the sake of saying something....." Not quoted verbatim....

Do you really get the meh feeling from Sig, or was this a way to bring him up as suspicious so you could come back to it later? That's how it read to me. Like you might know he's a civvie.....

[S~V~S]

No, I brought it up becasue it was the only thing that struck me on my initial read, that he mentioned 4 was missing, but not 9? It was weird, but sig gets lynched alot for trivia. So I noticed it, but did not necessarily think it suspect. If you actually read what I said in whole, rather than one sentence (as sig obviously did ) I don't particularly suspect sig, and would be ore likely to suspect anyone who does make moves against sig for trivia. I was wondering if anyone would try to pick that ball up and run with it.

Similar to what I said to Scotty here, actually:

This isn't anything new, but it's very intriguing to me. In so many other sites and venues the day 1 is literally random. Like, literally in the sense that in a group, most the time people will vote for someone based on a dream they had, or not liking the name of a person, or what have you. But this site especially has a weird way of dogpiling on someone that has a certain air if suspicion for doing something out of the ordinary. It's always amazing to me that votes on the first day are so justified here. I can't recall the last time I went back to day 1 conversations to get a confirmation of a tonal read on someone. Only to look at votes and who voted for whom, and when.

This is very interesting to me. I love to hear about how things go on other sites, even though I don't plan on ever playing anywhere other than here. I can only imagine how I would be grilled for voting someone Day 1 just because I didn't like their name or had a certain dream about them. Of course there is the occasional random vote on Day 1 here, but it always seem sot be a controversial issue. And it's usually professed as "random", not excused with a silly explanation.

In our original home cultures, Day 1 votes have, for the most part, generally been srs bsns. Someone is gonna die based on our votes, how not srs? People always tended to take flak for trivial voting reasons, randomizing, etc.

@G-Man, yeah, I always tend to get a residual baddie BTS effect the next few games, lol. Oddly, it tends to effect me the opposite way, I tend to want to trust my bad partner from a recent intense game like BSG was.

Ah yes, you know I agree with this criticism. Day 1 lynches produce more info than no-lynches, but why even invite a self-lynch. In what world would that benefit town if you are town?

I didn't invite a self-lynch. This is the first suspicious post of the game.

In your opinion.

In my opinion, too, tbh.

I understood clearly what Jay was saying. I am not sure how you would interpret it otherwise?

I've already answered this. I can't help if you, GMan and JJJ find it suspicious. But good to know you think that post is also the first suspicious post of the game.

My current propensity is to vote Polo today, unless he shows up.

Post 20

Sorry for lack of clarity, Mr Word Reader Into guy (to be fair, that is what we do in Mafia, but still )

"In my opinion, too" referred to Jay saying, "I didn't invite a self-lynch.", not the "first suspicious post of the game" bit. I don't necessarily find it suspicious. I think that recently we rely too much on tiny nuances of semantics, and we jump too much on people who talk and pick apart their posts for lack of anything better to do. But I also think it is important to comment on what we notice as we go along, it leaves a trail to be followed. So part of "following my own drummer" means commenting on what I notice; it does not mean I find it suspect. I just like to shake the tree and see what falls out, I guess.

Shaking the tree, bunny boy. Shake shake.

[S~V~S]

This multiples of 4 thing is a bitch. Right now I have 12, multiple of 4. Now I need to make 2 posts to get out of that so I can go watch the convention. Cause this will be post 13. So again sorry for the multis. One more to come.

[S~V~S]

Just a weird combination for my eyes with the dark grey background, but don't change it just for me.

I generally run the light background for work friendliness, it looks like the same colors as our intranet screen; it is very clear on that background. When the host uses yellow, though, I have to switch to the dark scheme, alot of the brights are hard to see on the light.

That said drinks & delegates, xo

*14*

[Ricochet]

This multiples of 4 thing is a bitch. Right now I have 12, multiple of 4. Now I need to make 2 posts to get out of that so I can go watch the convention. Cause this will be post 13. So again sorry for the multis. One more to come.

Just to clarify what's been written:

>>>Players are advised not to end any phase throughout their game with 4, 9, 13 written posts or multiples of those numbers.<<<

&

Challenge accepted, Ricotroll.

Question though, for the HOST -- does the post count rule refer to a player's total post count when phases end, or their post count strictly during the phase?

During the phase.

[Scotty]

This multiples of 4 thing is a bitch. Right now I have 12, multiple of 4. Now I need to make 2 posts to get out of that so I can go watch the convention. Cause this will be post 13. So again sorry for the multis. One more to come.

Remember it resets every phase. You are currently at 4 btw!

Also I see that everyone has checked in. So today I'll be evaluating low posters, unless you guys start blowing chunks everywhere.

Peace.

Post 1

[rabbit8]

@HOST why is there no rule number 3?



Also I'd like to bring attention to this.

5. The Mafia team can only interact in BTSC during the Night phase.

I'm not sure how much this helps us, I know the last game we had with this was the Scrimmag, I was mafia and it did make things more hectic and we had much less planning. However, it also made the links less clear. So I think we should keep in mind the mafia doesn't have day chat.

Any thoughts on this?

Rule number 4 not 3.

This is the only thing to get my attention so far,and as pings go, it's *meh*, so just saying it to say it, basically. It actually could be making me think sig is civ more so than the other way around, but it is hard to say this early. It just stuck out to me.

Sig has obviously read the rules including the on famous rule 10,

10. >>>Players are advised not to end any phase throughout their game with 4, 9, 13 written posts or multiples of those numbers.<<<

There isn't a rule 9, either. This seemed like saying something for the sake of being seen having something to say, BUT like I said, *meh*. This seems like a thread full of people playing it safe so far. So I am liking risk taking more than not.

I was not expecting to be playing, and have a crapton of stuff to do tonight (which is why I stole Ricos thunder and self announced, I only had a limited time to post). Toodles, citizens & Mafioso.

Linki, I hate no lynch. Grrr.

You said something to say something, not unlike sig may have done. Only your something was a quasi accusation with a CYA meh to say "not really". Then you reiterated the point in another say something to say something accusation, clarified with a "but like I said..."

I can't tell if you're accusing Sig or saying hes a civ. It makes your post read ambiguous, which seemed purposeful. Casting shade on Sig while saying you think he's a civ, only to defend with, I was poking to see if someone would accuse sig of trivia? Classic. Say something then hide behind the old, wanted to see what you would do routine.

You threw out something looking for a response. Only if you would have just waited for someone to go after Sig for trivia before you defended with it would have looked more civvie. Throwing out the Sig is always lynched for this behavior only when you're called out on it looks bad, IMO.

[Quin]

Voted no lynch.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I think rabbit makes valid points. There is a degree of ambiguity in S~V~S's wording which would enable her to move either direction on sig depending upon circumstance.

sig won't be mislynched in this game anyway because he was my n0 town peek.

[Quin]

I think rabbit makes valid points. There is a degree of ambiguity in S~V~S's wording which would enable her to move either direction on sig depending upon circumstance.

sig won't be mislynched in this game anyway because he was my *n0 town peek.*

what does this mean? i'm unfamiliar with it.

2

[Quin]

I'm referring to the n0 town peak bit. I tried to bold it but I used the wrong ...thing

3

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Voted no lynch.

If the day is nearing its end and the tally is close between one person you read as a townie and another you read as scum, would you move your vote to contribute to the lynch or leave it on no lynch?

2

linki: I began the game with a free peek on another townie. sig is town.

[DrWilgy]

@JJJ, theres no reason, it just happened to catch my eye. On another note, YOU'RE BAD, I KNOW YOU'RE BAD, GET LYNCHED RIGHT NOW.

@svs, yo you bad again?

@Quin, I appreciate your memes, I'll vote with you.

[Quin]

Voted no lynch.

If the day is nearing its end and the tally is close between one person you read as a townie and another you read as scum, would you move your vote to contribute to the lynch or leave it on no lynch?

2

linki: I began the game with a free peek on another townie. sig is town.

As we talked about, seeing as it's day 1 I won't have that concrete information to justify a lynch on someone, so I'd be inclined to leave it where it is.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

@JJJ, theres no reason, it just happened to catch my eye. On another note, YOU'RE BAD, I KNOW YOU'RE BAD, GET LYNCHED RIGHT NOW.

Let's fight, MISTER Wilgy.

[Quin]

Voted no lynch.

If the day is nearing its end and the tally is close between one person you read as a townie and another you read as scum, would you move your vote to contribute to the lynch or leave it on no lynch?

2

linki: I began the game with a free peek on another townie. sig is town.

I didn't read the bit about sig. If for some reason it turned out that sig was the one facing the lynch, I'd consider taking your word for it and voting to save him based on your testimony.

5

[DrWilgy]

@JJJ, theres no reason, it just happened to catch my eye. On another note, YOU'RE BAD, I KNOW YOU'RE BAD, GET LYNCHED RIGHT NOW.

Let's fight, MISTER Wilgy.

Excuse me good sir, my name is DOCTOR Wilgy, and I am most definitely a DOCTOR!

Whatcha wanna fight about yo?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

VOTE POLO

This game thread is tiny. I want your thoughts.

4

Wilgy, I meant fist fight. Rumble in the jungle. What do you think of sig, Scotty, and S~V~S?

[DrWilgy]

VOTE POLO

This game thread is tiny. I want your thoughts.

4

Wilgy, I meant fist fight. Rumble in the jungle. What do you think of sig, Scotty, and S~V~S?

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

[Quin]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

So you do find my vote suspicious?

5

[DrWilgy]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

Is it suspicious because I'm doing it, or suspicious because I acknowledged the action?

At this point I do intend on staying on no lynch.

Would you say you are scared of no lynch?

Oh shit. Yo wassup Quin?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

So you do find my vote suspicious?

5

Not really, no. I find yours believable and Wilgy's slightly less believable.

6

[Quin]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

Is it suspicious because I'm doing it, or suspicious because I acknowledged the action?

At this point I do intend on staying on no lynch.

Would you say you are scared of no lynch?

Oh shit. Yo wassup Quin?

Nothing much, bro. When was the last time you voted no lynch?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

Is it suspicious because I'm doing it, or suspicious because I acknowledged the action?

More the former. The latter appears to be your manner of exploring my own perspective, which is fine.

At this point I do intend on staying on no lynch.

Would you say you are scared of no lynch?

You could say so, I guess. I think a no lynch would harm town's chances to win the Mafia game and that's something to fear.

What is the appeal of a no lynch to you?

[Quin]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

So you do find my vote suspicious?

5

Not really, no. I find yours believable and Wilgy's slightly less believable.

6

I see. I interpreted 'a bit more suspicious than Quin's' to mean that you did.

7

[Quin]

I'm actually at 9. I've done this twice now.


...9

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Negative marks to everyone in single digit posts. More likely to be bad than the rest.

[DrWilgy]

Hmm... Scotty's meme goes against your meme. Svs needs to respond to me, and I've actually ignored all but 1 of Sig's posts. I've only half read that post too... Oh well.

Tell me JJJ, what would you think of me if I'm considering staying on no lynch? It is the most anti civ option after all yo.

It makes me mad. It's a bit more suspicious than Quin's since his is built upon a strategy he has promoted in games before this one, yours is not. Do you intend to remain on no lynch, and do you think a no lynch is a good idea?

Is it suspicious because I'm doing it, or suspicious because I acknowledged the action?

More the former. The latter appears to be your manner of exploring my own perspective, which is fine.

At this point I do intend on staying on no lynch.

Would you say you are scared of no lynch?

You could say so, I guess. I think a no lynch would harm town's chances to win the Mafia game and that's something to fear.

What is the appeal of a no lynch to you?

That would imply that you think a no lynch is possible based on votes building up.

Absolutely none actually. A no lynch won't result in anything good.

@Quin... I don't think I've ever voted no lynch. I uave played devil's advocate for it though.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Sure it's possible. It's a button in the tally.

[DrWilgy]

Sure it's possible. It's a button in the tally.

Odd. I think it's a silly notion. Pherhaps my vote is to test that notion.
"Is is possible for players to do something considered anti town?"

Or perhaps not.

[S~V~S]

@JJJ, theres no reason, it just happened to catch my eye. On another note, YOU'RE BAD, I KNOW YOU'RE BAD, GET LYNCHED RIGHT NOW.

@svs, yo you bad again?

@Quin, I appreciate your memes, I'll vote with you.

No, I am town. You?

And doh re post counts. Morning catch up.

[S~V~S]

@HOST why is there no rule number 3?



Also I'd like to bring attention to this.

5. The Mafia team can only interact in BTSC during the Night phase.

I'm not sure how much this helps us, I know the last game we had with this was the Scrimmag, I was mafia and it did make things more hectic and we had much less planning. However, it also made the links less clear. So I think we should keep in mind the mafia doesn't have day chat.

Any thoughts on this?

Rule number 4 not 3.

This is the only thing to get my attention so far,and as pings go, it's *meh*, so just saying it to say it, basically. It actually could be making me think sig is civ more so than the other way around, but it is hard to say this early. It just stuck out to me.

Sig has obviously read the rules including the on famous rule 10,

10. >>>Players are advised not to end any phase throughout their game with 4, 9, 13 written posts or multiples of those numbers.<<<

There isn't a rule 9, either. This seemed like saying something for the sake of being seen having something to say, BUT like I said, *meh*. This seems like a thread full of people playing it safe so far. So I am liking risk taking more than not.

I was not expecting to be playing, and have a crapton of stuff to do tonight (which is why I stole Ricos thunder and self announced, I only had a limited time to post). Toodles, citizens & Mafioso.

Linki, I hate no lynch. Grrr.

You said something to say something, not unlike sig may have done. Only your something was a quasi accusation with a CYA meh to say "not really". Then you reiterated the point in another say something to say something accusation, clarified with a "but like I said..."

I can't tell if you're accusing Sig or saying hes a civ. It makes your post read ambiguous, which seemed purposeful. Casting shade on Sig while saying you think he's a civ, only to defend with, I was poking to see if someone would accuse sig of trivia? Classic. Say something then hide behind the old, wanted to see what you would do routine.

You threw out something looking for a response. Only if you would have just waited for someone to go after Sig for trivia before you defended with it would have looked more civvie. Throwing out the Sig is always lynched for this behavior only when you're called out on it looks bad, IMO.

You are reading into me as you always do. I only noticed one thing about another player in my catch up, so I mentioned it. The thing sig mentioned was what he seemed to have thought to be a host error,when it actually was nothing of the sort. Mentoning player behavior that caught your eye isn't the same.

But again, I don't particularly think sig is bad becasue of it, but still thought it odd. Conversation about other players is good.

Even about me

[G-Man]

Negative marks to everyone in single digit posts. More likely to be bad than the rest.

Bite me, angry bear boy. You do realize that, as of this post, your comment suggests that 8+1 of us are more likely to be bad than the remaining 5? That's a net so wide it's silly. Why not just say everyone not named JJJ is more likely to be bad? Or were you being cheeky there?


1.02

[Elohcin]

Negative marks to everyone in single digit posts. More likely to be bad than the rest.

Bite me, angry bear boy. You do realize that, as of this post, your comment suggests that 8+1 of us are more likely to be bad than the remaining 5? That's a net so wide it's silly. Why not just say everyone not named JJJ is more likely to be bad? Or were you being cheeky there?


1.02

Thank you for addressing that as I was just about to.

Now, as many have agreed, there is not a lot to go on for a lynch on Day 1. I, however, intend to try and find a baddie instead of picking the no lynch option. I am going to throw sig's name out there. I think it was odd for him to be surprised at me mentioning his name as one of the good players who would be able to work around the fact that this game has baddie BTSC only at night. I am wondering if it alarmed him that I might be looking to him as being a baddie this game. This reaction could mean he actually is.

[Elohcin]

and since votes are changable, I will go ahead and vote there while I wait to hear from sig

[insertnamehere]

This may come as a shock to people who know me, but I'm voting no Lynch

[G-Man]

Based on prior game experiences, my biggest three question marks at the moment are Epignosis, S~V~S, and Vompatti. That's not because of anything they've said so far in this game but because knowing their alignment could go a long way to helping the civvie cause.

Epignosis because in every game he is either a tremendous asset to the civvies or a formidable threat to the civvies.

S~V~S because our lengthy history together makes me always somewhat suspicious of her. This is magnified since we were baddie teammates in BSG.

Vompatti because, if he is a civvie, you know the baddies will let him live just to try to mess with our heads and secure an easy civ lynch late in the game.

Games this small make vote analysis all but a waste of time (which makes my spreadsheet weep digital tears) because the game ends in only a few days, so I plan on ISO'ing everyone before the end of Day 1 and making my vote based on that, barring any juicy developments. That worked for me in at least one previous heist game so far.

[insertnamehere]

Negative marks to everyone in single digit posts. More likely to be bad than the rest.

Bite me, angry bear boy. You do realize that, as of this post, your comment suggests that 8+1 of us are more likely to be bad than the remaining 5? That's a net so wide it's silly. Why not just say everyone not named JJJ is more likely to be bad? Or were you being cheeky there?


1.02

All of these imaginary systems that he just keeps coming up with just seem like him posturing to where he can come up with some justification to lynch just about anyone. If I wasn't already committed to voting No Lynch, he'd probably be my top candidate.

[G-Man]

Bah! That was post 1.03.

Linki: You think he's faking his meta? I haven't seen enough to make that call just yet. My end-of-day ISO will help there. He could just be throwing half-assed meta out there as bait.


1.04

[rabbit8]

This may come as a shock to people who know me, but I'm voting no Lynch

Screams baddie to me. You want no lynch, no info. I think it's bad, looks civvie cause, yay I voted to not lynch someone that could be a civ. But we gain nothing from no lynch, IMO.

This goes for Wigly and Quinn as well.

[rabbit8]

@HOST why is there no rule number 3?



Also I'd like to bring attention to this.

5. The Mafia team can only interact in BTSC during the Night phase.

I'm not sure how much this helps us, I know the last game we had with this was the Scrimmag, I was mafia and it did make things more hectic and we had much less planning. However, it also made the links less clear. So I think we should keep in mind the mafia doesn't have day chat.

Any thoughts on this?

Rule number 4 not 3.

This is the only thing to get my attention so far,and as pings go, it's *meh*, so just saying it to say it, basically. It actually could be making me think sig is civ more so than the other way around, but it is hard to say this early. It just stuck out to me.

Sig has obviously read the rules including the on famous rule 10,

10. >>>Players are advised not to end any phase throughout their game with 4, 9, 13 written posts or multiples of those numbers.<<<

There isn't a rule 9, either. This seemed like saying something for the sake of being seen having something to say, BUT like I said, *meh*. This seems like a thread full of people playing it safe so far. So I am liking risk taking more than not.

I was not expecting to be playing, and have a crapton of stuff to do tonight (which is why I stole Ricos thunder and self announced, I only had a limited time to post). Toodles, citizens & Mafioso.

Linki, I hate no lynch. Grrr.

You said something to say something, not unlike sig may have done. Only your something was a quasi accusation with a CYA meh to say "not really". Then you reiterated the point in another say something to say something accusation, clarified with a "but like I said..."

I can't tell if you're accusing Sig or saying hes a civ. It makes your post read ambiguous, which seemed purposeful. Casting shade on Sig while saying you think he's a civ, only to defend with, I was poking to see if someone would accuse sig of trivia? Classic. Say something then hide behind the old, wanted to see what you would do routine.

You threw out something looking for a response. Only if you would have just waited for someone to go after Sig for trivia before you defended with it would have looked more civvie. Throwing out the Sig is always lynched for this behavior only when you're called out on it looks bad, IMO.

You are reading into me as you always do. I only noticed one thing about another player in my catch up, so I mentioned it. The thing sig mentioned was what he seemed to have thought to be a host error,when it actually was nothing of the sort. Mentoning player behavior that caught your eye isn't the same.

But again, I don't particularly think sig is bad becasue of it, but still thought it odd. Conversation about other players is good.

Even about me

I read you as bad in BSG and let it go, I won't again.

So let me get straight, you said something about sig just to say something about him saying something just to say something, while calling him a meh civ. Gotcha.

Seems a weird thing to do. Just throwing out random shit to see what happens seems bad, but is not always bad. But the ambiguousness of your post seemed bad to me.

[Vompatti]

I'm not voting for no lynch to protect my fellow baddies, I'm voting for no lynch just for the lulz.

[rabbit8]

I'm not voting for no lynch to protect my fellow baddies, I'm voting for no lynch just for the lulz.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Negative marks to everyone in single digit posts. More likely to be bad than the rest.

Bite me, angry bear boy. You do realize that, as of this post, your comment suggests that 8+1 of us are more likely to be bad than the remaining 5? That's a net so wide it's silly. Why not just say everyone not named JJJ is more likely to be bad? Or were you being cheeky there?


1.02

All of these imaginary systems that he just keeps coming up with just seem like him posturing to where he can come up with some justification to lynch just about anyone. If I wasn't already committed to voting No Lynch, he'd probably be my top candidate.

These "imaginary systems" stem from a wealth of experience playing games in this general format. I know what I'm doing, and frankly if you're going to vote no lynch -- you don't.

Or you're bad.

G-Man -- it's a general gripe to push those single digit counts upward. I don't care who I annoy.

[Epignosis]

Negative marks to everyone in single digit posts. More likely to be bad than the rest.

Bite me, angry bear boy. You do realize that, as of this post, your comment suggests that 8+1 of us are more likely to be bad than the remaining 5? That's a net so wide it's silly. Why not just say everyone not named JJJ is more likely to be bad? Or were you being cheeky there?


1.02

All of these imaginary systems that he just keeps coming up with just seem like him posturing to where he can come up with some justification to lynch just about anyone. If I wasn't already committed to voting No Lynch, he'd probably be my top candidate.

So, let me preface this by saying that I am by no means, an expert at coding. This was the first really big program that I've decided to make. It could work, it could not, I'm going to try and see.

I've created a program that goes into every poster's game history, specifically games where they were bad, and sees what their top phrases or words are. It then contrasts those with the top words or phrases from a persons post history when they were good. It then eliminates the words that were on both lists, leaving us with that person's tells. After that, it goes into this thread, and sees how many times someone uses words or phrases identified as tells. The higher that number is, the more likely chance you are to be bad. This was a bitch to make, and it's something I've worked on for a long time, a bit of a pet project if you will.

Now, of course, because of the limited sample size, the program is more likely to be incorrect these first few days, but, as more and more people post, I know more and more about their role.

To summarize, I'm the NSA now, bitches.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Based on prior game experiences, my biggest three question marks at the moment are Epignosis, S~V~S, and Vompatti. That's not because of anything they've said so far in this game but because knowing their alignment could go a long way to helping the civvie cause.

Epignosis because in every game he is either a tremendous asset to the civvies or a formidable threat to the civvies.

S~V~S because our lengthy history together makes me always somewhat suspicious of her. This is magnified since we were baddie teammates in BSG.

Vompatti because, if he is a civvie, you know the baddies will let him live just to try to mess with our heads and secure an easy civ lynch late in the game.

Games this small make vote analysis all but a waste of time (which makes my spreadsheet weep digital tears) because the game ends in only a few days, so I plan on ISO'ing everyone before the end of Day 1 and making my vote based on that, barring any juicy developments. That worked for me in at least one previous heist game so far.

I don't understand this post. Why would knowing the alignment of these three players be any more helpful than the mean helpfulness of knowing anyone's alignment? Prior games don't have informational bearing on this one.