The Syndicate

Strawhenge wrote:Also, no one has answered me this entire game about why some people are so sure that the SK has only killed townies. Why the [censored]ing [censored] are some people so certain of this? Answer me dammit. What are the odds that...

I've seen this pretty commonly in games, just reflecting a worst-case scenario mindset. The idea being that it puts the most pressure on us to get baddies immediately, and if the assumption is wrong, so much the better. I didn't read much into it.

Diiny, who do you suspect today? The last thing I saw from you was thinking bcornett was bad. Still looking at Fuzz, or elsewhere?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:b) Long Con, as others had stated, has an incredibly complex game that he is hosting right now that he needs to look after. Also, his plan on Day 1 appeared to backfire. So going into Day 2, he had plenty of reason to want out of this game, and for other people to want his head. Still, it's a bit hypothetical, and we've already seen that 3 of his 8 voters are not mafia. On the other hand, let's take a look at the numbers. There were 30 players alive at the time of his lynch, and 11 alive now (36.6 %). There were 8 players that voted in the Long Con lynch, and 5 of them are still alive now (62.5 %). I'd argue that offers a decent likelihood that there is at least one mafia on the Long Con lynch with there being such a drastic difference in survival percentages.

c) MacDougall was a very vocal, and also a well-vouched for player in the thread. His lynch was extremely close, and he had several vocal supporters in his defense, and he's a damn good mafia player. If he was bussed, it certainly wasn't planned, and is more likely to have been a late attempt. Let's look at numbers here too. 21 players were alive when MacDougall was lynched, and 11 are alive now (52.4 %). 7 players voted for Mac on his lynch, and 4 are still alive (57.1 %). Those numbers are significantly closer together, and suggest that MacDougall was not bussed.[/list]

Science!

So has anyone done or seen an analysis of survival rates among a player's voters before? This is totally new to me.

The idea appeals, since baddies have an NK. If they bus a teammate, they can't kill themselves, so statistically they're less likely to die than everyone else (although that's somewhat mitigated with an SK in the game). Is there actually an effect we can observe where bussed baddies' voters have a higher survival rate than non-bussed ones'? Or could this also be attributable to early game vs. late game or some other factor?

motel room wrote:Oh yeah, and oh yeah Bullzeye was sanmateo.

Bullzeye is sanmateo????

Linki: Yeah,I agree on rereading, I'm doing the same.

I guess I'm just surprised we made it to Day 10 without discussing it. I missed it on D2, (I started real slow this game) but usually people are all over that.

Rico, I see your point here. If you think this is such a big deal, though, why are you bringing it up 8 days later? I agree that not posting a case is a faux pas, but I think the statute of limitations has run out, there.

Spoiler: show

Metalmarsh89 wrote:But hey, I did learn some things from skimming through players' posts looking for all of their votes cast. Here are quick thoughts I have on players.

Bullzeye - There's that MacDougall interaction that Epignosis. But everything else feels less... bad. Nothing stood out as super-civ, but nothing bad either. I don't know I'll have to revisit him again I think. After browsing through 6 other players after Bullzeye, my thoughts are all over the place now.

Choutas - I commented on the votes already. He's often voted early without changing his vote beyond that. The only exception was seemingly to try and save a lynched mafia. He has dropped in my rainbow list.

Diiny - His contributions have not been great. Like Bullzeye, I had thoughts before, which have been replaced by the other players I've looked at since, but I do recall him being very go-along in his demeanor.

DrWilgy - His case on Day 2 against Long Con looks really good (barring at strategic bussing attempt). He's still been pretty solid since then. He helped lynch MacDougall on Day 6, and his votes outside of just seemed solid. Also, like Strawhenge, there was a point where he was trying to push an idea that relied on info, before he realized the error in his ways. Like Strawhenge, I think this is a good look for the doctor.

RadicalFuzz - Voting record doesn't look good. His attitude is solid and consistent, but he's done a good job at not committing to any reads on players that happened to flip mafia, specifically MacDougall and Floyd. Each of his votes has not resulted in a lynch with two exceptions. 1) espers on Day 5. Espers did lead the lynch 8-6 over Devin, but Devin was lynched instead due to vote manipulations. 2) Fuzz voted sig on Day 9, but that was a self-preservation vote. Thus, both of these exceptions get stars next to them, and don't make his vote record very solid.

Russtifinko - My mind has been changed on Russti. I think I may have tunneled on him quite a bit this game. Russti has not been afraid of making a decisive vote, whether it be on a baddie or a civilian. This consistent aggressive strategy has more potential to come from a civilian than a mafia member, in my opinion. He's got balls, and his output has been consistent throughout this game. Yes he has said several things that seem waffly/weird, but he's generally been open-minded as well, not afraid to trust another player when he was not certain (which was the case in the Long Con lynch).

Strawhenge - I can't see him being mafia at all. I've got a role pegged for him right now, and I've seen strong flashes of a civilian playstyle that I've noticed in my RYM research of him. I also completely understand the effects of burnout.

So this is mainly a stylistic point, but I love this post (and not primarily because MM's read of me improved in it). I just find this kind of simple statement of opinion with reasoning very easy to follow, as opposed to some of the denser quote- and spoiler-heavy posts that go around. I figure, I can always look up vote records or posts to see if the opinions are based in real observations. I motion for more content like this - I know it helps me avoid burnout. Are others of the same mindset?

Linki: I committed to reread some people today, but I'm catching up on current topics first. I don't want to get locked into a mode of thinking from a prior day, so my vote will come out when I decide I'm confident in it's placement. Can't speak for others, though.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Also CHOUTAS.

His vote record looks bad. Yes he voted Long Con on Day 1 and Floyd on Day 8, but in both cases, his vote was the first on the wagon. Otherwise, he has shown the tendency to vote early and not alter his vote (except for the case I noted previously).

So I found this post interesting. I think it was JJJ that said yesterday he thinks people who vote early look more civ. You're saying here they look less so, and in another post you cited some of my late votes as a reason your mind has changed somewhat on me.

I'm personally inclined to view a patter of vote times as mainly situation-specific. Choutas lives in Europe; I get off work 2-3 hours before lynches. I do think baddies can occasionally be found voting in the middle of packs, to avoid looking like they have too much influence over a lynch, but generally I only use vote timing as a supplement to more substantial cases. I'm interested in what others think about the vote timing issue.

Linki: So I feel like I get what you're driving at with Strawhenge's role, MM, but if I'm reading this in relation to your other posts, I don't see how he could be convinced you are one of those two (or any two) roles. Is that the point you're trying to make, that he couldn't know? Or is it just that I'm missing something?

Oh geez, 3 deaths. RIPIYWG, all.

I still support a motel room lynch, but The Men With Matching Starting Consonants (MM and JJJ) are right that the more we talk, the better off we'll be. I'll read the players I haven't today and try to keep an open mind about everyone.

Epignosis wrote:I have helped lynch two Mafia.

Much better! Thanks! :cheers:

Addendum to what I just wrote: Bullzeye, just like Fuzzy, said he was leaving and then came back unexpectedly?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:JJJ, I'd agree with you that it looks somewhat bad. And I am pretty sure your perspective on this is obvious, since you voted for Fuzz yesterday. But I'd think that you of all people would be interested in when a candidate looks TOO bad. I mean, you're telling us you're civ, and you were neck deep in Mac defense.
In the case of those RadicalFuzz responses, which is it?

Sure, it isn't uncommon for someone to do something that looks so bad that it is a town tell. This is obviously dangerous WIFOM territory, but I've made reads like that before. I don't understand why you're making mention of this now though -- have I made an accusation in recent memory against a player that suits the notion of looking "too bad"? You've made an assertion that my content can be described in a specific way, but without specific examples you've said very little.

Russtifinko wrote:I was also a little surprised at you telling Rico you wouldn't IMMEDIATELY crucify him after today's result (implying that you might crucify him later if you didn't like his explanation). The past few days, I've felt like you're much more interested in finding easy people to lynch over yourself instead of finding baddies. You're still posting quality content, don't get me wrong, but it seems like you're picking on weaker targets and that you're going more with the flow of suspicions than you were before.
Yellow: This is, as I see it, common sense -- both my approach to Rico's lynch-deciding vote and your parenthetical implication. Yes, I am inclined to think things through before I raise my pitchfork and torch. Rico made a vote that can be perceived as less than ideal, and I prompted him to describe what brought him to make that vote. If I am to judge his vote fairly, he should have the opportunity to express himself. Moreover, this game has featured quite a lot of knee-jerk scumhunting and it's truly begun to grate on me. So I thought conveying a level head might promote a healthier discussion in general.

As for the parenthetical: if I don't like Rico's explanation then yes I would be more likely to take a harder stance against him. If I don't like anyone's explanation for anything I would be more likely to take a harder stance against them. Isn't that the whole point of this thing we do called Mafia?

Orange: This is quite an accusation to make. You're telling me that I am trying to press the easy button in my suspicions for the sake of my own survival -- but again you haven't given me an example that suits that accusation. Who are the weaker targets that I have picked on? What makes you call them "weaker"?

I don't think your accusation reflects my content. On Day 7, my vote was always going to end up on either Floyd or Seaside simply because of self-preservation, and I was too exasperated by being Public Enemy #1 to try to push a case myself (who would have followed me then anyway?). On Day 8, I engaged in a bunch of different discussions, voiced my suspicions as ever before, and ended up deciding the lynch with my vote -- Floyd over MM. That's not "going with the flow" -- that's shouldering a heavy load and taking responsibility for an action that'd significantly affect the game for better or for worse.

On Day 9, "going with the flow" is the complete opposite of what I did, and the fact that you make that observation now really strikes me as disingenuous. I couldn't have possibly "gone with the flow" when I pursued a RadicalFuzz lynch, because I built the case against him myself. I drove that train. I didn't openly oppose a sig lynch because he was also a suspect of mine, but I made it clear down to the final minutes of the day phase that I wanted to lynch Fuzz based upon my own analysis of his content. He wasn't an "easy target" either, because prior to Day 9 he was a near-consensus town read.

Now it's Night 9 and I still think Fuzz is an important player to be discussed. So I'm continuing that discussion. What else would you expect of me under the circumstances?

As for the first part, my impression was that you were trying to get RadicalFuzz lynched. Is that not the case? If not, I interpreted your intent wrong. I'm saying that, if you are trying to get Fuzz lynched, I'm wary because it seems too easy. Regarding the second part of the post, where I accused you of going after easy targets:

Based on your response, I think I worded the previous post too strongly. I should have made this more clear - I'm not saying there's a baddie motivation behind you going after easy targets. I still have a slight town read on you. I'm just saying that civs have 2 priorities: 1) stay alive and 2) get baddies, and I'm concerned you're focusing too much on #1 and not enough on #2.

Per the underlined, you admit you went with the flow Day 7 because of self-preservation. That's fair - you have to survive to win. Still fits my point, but if I'm being fair we should disregard it for these purposes.

It's true, on Day 8 you considered a number of people. sig and Fuzz were other notable ones you didn't mention in the post above. Again, I'm not arguing that your content has gotten worse. And you did cast the deciding vote to get a baddie in a lynch, so credit where credit's due.

I'd argue Floyd was an easy target, being new and quiet, but since he was bad I'm willing to throw out any argument about that. Yesterday you went after Fuzz when he said he'd be out of town, which I and someone else (who?) disagreed with. That's fine, if you think someone's baddie you vote for them, I get it. But yesterday (real time, not game time), you out out there that you're looking hard at Bullzeye....right after he says he's going away for a few days. And Fuzz is an easy target because his play looks atrocious. I'm saying, quite possibly too atrocious to be bad. Yes, you did build the case, but after he himself acknowledged that he looked bad, and after people (Again, who? Sorry I don't remember.) said that he always looks atrocious as civ. It's possible he really is that bad at being bad, and that people are wrong about his meta like you were about Mac's. Maybe all the baddies are actually being super obvious and relying on us thinking they'd be more clever to win. But I don't think that's the case, and I'm trying to convince you that looking less at very obvious stuff and more at subtler things has value.

The Rico thing to me just seemed lightly hypocritical. When you explain it, it sounds super reasonable, though.

Matt F wrote:Sonovabitch

Yeah, you can't embed spoilers in spoilers. It's a shame.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:RIP Elo and sig.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Day 9 has ended. Elohcin has been killed by ?????. She was Animals.
No surprise there. RIP Elohcin.
I was talking about the flip.

Ah! That makes much more sense!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Flash was unconventional, but Bullzeye and I had a good back and forth (I was "bad", but I don't consider Flash a true Mafia game).

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 2&sr=posts

Last Man Standing was another unconventional one (again, not a true Mafia game), but:

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 5&sr=posts

My point in all this is that Bullzeye seemed perfectly fine with MacDougall calling him bad.

That's unlike him if he's a civilian, from my experience.
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 041#p87041

Monty Python. Here's a normal mafia game (closed setup). Bullzeye is mafia, and Long Con is his teammate. Long Con says Bullzeye is info-dumping, but Bullzeye "shrugs it off", even while he is heatedly calling Boogs a liar for his accusations.

Thanks, MM! Good find. I'll reread Bullz tomorrow, but at first glance that looks like a useful idea.

The only other game I've found where I played with a baddie Bullz was Bioshock. Not a lot to go on there imo, but the link is below for those interested. He wasn't really heavily suspected, but at one point Dom, who was civ, came after him a bit. He didn't really overreact, but he did have a moderately strongly worded retort. I'd have to search speed games to try to find anything else.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'd like to hear what everyone thinks of Fuzz in light of a specific point. When asked why he didn't pursue Floyd after his "thread text" slip (which occurred in a conversation between Floyd and Fuzz), these were Fuzz's answers:

RadicalFuzz wrote:Diiny I didn't push him because I didn't want to lynch him in his first game for that. It was emotion-driven ignorance. I thought he might become engaged in his defense, but that was not the case. I don't regret not pushing him, I'd do it again every time.

RadicalFuzz wrote:Diiny you are correct. I thought I made that abundantly clear at the time. I posted that I found it objectively scummy but wasn't going to personally pursue it. I attempted to be clear that I was aware my decision was an illogical one.

RadicalFuzz wrote:It's not being nice, it's wanting to give him a chance to fail. My first game I was Mafia and made a comeback for the win. I have a large ego and enjoy it when other people fail things I succeeded at. It falls under "illogical" all the same. I'm curious though, are you going to vote me for it?
He has made a claim that must either be taken or left at face value. I'm going to leave my own perspective on the matter at the door for now. I just want to hear what the rest of you think when you read these responses.

JJJ, I'd agree with you that it looks somewhat bad. And I am pretty sure your perspective on this is obvious, since you voted for Fuzz yesterday. But I'd think that you of all people would be interested in when a candidate looks TOO bad. I mean, you're telling us you're civ, and you were neck deep in Mac defense.

I was also a little surprised at you telling Rico you wouldn't IMMEDIATELY crucify him after today's result (implying that you might crucify him later if you didn't like his explanation). The past few days, I've felt like you're much more interested in finding easy people to lynch over yourself instead of finding baddies. You're still posting quality content, don't get me wrong, but it seems like you're picking on weaker targets and that you're going more with the flow of suspicions than you were before.

No offense meant to Bullz in that last post, by the way. Hopefully none is taken.

RIP Elo and sig.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Day 9 has ended. Elohcin has been killed by ?????. She was Animals.
No surprise there. RIP Elohcin.

No surprise? I was surprised. Why not be surprised about a kill from a Shadowy Figure coming in right before the Day ends??

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I reviewed your case on Bullzeye, Epi. I think you raise good points, particularly Bullzeye's awkward piggybacking of my Day 2 (?) beef with Golden. It's inconsistent with his prior stated civ read on Golden, and it also makes no sense for him to have the same mindset about Golden that I had when my mindset was completely based on my own interaction with Golden. Bullzeye can't exist inside my head.

It'd be groovy if anyone else who knows anything about Bullzeye's style could confirm/refute this:

Epignosis wrote:Now this is something I want to emphasize: In my experience, when Bullzeye is called bad, his retorts can be caustic and nerve-wracking to the accuser. I went against him a few times and he breathed fire through the Internet.
because his tame treatment of Mac's accusations was something that I found curious as well.

I have played with Bullz a number of times, and mainly when he's been a baddie, I believe. The one thing I remember well is that he gets HYPER defensive over relatively little things, and generally over defends himself and convinces everyone he's bad. Iirc he's had some pretty spectacular flameouts as a baddie.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I didn't realize he placeheld a vote on Black Rock that day. Didn't he also go after fingersplints for suspecting BR that same day?

I didn't go after fingers for going after BR; I went after fingers for doing nothing but say "Roxy is civ; BR is bad," which I wasn't finding very useful after about the 10th time.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I'm voting Bullzeye for right now.
I'm reading your Bullzeye post now.

How about RadicalFuzz?

Linki: Russ, I didn't intend to call Epignosis stupid. I was taking a popular idiom and inserting Epignosis's name into it.

Yeah, I know. I meant you were trolling me by agreeing with him.

Unless you actually do....which would be weird, given my point that he didn't actually say anything to indicate a suspicion, and then waited 3.5 hours, 13 posts, and 1 case against Mac to saying anything further about him.

Linki: Right, sorry, I forgot to give you your proper due for arguing in circles with him on Day 6 and then claiming you got him lynched.

I said in my post at 8-ish pm that Tuesday that he, and I quote, "look[ed] really bad to me". Doesn't preclude me having other suspects as well. I would hope you have more than one suspect so far, and I certainly do. You sure as shit didn't convince me of anything regarding Macdougall, and you should stop parading that around like you're God's gift to civs. That's only in your head, where you ARE God. If anyone is spinning this, it's you, and you're doing it to get civ cred that you aren't due.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 88#p188088
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 34#p188134

Link'd.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:We can argue about how to interpret your first post to Mac, there, but I challenge you to get one person in thread to agree that was a suspicion and not simple disapproval.
I'm with stupid Epignosis.

You really are a troll, after all.

Diiny wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:Diiny, have you read motel room lately? Thoughts on him?
No, I'll give him a cheeky iso. What are your concerns?

He said lynching civs is ok because then you can stop talking about lynching said civs.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Russ, if you had to pick between RadicalFuzz or sig to vote, who would you pick?

Of the two, RadicalFuzz. However, that's pretty far-fetched. I don't like the lynch on either.

Epignosis wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:Linki: Epi, regardless, facts are facts. I got there first; stop saying you did.
I didn't say I got there first. I said I got the job done.

Also false, though. I cast the last vote on Mac, and he "won" the lynch 7-6. Stop trying to take sole credit when numerous other people contributed. It makes you look far more civ than you deserve to.

You, can't ever be wrong, can you? It's a pretty unfortunate trait.

Diiny, have you read motel room lately? Thoughts on him?

Over 2/3 of sig's input came before Day 4. Beyond that I like what I see, though. I may be biased here, because he suspects motel room like me, but there you have it. Don't really understand why the dude has 5 votes.

RadicalFuzz I get more. He has looked pretty scummy. Almost too scummy, as Epi was saying with obvious choices before (although that was with JJJ, who arguably looks even scummier). I've thought his posts have been fairly useful, though.

Fuzz and Wilgy, you guys should switch to motel room. We can still put him in the lead, and I think he looks way worse than either of the current candidates.

Linki: Epi, regardless, facts are facts. I got there first; stop saying you did.

We can argue about how to interpret your first post to Mac, there, but I challenge you to get one person in thread to agree that was a suspicion and not simple disapproval.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Fuzz, this is the post that Elohcin is talking about.

Ricochet wrote:
Elohcin wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Okay, Matt F. You asked me if Mac has a tendency to vote for his mafia team mates on Day 1. I did some research into the RYM Mafia archives and didn't struggle at all to find valid examples:
But...he didn't vote for any teammates in this game.

How do you know?
Uhm...his vote record?

O wait...

I think I get it now.

derp
Ricochet said MacDougall didn't vote any teammates, if it was not a derp and actually correct, that means that you and Diiny are both civ, since he voted for you (reywas) on Day 1, and Diiny two other times.

RadicalFuzz wrote:I see. Players are using that connection as a way to check Rico and/or me/Diiny. I'm dirtier than Rico, so they're more comfortable with lynching me for this scenario. That makes sense, unfortunately.
It actually doesn't make sense to me. Maybe someone can help me out and explain. So my understanding is that the above looks like a slip by Rico, because how would he KNOW Mac didn't vote any teammates in this game? What I don't get is why this leads people to want to lynch Fuzz instead of Rico.
I speak for my vote, but RadicalFuzz's interactions with mafia combined with the Floyd slip wrt Fuzz look more suspicious than Ricochet's possible slip/probable derp.

The votes on RadicalFuzz are there independent of and prior to Ricochet's behavior. Rico just happened to make a comment that could correlate to RadicalFuzz's alignment, but not the other way around.

Ah, that clears it up. That's what I get for reading in backwards order. Thanks, MM.

This isn't germane to today's lynch, but needs to be brought up. Epi has, in very strong language, twice claimed credit for the Mac lynch:

Epignosis wrote:You are willing to lynch me based on the alignment of two players that remain a mystery to you, after Long Con, MacDougall, and Black Rock have all turned out to be bad (and I called out two of the three).

Epignosis wrote:Hey Matt: I fucking handed MacDougall to you. And I'm on a team with 3J now? Get some reality in your head, mate.

However, these claims are overstated.

I was the first one to "call out" McDougall, at 8:07 on Tuesday, October 13th:

Spoiler: show

Russtifinko wrote:So before my recent catch-up read I was with JJJ in thinking Macdougall looked to be one of towniest aroundiest. After today I'm not so sure, though...

MacDougall wrote:I think we really have to lynch sorsha. I feel like it's the key to breaking the game open today. She either flips scum and leaves behind a tasty breadcrumb trail, or flips town and leaves behind a tasty breadcrumb trail. Trusting Golden again seems like a nice way to get another townie killed. We've got a scum dead inside the first four days in a large game. We can afford a tactical lynch. Sorsha is a good lynch candidate for up front scum play as well as being the best possible lynch from a tactical perspective. Short of someone saying "I am scum" my vote won't be changing today.

Sorsha's play being scum is well documented, you only have to look at her recent posts to get a sense of posting nervously as scum playing poorly with a lynch on them tend to do.

DrWilgy... Are you tunneling me because I said you were scum in that Jimmy's game? Oh my God, u suck brah.
Others have pointed this out (Epi and Sorsha that I remember), but I think it was a good point: lynching a civ and getting lots of info is NOT preferable to lynching a baddie, even if you get little to no info. I know Macdougall clarified his thoughts after this, but it still sounds funny to me.

There's this....
motel room wrote:
MacDougall wrote:I'm actually unvoting sorsha and changing my vote to MattF. Something about him is not what it seems my friends. And I aim to get to the bottom of it.
I don't get why you've switched from Sorsha, at one point saying you wont switch for anything less than someone saying "i am scum", to Matt F because of a few "pings". This is a significant bandwagon.
And finally, this post sounds like baddie bitter about Golden being outed.
MacDougall wrote:
Golden wrote:
Black Rock wrote:Something about Sorshas posts just read genuine to me. I'll be surprised if she flips bad.
I uninured agree. I unwarmed don't me in charge buddy! be very surprised.
I agree with golden. He is the best townie in the world after all.
I feel pretty darn bad about Mac now. Probably too late for today, but very worth a look tomorrow.

Epi had made one post at exactly 6:00pm that day lightly chiding Mac for his stance on lynching townies. However, he stopped well short of actually accusing him of anything.

Spoiler: show

He then went on to talk about other things, and made 13 other posts before finally posting this actual suspicion of Mac at 9:29pm, nearly an hour and a half after me. (Had to unspoiled the interior of this because apparently you can't embed spoilers within spoilers.)

Spoiler: show

Epignosis wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Actually I can get it.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Relationship between MacDougall and Long Con:

MacDougall wrote:
Long Con wrote:Bea has opinions about who is Civvie, but none about who is bad. A Mafia member knows every Civvie out there, so can proclaim their trust with confidence. I think bea is Mafia, and I'm going to put my vote on her for now.

*votes bea*
This post set off scumdar pretty bad. It reads tactical, mindful ... I don't like it. No other posts in Long Con's ISO trouble me. It just seems like a nervous first major action.
MacAttack right off the bat. Good look, not just because it's anti-LC but because this is the kind of thing that helped to force LC to pretend it was ruse.

Here we have MacDougall and LC literally discussing the Nothing but Flowers role in the thread.

Mac brought the role up, and LC couldn't resist the urge to comment. Do I think two mafia team mates were chatting the day away about one of their own roles publicly in the thread? I absolutely don't. Towniest look of any analysis I've done so far, congratulations Mac.

MacDougall wrote:
Sorsha wrote:Two players I'm considering voting for so far:
Mac:
I don't like Mac going for seaside for the simple fact that he doesn't want him in the game. Seaside came in day one voicing suspicion of Mac so this just seems like a delayed no u/omgus. Long Con made a couple good points earlier about some things Mac said yesterday late in the lynch also. (If I wasn't on my phone I'd go back and get the quote) Mac was also on HBs rainbow list in yellow so I could see Mac trying to take him out before HB had more of a chance to look closer at him.
Straw:
Based on his posts from the night I believe he might also be trying to set seaside up for the HB kill.

Going to put my vote on Mac for the time being.
I don't want him in the game because he's either scum or because he's disruptive to the scum hunt. He's the best lynch candidate for the day. Explain to me how that's not valid?

His suspicion of me was nothing tbh. I barely even considered it at the time let alone now.

I don't think Long Con's points were good. Pretty sure you'll agree when you ACTUALLY READ THEM.

Also I have no idea what the fuck you mean by the last bit? Setting him up for the kill? He's going to get lynched, why would anyone bother doing that?

Lynching seaside is a no brainer at this point. Most votes, most people interracted with so it leaves the best crumbs. Most people seem to harbour some doubt about him.

What's your read of seaside?
Mac may have taken a long break, but he returned to Mafia in old form.

Spoiler: show
Long Con wrote:I'm used to an unchangeable vote mentality for the most part. I'll put a vote on Macdougal for the reasons I gave earlier.
LC responded to Mac's aggression with an OMGUS vote. It's possible that this was all a designed cooperative bus, but... I don't think it was.

~~~

Mac looks like a townie and y'all should do what he says.
You asked for a second opinion. So here goes.

To your first spoiler tagged entry: Why did MacDougall choose to gun for that particular vote? There were a lot of shitty votes Day 1, as there always are, and Long Con struck me as genuine (and you have Black Rock here verifying that I usually view LC as bad, which is true). Why call him out on that?

I don't know why it never occurred to me before, but I want to go back to Breaking Bad Mafia on RM. Sorsha was bad with then, weren't your Sorsha? Aw, wait, you're dead because people don't listen to sense.

In that game, I was Gus Fring, and my vote was worth a shit ton. While that sort of thing sounds good, it's very hard to hide. I chose to be blatant about it, breaking ties and what not and rubbing it in people's faces. I lasted quite a while.

Long Con was in that game, and he hunted my role hard. It was an exhausting exercise, and I think it's one he didn't look forward to in particular.

Suppose then, that LC decides to have this fake case on a civilian to "test reactions" and get somebody else on his team to call him out on it. They duke it out in the thread, and the plan is to lynch LC, who, let's face it, would be caught eventually anyway (seriously folks, giving Mafia +vote roles only outs them in the long run- it's bad game design). LC gets lynched, and the one who called him out on his gambit gets credit for it.

With a team of seven, it's the kind of thing I'd go for.

The fact that you, 3J, were blind to this possibility concerns me.

MacDougall has gone from gung-ho against Mafia to wanting to lynch civilians to give us fucking breadcrumbs. Fuck breadcrumbs.

I also want to point out that, in the second spoiler tag, 3J highlights "I don't think Long Con's points were good. Pretty sure you'll agree when you ACTUALLY READ THEM" which directs attention from the rest of the post:

MacDougall wrote:
Sorsha wrote:Two players I'm considering voting for so far:
Mac:
I don't like Mac going for seaside for the simple fact that he doesn't want him in the game. Seaside came in day one voicing suspicion of Mac so this just seems like a delayed no u/omgus. Long Con made a couple good points earlier about some things Mac said yesterday late in the lynch also. (If I wasn't on my phone I'd go back and get the quote) Mac was also on HBs rainbow list in yellow so I could see Mac trying to take him out before HB had more of a chance to look closer at him.
Straw:
Based on his posts from the night I believe he might also be trying to set seaside up for the HB kill.

Going to put my vote on Mac for the time being.
I don't want him in the game because he's either scum or because he's disruptive to the scum hunt. He's the best lynch candidate for the day. Explain to me how that's not valid?

His suspicion of me was nothing tbh. I barely even considered it at the time let alone now.

I don't think Long Con's points were good. Pretty sure you'll agree when you ACTUALLY READ THEM.

Also I have no idea what the fuck you mean by the last bit? Setting him up for the kill? He's going to get lynched, why would anyone bother doing that?

Lynching seaside is a no brainer at this point. Most votes, most people interracted with so it leaves the best crumbs. Most people seem to harbour some doubt about him.

What's your read of seaside?
3J took this post, highlighted a side note about Long Con, when the overall conversation here was about seaside. Then 3J talked Mac up, saying, "Mac may have taken a long break, but he returned to Mafia in old form. "

Old form...over a defensive post? Is he usually defensive?

And what happened to lynching seaside for breadcrumbs?

Finally, on this point, tt's worth pointing out that Sorsha, a civilian, suspected Mac.

Mmm...breadcrumbs indeed.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:LC responded to Mac's aggression with an OMGUS vote. It's possible that this was all a designed cooperative bus, but... I don't think it was.
Raise your hand if you think LC casts OMGUS votes on civilians.

Now raise your hand if you think LC knew what he was about when he did it.

I think this needed to be made obvious, because it's just false and it's confusing other people. (Matt F, for example, actually corrected Epi earlier, saying he wasn't the only one to post a Mac case. However, he neglected to mention that Epi wasn't even first to the scene I believe this is because of Epi's overdone claims.) Epi is jumping at every chance to take credit for this, and I think it's giving people way more of a positive read on him than he deserves to get for his Mac stance.

Linki: Elo, fair enough. JJJ, do you have numbers on how many times he's been bad? If he's 4/4 on teammate votes Day 1, that's damn compelling. If he's 4/20, not so much.

Elohcin wrote:
RadicalFuzz wrote:Elo, since you're here, why did you vote for me?
The tab stays open on my computer. It doesn't mean I am actually here. But I am now. I voted for you b/c I think you are bad. Mac has a record of voting for a teammate day 1. I think there is a good chance that happened this game. Also, I would like to take away the doubt that has been placed on Rico b/c I think he is good.

Have you played with Mac before? I thought he was an RYMer.

Diiny wrote:
RadicalFuzz wrote:I think bcornett is a strange individual. I don't think he's particularly helpful in any sense of the word, but I can't tell if that's because he's scum or if he's just not helpful.
He can be helpful as. He sometimes shines with magnificent towniness. He hasn't done so this game and has failed to replicate it as scum.

Just to fuck with my meta reads, though, there's some GAME SCIENCE that exists that suggests he's more than likely in the clear because if LC (his teammate if he were scum) voted brian, it'd reveal that someone who voted brian was in fact flowers. I think that's the case, anyway, someone correct me if I'm wrong.

He's not confirmed, but it's unlikely mafia would like to reveal someone on brian's train was flowers. that said, maybe they were hoping that it could've been explained by the other vote changing role?

Proposers of the cleared brian theory, pls respond to that: how would it have been obvious that it was flowers fuckery rather than anything else? Am I missing something?

As I read the roles, there weren't any other vote manipulations that could have been in effect and given bcornett at least 2 extra votes at the time.

Linki: Ok, Rico, fair enough. I'm not sure yet whether or not I'd buy that it was a slip, I need to reread you. My leaning based purely on the amount of content you've posted is that no baddie would do that. My question, though, is why the exchange makes anyone at all interested in lynching Fuzz.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Fuzz, this is the post that Elohcin is talking about.

Ricochet wrote:
Elohcin wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Okay, Matt F. You asked me if Mac has a tendency to vote for his mafia team mates on Day 1. I did some research into the RYM Mafia archives and didn't struggle at all to find valid examples:
But...he didn't vote for any teammates in this game.

How do you know?
Uhm...his vote record?

O wait...

I think I get it now.

derp
Ricochet said MacDougall didn't vote any teammates, if it was not a derp and actually correct, that means that you and Diiny are both civ, since he voted for you (reywas) on Day 1, and Diiny two other times.

RadicalFuzz wrote:I see. Players are using that connection as a way to check Rico and/or me/Diiny. I'm dirtier than Rico, so they're more comfortable with lynching me for this scenario. That makes sense, unfortunately.

It actually doesn't make sense to me. Maybe someone can help me out and explain. So my understanding is that the above looks like a slip by Rico, because how would he KNOW Mac didn't vote any teammates in this game? What I don't get is why this leads people to want to lynch Fuzz instead of Rico.

Just realized I forgot to put my vote on motel room when I said I did earlier, so putting it on now while I catch up.

Oooh, good job on Floyd! And yay bonus day!

sig wrote:I will be quickly looking over Russ again, what is the case against him since he has been a candidate for lynches and I can't seem to recall what the suscpioun is based on.

So this is a super good point. As far I know (and I admit I have skipped 2-3 pages at this point due my early night yesterday and stuff going on today), there isn't even anything resembling a case against me. The closest we've come is Matt F rereading me, and he came out feeling positive. And somehow, despite that, I got 3 votes yesterday, putting me in the realm of possible lynchdom. MM voted me without listing any reason whatsoever, he just bolds my name. motel room is NO Uing me, and his is the BEST vote I got. I have no clue whatsoever where Bullzeye's vote came from. It's really not sporting. If you actually suspect me and want me lynched, the burden should be on you to bring some type of evidence, however weak, against me. If you're not gonna do that, get off my lawn and go after actual baddies.

sig wrote:Russ why did you vote for motel room day 8?

Radical Fuzz could you give me some more reasoning for your wilgy vote? Besides him who else would you be willing to lynch today?

I voted for motel room because at the end of Day 6, he said it would be ok to lynch JJJ, who he thought was civvie, so we could stop talking about JJJ. The antithesis of pro-civ behavior. People have basically ignored my point, and when I asked the thread for reactions and to tell me if they thought I was off base and stand down, I didn't get a single response. It's actually very frustrating at this point. SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME WHETHER YOU BELIEVE MY MOTEL ROOM CASE HAS ANY MERIT AND WHY.

Matt F wrote:This is going to be a strange request...

Can everyone tell Elohcin a joke this day phase? Thanks!

Why did the chicken cross the road in 1768?

...To get away from Colonial Sanders!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:RadicalFuzz should be around tonight or tomorrow according to this post made Thursday morning.

RadicalFuzz wrote:What's with this Roxy-splints-BR triangle all getting modkilled in one night? Spooky stuff.

I'm going to be out of town for roughly 3 & 1/2 days. I can post a little bit from my phone, but I won't be able to check the thread very often. I'll make a post when I get back and then start catching up from this post on page 137.

PAGE 137
But you're not exactly wrong DrWilgy.

I'm not into lynching people who are gone, whatever JJJ thinks about it. It's one thing in lylo, but we still have 4 anti-civs alive and plenty to go on.

Pretty sure all this will get me is a reciprocating vote, but he needs the attention. motel room

Linki: To reiterate, Matt, I did not and will not hint at any role during this game or any other. So as happy as I am to have you think I'm civ, you should absolutely not base any read of me at all on perceived hints. Syndicateers can vouch that I wouldn't hint, so you should probably reassess.

hey all, i am not feeling well this evening. I have read most things, but won't be writing much. I'm sorry to be around in only a limited capacity.

I don't see the MM thing. I have a personal policy against using dumped info to kill people.And Strawhenge is clearly implying he's info dumping, but not really giving us anything we can use. It's weird people are following him on this so readily, especially JJJ.

The interesting thing about Matt accusing JJJ and Epi of being teammates is that it drove them together in common defense. Doubt it means anything role-wise, but I found it kind of funny.

I haven't reread Floyd like I promised. I don't buy that the rivals thing with Straw was a baddie slip, but people saying he could be anything and we wouldn't know are right.

Epi's defense of motel is that he reminisced with a known baddie about past games super early on in this game. It means nothing to me, so my vote stays put for now.

Off to nap. I will try to be back before EOD to make sure I don't miss anything important.

PS-Rico, sorry for the chunky posts. I've called people out on content being too dense. It's a negative byproduct of the way I've been reading/catching up this game. I'll try to break things up more and bring more attention to my most salient points

trying to catch up, but I still have 3 pages and I need to pause because I have a headache coming on. And I'm supposed to Skype my girl momentarily. Apologies if my input gets delayed; it will be in before EOD, but it's hard to say how long before

Matt F wrote:I'm outta here for a bit, but I just realized that 3J doesn't have one single vote yet.

To everyone who switched from 3J to seaside last Day Phase - What's up?

Peace out folks bbl

Oh and Choutas - Were you being funny about the "who do you suppose they targeted?" I guess I'll take you off my civvie for sure list.

I did switch to seaside, though not from JJJ. I think seaside had been acting weird all game, making unsupported accusations, and then Choutas' defense of him was terrible. It read to me like a baddie desperate to preserve a teammate for one day.

I'm torn on JJJ still, but I do think it's weird that the people who were after his head after the Mac flip seem largely willing to leave it and vote where the wind blows.

Elohcin wrote:
sig wrote:Just popping in supposed to be doing school but Mom hasn't noticed I'm not yet :P
Are you homeschooled? What grade are you in?

Okay, thoughts. I have to say that I am beginning to remove my trust of Epi. I hate to even say it, but he is acting weird. He doesn't normally act this wishy-washy. I think MM could be right that he is the SK. And I hate that b/c I fought Mac when he said it could be.

Elo, as much as I love to hear someone say Epi is being wishy-washy, I no longer think there's any reason we should buy even a tiny bit of Mac's theory that Epi was the SK. I think it really is just a new style for him.

Epignosis wrote:So what I have learned by coming out of the blue and calling MM the Psycho Killer is that two people were eager to jump on that and lynch him for no stated reason:

Spoiler: show
Who tried and failed to kill Mr. (or Mrs.) ?????

Poll runs till Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:28 pm
You may select 1 option

bcornett24
0
No votes

Bullzeye
0
No votes

Diiny
1
bcornett24 (10)
6%

DrWilgy
1
RadicalFuzz (18)
6%

Elohcin
0
No votes

Epignosis
0
No votes

JaggedJimmyJay
0
No votes

Matt F
0
No votes

Metalmarsh89
3
Epignosis (4), Strawhenge (6), TheFloyd73 (8)
17%

motel room
2
Russtifinko (7), Matt F (11)
11%

RadicalFuzz
0
No votes

Ricochet
0
No votes

Russtifinko
2
Metalmarsh89 (3), motel room (9)
11%

sig
0
No votes

Strawhenge
0
No votes

TheFloyd73
2
Choutas (13), Diiny (14)
11%

Two killers who aren't very good job at their jobs, apparently (host, deadies, non-players)
7
MovingPictures07 (1), Sloonei (2), HamburgerBoy (5), a2thezebra (12), MacDougall (15), bea (16), juliets (17)
39%

Total votes : 18
Regardless of whether MM is PK (and I don't really think he is, for a reason obvious to me), it's clear that Mammaries Can't Wait is still alive (it is October and I was wearing a pink shirt today, after all), and lynching Mafia should be top priority, which would deprive PK of his deadmaking services yet again.

Given that Long Con tried to pull this very thing Day 2 (or, rather, what looks like this very thing), I figure no one would expect me to do it. So I did.

Plus football got boring as hell last night.

So are you now intent on lynching these two, or what? This sounds like you're just happy you did a gambit and you don't actually want to do anything with the results. I wanna see Headhunter Epi!

And since you've clearly done your homework on this, who barely killed on N5? Save us some time in a 150-page game. And what is your theory on the two N4 kills? I had forgotten that you never elaborated.

Linki: Oh god, Epi is back on Occam's Razor. Everyone duck and cover!

Ricochet wrote:The mafia's tactic surprises me here. Again, they've sent Life During Wartime to do the killing and it failed. That means that, once again, they won't be able to kill on Night 8. Why would they do something so detrimental? Drugs has never performed the kill once and he would have been a better choice, considering he couldn't have used his power last Night. Maybe he's a BTSC lurker? Maybe he was killed by the SK? No attempt from No Compassion, or in fact any visible shenanigans from him, either. Maybe both Drugs and No Compassion are players suspected enough to not risk being targeted with a block or such?

Anyway, such a misstep makes me think maybe the mafia have currently lost a bit their sense of gravity a bit and risk moves that, should they backfire, would leave them optionless until the next odd Night.

---

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Matt F wrote:What up Choutas', why the sunglasses? Hard for you to see?
He's too busy staring at the sun. He's so high he's off the poll.
Well it's guaranteed he wasn't roleblocked if his name's off the poll.

Doesn't rule him out as bad of course.
Is this a Captain Obvious moment of yours or what exactly were you trying to say with this?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Try again.

Read my posts, maybe you can figure out who I am.
Ugh, this is Watchmen all over again...

It's Day 8, you've written almost 400 posts on 10 pages of history, you catch real heat and only now do you think it's proper to leave a "guess what, I may have hinted who I am before".

---

TheFloyd73 wrote: Epi and Marsh's conversations with each other are fascinating to observe.
Who ever Life During Wartime and SK tried to kill, they most likely tried to attack Blind.
Interesting. Quite specific about who the common kill target might have been.

Why did you vote MM at this point, if you only found his exchange with Epi "fascinating to observe"?

---

Epig's and Straw's accusations on MM sound a bit too behavioural, at this point. Is MM the only viable candidate for the patterns they describe? If not, why MM and not others who might relatively fit the same description? Strawhenge is also bringing the case-making to an unfortunate halt with the "I can't fully make my case, because infodumping". Then again, speaking of behaviour, MM seems a bit testy with the rebuttals.

Also, dat "MacBaddie must have been right about Epig, despite being a MacBaddie"? Com'on, he went all the way to claim that Epig must have forgotten to send his PM or choose to do so intentionally. The last I remember that line of conversation, he [MacBaddie] was shapeshifting his arguments constantly, depending on how they were bouncing back.

Rico, super cool points here.

About the baddies: Drugs – If it carries out the kill, it cannot kill any player it hasn't drugged.

This is a double negative, but I'm pretty sure it means Drugs can only kill drugged players. We know it's only been able to drug one time, and it seems most likely its target was Devin, who is dead. So Drugs may actually be unable to kill right now. However, you raise a good point as to why the baddies aren't using someone other than Life During Wartime. Are you saying you think the mafia are less involved players who haven't read their roles properly?

Your last two points above lead me to think that you think that both Epi and MM are civ, since you criticize the cases against both. Is that an accurate assessment?

I need to read Floyd and MM again. However, it is Friday night, so I may or may not do it tonight.

bcornett24 wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:Floyd, I see you're in thread. Any thoughts on the events of recent days? You nearly got lynched but didn't; what do you think of your voters? JJJ? The last-minute seaside lynch?

And bcornett, I can already tell that post will be real long. Please be so kind as to include a tl;dr when you're done.
What is that and what does it do?

tl;dr stands for "too long; didn't read". It's a summary at the end of a long post that gets the main point across quickly.

Luckily for everyone, you made a huge green one, so we're solid.

bcornett24 wrote: Final Comments

Good Looks

Case Against Long Cong

Case for sorsha

Case against Mac

Good points appears to be scum hunting

Neutral Looks

Little night participation

Little content to look at

Bad Looks

Potential lacking of content/fluff

Updated Read: Slight Town

Matt F wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:I don't catch what you're implying with the underlined. I am very bad at hinting at things and catching hints, as others can attest. I also have a personal policy of not hinting at non-thread info in the thread. So whatever you think you see probably isn't there, sorry.
No problem, I figured not anyway. Just trying to start a civvie link fence with a few players (right now I have Elohcin and I guess Choutas as civvies, and bcornett as anti-Mafia), but it's all good.

Russtifinko wrote:I also don't love your rationale for wanting to lynch MM. It reads to me as uncomfortably close to the idea of lynching civs just to do it, which I am currently ripping motel room for. Please explain yourself.
Actually, I want to lynch motel room, 3J, Strawhenge, and Floyd (in that order until the order changes in about 5 minutes haha). However, I will explain myself. Straw came into the thread claiming some wild stuff about MetalMarsh (who I had G2H as part of a Mafia team anyway), pretty much guaranteeing a good result if lynched. I figure since I suspected Metal Marsh anyway, why not? And if it didn't take, if MM came out civvie, then that would be just one more reason why Strawhenge is bad. If anything, though, I see Metalmarsh as a neutral read leaning Mafia, definitely not a civvie read currently, so I don't see how that's the same as "just lynching civs just to do it". If you'll recall, I was very unhappy with Golden's gambit back on Day 3, I think?, when he invited everyone to waste a lynch day to lynch him and he claimed being civvie all the while.

Hmmm, ok, thanks for the explanation Matt. I don't recall you saying you thought MM was bad before, but maybe I just missed it. Anyway I appreciate you reasoning it out instead of just saying you actually think lynching civs is good.

In return...

Matt F wrote:Epignosis - For a second I thought Russ might be a civvie, but now I'm back to neutral.

After reading him, I did notice that at one point he tells the thread that he's sold on Mac being town because of 3J's vouching for him. Later still, he reiterates MacD's towniness because 3J and Choutas' read of him. It kinda seemed like he was preemptively blaming 3J in case MacD ever flipped mafia? Also at one point, says he was all about a Black Rock lynch until fingersplints made him change his mind because of some argument they were having. Weird that he was gung ho about Black Rock (scum) but then changed his mind because of an argument with splints (civvie).

I dunno, it's hard for me to see him as Mafia with that Long Con vote. HOWEVER, I did notice during that Day phase, he seemed to suspect Sorsha more then Long Con, even voted Sorsha once because he was not happy that she was encouraging the LC vote (even though he suspected LC too) but then realized his mistake because Sorsha was actually discouraging a Long Con vote. Then he eventually votes Long Con (as we all know). ???

I'm neutral on Russ for now, I'd have to see more evidence of him being bad before voting for him.

Yay! Stuff to respond to! A couple responses:

- I did trust JJJ and Choutas' read of Mac because they said very confidently that he's played that way as a civ before. However, since then I haven't tried to set them up based on it, so saying I was preemptively blaming them would be a stretch.

- With Sorsha, I suspected her because I thought she was the saying the opposite of what she actually was. What I thought she was saying made her look really bad to me, but when she corrected my understanding it made her look fine, so I went back to my original stance.

- I still regret making fingers so angry, and my play regarding BR there was influenced by my emotions in that interaction.

I know this isn't a case against me, I just want you to have the responses available.

Floyd, I see you're in thread. Any thoughts on the events of recent days? You nearly got lynched but didn't; what do you think of your voters? JJJ? The last-minute seaside lynch?

And bcornett, I can already tell that post will be real long. Please be so kind as to include a tl;dr when you're done.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Matt F wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:I'm down to vote motel room again, with Matt this time.
I'd love to vote for him, but I'm not sold as of yet. 3J and Straw are also pretty high on my list. Does the underline mean what I think it means?

Epignosis, after reading Russ I can see where you're coming from, but I'd like Russ to answer this post before I go on.

LOL @ Straw's "If I answer about info dumping, is it info dumping?" Had me rolling.

I could be convinced to vote MM today, if only to crucify Straw the following day if he's wrong.

Russ - please answer this post when you get a chance.
I'm glad you already know where you're voting for the next two day phases.

Matt F wrote:Yo Russ, I see you in the thread! Answer me, man, answer! Gaaah

Chill, man! Had the browser up while I Skyped my girlfriend. We do have nearly 48 hours haha.

I don't catch what you're implying with the underlined. I am very bad at hinting at things and catching hints, as others can attest. I also have a personal policy of not hinting at non-thread info in the thread. So whatever you think you see probably isn't there, sorry.

I also don't love your rationale for wanting to lynch MM. It reads to me as uncomfortably close to the idea of lynching civs just to do it, which I am currently ripping motel room for. Please explain yourself.

motel room wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:motel room. I have two days to think it over, but for now he's far and away my biggest suspect.
I know, you announced it when you tried to start a bandwagon on me at the end of yesterday when you drifted in out of the blue. You tried to Start a bandwagon with no prior knowledge or suspicion of me or where the thread was at.

Let's put your suspicion of me into words - motel room said he thinks jjj is town but doesn't oppose his lynch. Is there more? Who's your next "biggest suspect", MovingPictures?

Your responses make me feel worse and worse, two. You're throwing out wild insinuations against me with nothing to back them up and ridiculing me for bringing up that lynching civs might not be the best idea ever.

First off, the entire classification that comprises your first paragraph is just plain wrong. As I've said numerous times, I play when I can. I came in yesterday at the end of a long work day and hopped right onto the thread. If you don't like it, too bad. I can't skip work for mafia. I did know what was going on in the thread at the time, because I read it before posting my suspicion of you.

Of course i hadn't suspected you before - you hadn't said lynching civs is a good idea. What, am I only allowed to suspect people I've been on since Day 1, like Epi does? Sorry, didn't see that in the rules.

There is more, http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=734&p=187911#p187911. However, even if there wasn't more to it, that single point I made would be enough. I have only ever seen baddies say lynching civs for any reason, and your reason is literally that there will be a dead civ if we lynch a civ. After the way the Mac thing went today, I'm pretty damn confident.

REST OF THREAD: Please, check me here. I feel like this is the most obvious baddie thing that has happened all game long, but it's not getting much notice from people outside of me, motel, and Matt (hah, alliteration!). Am I way off base, or does motel room actually look bad for the reasons Matt and I enumerated?

Linki that I clicked through: lol Strawhenge, you are absolutely info dumping by this point.

Still not convinced why anyone should follow you though, when we have perfectly good leads on baddies.

motel room. I have two days to think it over, but for now he's far and away my biggest suspect.

Epignosis wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:
Epignosis wrote:"Tunnelly?"

Name the last time I voted you.

Name the last time I questioned you.

Name the last time I went after you.

You're about to all three wishes.
Never said you've been going after me (although you have lightly, on and off).

tunnelly (tə' nə lē) : lacking a sufficiently broad focus; being so set in an outdated mindset as to preclude assimilation of new information

You're on me because I said "deliberately" on Day 1. Which by the way is a NO U, since it was in response to me going after you that Day. You seem very concerned with the word-mincing.

Linki: Hmmm, how surprising the motel room suddenly agrees with Epi and MM that I look bad, now that my suspicion of him is gaining traction. Oh, wait, check that, it's not.

Double Linki: Strawhenge, what? Haha, you can't just hop into the thread, tell us to vote someone, and reasonably expect us to follow without giving us a reason why. What is going on with people? Is your reason "info dumping"? Because Choutas tried that yesterday, and it was a major factor in a civ being lynched.
I don't give a shit about what is and isn't a NO U. And here you are misrepresenting again what I said. I didn't go after you because you said "deliberately." I went after you because you said "deliberately misinterpreted," when I didn't do that.

I rest my case. You're on because of a Day 1 NO U. It looked deliberate to me at the time, but to be honest I don't see why we're debating this 7 days later. If you want me dead because you think I'm bad, ok cool, build a case. If you want me dead because you think I am a threat to you personally, then we have what I'd call irreconcilable differences. The latter seems to be the case to me.

motel room wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:
motel room wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:To be more precise: esplain the part where you think JJJ will flip town, but you're happy to remove the doubt by lynching him. I recall Mac saying something very similar, I think about Sorsha. (Would quote, but have you seen that dude's post history?)
Nah you should quote it cos I don't like you dropping into the thread after no content and trying to drum up shit without context.

I'm not sure how I can further explain it. I think JJJ may be town and made the same mistaken judgement on mac as I did. I'm not confident enough to fight his lynch and can see benefit from him as a lynch contender being removed from further chatter. He has even said the same thing himself. Why is me thinking this so suspicious to you, specifically?

MacDougall wrote:I think we really have to lynch sorsha. I feel like it's the key to breaking the game open today. She either flips scum and leaves behind a tasty breadcrumb trail, or flips town and leaves behind a tasty breadcrumb trail. Trusting Golden again seems like a nice way to get another townie killed. We've got a scum dead inside the first four days in a large game. We can afford a tactical lynch. Sorsha is a good lynch candidate for up front scum play as well as being the best possible lynch from a tactical perspective. Short of someone saying "I am scum" my vote won't be changing today.
Fine. Found it. Not sure why you felt the need to have me do that. (It's near the top of page 9 of his post history, btw.)

This response is terrible imo. You're really debating the point that Mac expressed a willingness to vote Sorsha even if she was civ? It's right there in the thread! And then you say I'm "trying to drum up shit" when, again, Mac's point was well documented as a major point of suspicion that Day.

Finally, you double down on your "JJJ is civ, but we should still lynch him anyway" idea. It's this simple: lynching civs is NOT worth it. We're losing! Someone (Rico?) said we have 4 days to get at least one baddie, or game over. Wasting one of those days lynching someone you think is good should be repulsive to you. At least Mac made up some bullshit about wanting info! You don't even say we'd get anything out of JJJ being lynched. You want someone you say is civvie to die so that we can stop discussing him as a potential lynch candidate??? The POINT of the game is to discuss people as potential lynch candidates!

I am overreacting, or is this the least civ mindset all game? I'm down to vote motel room again, with Matt this time. I'm more sure about him than JJJ.
Great. Yes I knew what you were referring to, what I objected to was you coming in out of nowhere and pretending to be certain about something. Going and actually doing it now seems like busywork but ok do you see the difference between what I'm suggesting and what Mac was suggesting? Mac thinks lynching Sorsha will leave behind all these clues he's super eager to get into, I'm suggesting lynching JJJ crosses him off the list the end. No more bickering about whether he's scum or town or what because look it's happening again today "JJJ should still be on the table for a lynch", "what do we think about JJJ?" over and over.

I'm not debating anything about Mac's Sorsha thing, not sure why you think that.

"Pretending to be certain" about verifiable facts? I wasn't pretending, I was certain. I do see the difference, and Mac's reason is actually BETTER than your reason. Which is major point against you.

Epignosis wrote:"Tunnelly?"

Name the last time I voted you.

Name the last time I questioned you.

Name the last time I went after you.

You're about to all three wishes.

Never said you've been going after me (although you have lightly, on and off).

tunnelly (tə' nə lē)

: lacking a sufficiently broad focus; being so set in an outdated mindset as to preclude assimilation of new information

You're on me because I said "deliberately" on Day 1. Which by the way is a NO U, since it was in response to me going after you that Day. You seem very concerned with the word-mincing.

Linki: Hmmm, how surprising the motel room suddenly agrees with Epi and MM that I look bad, now that my suspicion of him is gaining traction. Oh, wait, check that, it's not.

Double Linki: Strawhenge, what? Haha, you can't just hop into the thread, tell us to vote someone, and reasonably expect us to follow without giving us a reason why. What is going on with people? Is your reason "info dumping"? Because Choutas tried that yesterday, and it was a major factor in a civ being lynched.

Miscellaneous thingsL

RadicalFuzz wrote:What's with this Roxy-splints-BR triangle all getting modkilled in one night? Spooky stuff.

I agree! I thought of them as a triumvirate too. RIP Roxy and fingers.

motel room wrote: Yeah no thats what I mean:
So back to this other thing, if seaside was isolating those three players (jjj, diiny, espers) because of voting shenanigans he saw, on Day 4, that actually would indicate they were more likely to be town? - threw in a comma

But yeah, aside from the Day being clarified, am I correct or misunderstanding?

This is actually a good point though. seaside was on these three starting in D4, and Drugs couldn't have been used until N4. So any lynch manipulation he saw would've been town.

The problem is, he would have known all this. So why not call these three out as civs, if that was why he was doing this?

Matt F wrote:Unfortunately, my total whack out theories prevent my really good theories from getting any traction, cuz I guess peeps think I'm crazy haha. Remember, it wasn't until Ricochet and others started looking at Mac differently before he was lynched.

However, I will point out, earlier in the game I suspected Mac of being an LC teamie for their discussion on the Nothing but Flowers role, I even asked Mac if I was wrong and he simply said "Yes" (which I wasn't)

and

In an ISO of Black Rock, I suspected her and Long Con of being teamies because of her "I believe BC was in the lead" comment after I was curious who was in the lead, BC or LC, during the late Llama train Day 2.

So I get it right sometimes

This totally happened to me. You are slowly winning me back to thinking you're sane, though. Slowly.

motel room wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:To be more precise: esplain the part where you think JJJ will flip town, but you're happy to remove the doubt by lynching him. I recall Mac saying something very similar, I think about Sorsha. (Would quote, but have you seen that dude's post history?)
Nah you should quote it cos I don't like you dropping into the thread after no content and trying to drum up shit without context.

I'm not sure how I can further explain it. I think JJJ may be town and made the same mistaken judgement on mac as I did. I'm not confident enough to fight his lynch and can see benefit from him as a lynch contender being removed from further chatter. He has even said the same thing himself. Why is me thinking this so suspicious to you, specifically?

MacDougall wrote:I think we really have to lynch sorsha. I feel like it's the key to breaking the game open today. She either flips scum and leaves behind a tasty breadcrumb trail, or flips town and leaves behind a tasty breadcrumb trail. Trusting Golden again seems like a nice way to get another townie killed. We've got a scum dead inside the first four days in a large game. We can afford a tactical lynch. Sorsha is a good lynch candidate for up front scum play as well as being the best possible lynch from a tactical perspective. Short of someone saying "I am scum" my vote won't be changing today.

Fine. Found it. Not sure why you felt the need to have me do that. (It's near the top of page 9 of his post history, btw.)

This response is terrible imo. You're really debating the point that Mac expressed a willingness to vote Sorsha even if she was civ? It's right there in the thread! And then you say I'm "trying to drum up shit" when, again, Mac's point was well documented as a major point of suspicion that Day.

Finally, you double down on your "JJJ is civ, but we should still lynch him anyway" idea. It's this simple: lynching civs is NOT worth it. We're losing! Someone (Rico?) said we have 4 days to get at least one baddie, or game over. Wasting one of those days lynching someone you think is good should be repulsive to you. At least Mac made up some bullshit about wanting info! You don't even say we'd get anything out of JJJ being lynched. You want someone you say is civvie to die so that we can stop discussing him as a potential lynch candidate??? The POINT of the game is to discuss people as potential lynch candidates!

I am overreacting, or is this the least civ mindset all game? I'm down to vote motel room again, with Matt this time. I'm more sure about him than JJJ.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
AceofSpaces wrote:I am putting a vote onto Russ, based on what MacDougall said. I really don't have the time to catch up fully and form a solid opinion right now. Voting for Russ is the best I can do.
Black Rock replaced AceofSpaces. This was one of AceofSpaces' only two posts of the game before he subbed out, in which he followed a known teammate's suspicion to vote Russti, being the second vote on him and about an hour before the deadline.

I asked Mac if he wanted to lynch Russti, who had quickly gained four votes, and was looking like a decent lynch candidate (trailing birdwithteeth 4-7). Instead, Mac left his vote on the less popular reywas (now RadicalFuzz).

These things considered, I think Russtifinko is mafia.

Wait, wait, wait. So disregarding everything I've done this game and all 139 pages of content, I'm bad because one baddie voted for me on Day 1 but another one didn't?? I fail to see the merit of this.

Epignosis wrote:
Matt F wrote:
Epignosis wrote:If I had two lynches as of this moment, they'd go to 3J and Russ.
You think motel room is clean or you just like these two better?
Russ was my Day 1 suspect, and he never left that list.

This seems....tunnelly.

If either of you have a case to bring, please, let's have it out in the open. I'm happy to defend myself if need be, and I have nothing to hide.. I don't like these mentions and insinuations with nothing behind them, though. They've led to too many bad lynches, just because someone's name is out there a lot.

Matt F wrote:
motel room wrote:holy shit I'm not touching that monster post any more. I'll pull out your red and reply and you'll just have to remember what I'm replying to. Cos damn some of that still isnt actually questions.
You could just quote it, and then put your answers in blue. Then we know where the convo's been and where it's currently at.

Anyway, I'm out. I'll be back in the morning to continue our discussion.

What does everyone in the thread think about 3J and Motel room voting together 5 out of 7 day phases, dissuading players from voting MacDougall during Day 6, and bandwagoning a civilian Day 7?

Matt, thanks for bringing some attention to motel room. I think my point about him being ok with lynching civs yesterday was largely ignored, with the seaside stuff going on.

I do think motel room is suspicious. I think it'd be a bit of a weird move for two baddies to vote together so often, as I've been on baddie teams that intentionally avoided voting together too often so they wouldn't implicate one another if they died. Idk though, maybe not every baddie does that. I think the D5-7 votes together make the most sense from a "they're baddie teammates" perspective, since those were important results and were up in the air, but I guess I don't get why they'd vote together on D1 & D2.

Has anyone ever played a game with a baddie JJJ? Because I have only ever seen him good before and could use an evaluation of his baddie prowess. The past few days' lynches look really bad for him, I agree, but he just seems so dang genuine in every post. And he's written tons of stuff with actual content. Just having trouble deciding whether to follow the hard evidence or my read, and trying to assess how valuable my read actually is.

Oh geez. RIP seaside.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Elohcin wrote:I ask again...who came up with the sudden suspicion of seaside?
I'm certainly a guilty party.

I believe Epi started it. I also made a fairly large case, though.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Based on this, a Jay lynch should stay on the table for tomorrow, but I'll have to look at Diiny as well.

Yeah. I never even thought seaside could have actual info. Seems so obvious in hindsight - that's one of the only roles that could have acted that way.

It looks increasingly like one of those two is bad. I also think the results makes Floyd look a bit better. He was a leading vote-getter going into the end, and all but one of his votes stayed put.

Linki: Sleep sounds better than a tuna steak right now. Hopefully tomorrow brings better things.

Epignosis wrote:
Choutas wrote:Day 7 rainbow list

Epignosis

motel room
Ricochet
Metalmarsh89
Matt F

Russtifinko
JJJ
seaside
Bullzeye
Strawhenge
Roxy
Elohcin
RadicalFuzz
Diiny

bcornett24
DrWilgy
Black Rock

sig
fingersplints
TheFloyd73

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Choutas, you're telling me that we've been reading and going back and rereading and making cases all day today, and 5 minutes before the deadline, you're going to "put your neck out" with an obscure comment that looks borderline OB?

What?

These are good points. I don't trust Choutas a bit here, and revealing baddie BTSC would be info dumping. Defending a teammate this late would also be sticking your neck out. Went with my strongest lynchable read. seaside

Linki: Epi, 2 cautions:

1) Deciding who to lynch the day before the lynch rarely works. I don't see how Choutas looks bad if seaside flips civ, could you explain? Unless you mean he purposely offered a defense so suspect he knew it would convince more people to switch, which seems very involved.

2) In Death Note, llama knew I was civ and purposely read me in the middle of his list so I wouldn't be NK'ed. It may not be super likely, but it's at least possible this is happening here.

Linki again: pleas elet me post.

I find Choutas' defense of seaside suspect, by the way. So that's at least a tiny bit encouraging.

The speed of this REO speed wagon makes me nervous. I do suspect seaside by far the most of the 3 leading candidates, but given the thread events since I started writing the case I'm not sure whether I feel comfortable casting the deciding vote on it. 10 minutes to think it over, I guess.

Linki: Epi, I don't see those as out of context, and I JUST reread seaside. That's just me, though - others should decide on their own.

Epignosis wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:I actually wouldn't be opposed to a seaside lynch if there's time - dude's been acting weird since D1. However, motel room voted for him, and motel room just took a big jump up my suspect list.

I'd definitely be down to try to pull votes onto motel room.

Why?

Mainly, he's throwing out totally unsupported opinions, every so often and saying we should believe them just because.

He was on Rico for days for being bad, and then suddenly N5 he thought Rico was good "despite really wanting you to be scum".

Since D3 he's been saying JJJ, espers, Diiny, and Zebra were bad, for no other reason than that they voted Rico on D3. (He later retracted his suspicion of Zebra upon learning Zebra was a dead civ when he posted this, and he's since back off of also-dead-civ espers.) This post in particular reeks:

seaside wrote:anyway, i reakon there is a strong chance one of those three are scum
i'm not saying those three are my most suspicious (or suspicious at all) but i think 1 of the 3 could be scum

He hasn't offered even a modicum of a case against any of them, but is trying like hell to get people to join him in a lynch just because. He even tried to use JJJ's move away from Mac yesterday to get Diiny.

Today, though, he's all about the easy JJJ lynch. He has precisely one point of evidence: he's been going on about JJJ's Mac connection all day, despite the fact that everyone is perfectly clear on it. I think he's trying to lock up the lynch without making it look like he is. Which actually makes me wonder if my vote should be on Floyd after all. If there has been a save attempt in the thread so far, this is the one. It's just subtle enough that people might miss it, and just unsubstantiated enough that he might be able to laugh it off.

Epignosis wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:motel room for now. Come join! It's a nice big room, and we have free HBO and a continental breakfast.
It isn't free. It's included in the price of the room.

Some economist.

rekt

Linki: Oh wow, big push toward seaside here. Holy cow. That's a bit nerve-wracking.

motel room, my suspicion of Mac arose because he was willing to lynch civs for no good reason. I've suspected people for less. I'll read you in full by tomorrow, but since you won't be lynched today and I'm short on time it's not worth the bother. As it stands now, I consider you a major suspect. I see you voted me for most of the day - what do you find suspicious about me?

motel room for now. Come join! It's a nice big room, and we have free HBO and a continental breakfast.

I actually wouldn't be opposed to a seaside lynch if there's time - dude's been acting weird since D1. However, motel room voted for him, and motel room just took a big jump up my suspect list.

I'd definitely be down to try to pull votes onto motel room.

I didn't see anything in Floyd's history that makes me really want him dead. I think the scum slip theories are overblown, and beyond that there's just not much there.

motel room wrote:
Russtifinko wrote:
motel room wrote:I'm happy to see JJJ lynched to remove the doubt but I think he did the same thing I did w/r/t mac.

motel room wrote:I actually feel like JJJ and Floyd will flip town.
Please esplain.
Which part? I wont be surprised if they were both town, but I'm not sold so hard as to defend them and they are both potential distractions now at this point and if not lynched now will probably ride on as lynch contenders until the end of the game is all.

To be more precise: esplain the part where you think JJJ will flip town, but you're happy to remove the doubt by lynching him. I recall Mac saying something very similar, I think about Sorsha. (Would quote, but have you seen that dude's post history?)

motel room wrote:I'm happy to see JJJ lynched to remove the doubt but I think he did the same thing I did w/r/t mac.

motel room wrote:I actually feel like JJJ and Floyd will flip town.

Please esplain.

Hey all, sorry I have been AWOL. Worked until after ten last night and immediately went to bed, and had another huge day today. I'll be back to my usual self by the weekend.

I don't know how to feel about TheFloyd, but I still find it hard to believe JJJ would have bussed LC the way he did and then been so supatown all this time. I can definitely see why people are voting there, but I won't join. I'm gonna read through Floyd now and see if I get anything from him one way or another, to decide whether to put a vote there.

Search found 228 matches