The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:Epi, I knew that DFaraday died yesterday night (I have checked the nightkills), but MP dying stood out in my mind more than DFaraday dying did.
If you knew DFaraday died, then your recent posts about him make no sense.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
DFaraday wrote:I'm sorry I missed the vote. The last day of work before break was hectic. Will catch up later today. I'm voting to learn more because more information is likely a good thing.
I have my eye on DFaraday in particular; I find it odd that he popped up and had input on the night vote (which isn't indicative of alignment in any way at all) and yet hasn't really given input on anything else.

Nachomamma8 wrote:MP's ISO on DFaraday reinforces my scumread there, though; would be happy with seeing them dead today.

I read the night post. I knew that DFaraday died along with MovingPictures (hence my "all my friends are dying" post that showed I was aware of the night post). When I was catching up today (after a full night's sleep), I forgot that DFaraday was the one that died along with MP.

Epi, what do you think of the point I brought up against Boomslang?

Vompatti wrote:I voted for MP k

Haven't really liked anything that I've seen coming from Vompatti lately.

Epi, I knew that DFaraday died yesterday night (I have checked the nightkills), but MP dying stood out in my mind more than DFaraday dying did.

Epignosis wrote:Essentially, it's one down, five to go. The Men of Low Moral Fibre and the Pirate Leaders aren't required to be dead, according to the win condition. The cannibals aren't really independent, despite the label- they function exactly as a second mafia.

The ideal lynch for Day 3 would be LeChuck, because there is a chance that would remove one of the two kills from play. Unfortunately, Black Rock gave us little to work with.

I'm posting the votes here for myself.

Spoiler: show
Day 1
Who is a ghost pirate?

Poll ended at Fri Nov 18, 2016 3:24:09 pm

a2thezebra
1
Scotty (18) 6%
birdwithteeth11
0
No votes
Black Rock
0
No votes
Boomslang
0
No votes
DFaraday
0
No votes
Dr. Wilgy
2
Soneji (6), nijuukyugou (10) 11%
Elohcin
0
No votes
Epignosis
0
No votes
Golden
0
No votes
Long Con
0
No votes
MacDougall
0
No votes
Metalmarsh89
1
Vompatti (12) 6%
motel room
4
Nachomamma8 (9), Boomslang (11), MovingPictures07 (14), Metalmarsh89 (16) 22%
MovingPictures07
3
Long Con (7), Epignosis (15), sig (17) 17%
Nachomamma8
0
No votes
Nijuukyugou
1
Golden (8) 6%
Quin
1
Quin (3) 6%
Scotty
0
No votes
Sig
0
No votes
Soneji
0
No votes
Vompatti
0
No votes
That little dog in the corner (Host/Mod/Dead/NP)
5
thellama73 (1), JaggedJimmyJay (2), Snow Dog (4), juliets (5), G-Man (13) 28%
Total votes : 18

Spoiler: show
Day 2

Who is a nasty Ghost Pirate?

Poll ended at Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:27:38 pm

a2thezebra
3
Long Con (12), nijuukyugou (14), Snow Dog (15) 18%
Black Rock
5
Epignosis (4), Metalmarsh89 (5), DFaraday (10), Scotty (11), DrWilgy (17) 29%
Boomslang
0
No votes
DFaraday
0
No votes
Dr. Wilgy
1
Boomslang (13) 6%
Elohcin
0
No votes
Epignosis
1
Soneji (8) 6%
Long Con
0
No votes
MacDougall
0
No votes
Metalmarsh89
0
No votes
MovingPictures07
1
Vompatti (9) 6%
Nachomamma8
0
No votes
Nijuukyugou
0
No votes
Quin
0
No votes
Scotty
0
No votes
Sig
3
motel room (6), Quin (7), MovingPictures07 (16) 18%
Snow Dog
1
a2thezebra (3) 6%
Soneji
0
No votes
Vompatti
0
No votes
A bridge troll (he's just a red herring) [Host/mod/dead/NP]
2
thellama73 (1), juliets (2) 12%
Total votes : 17

Is that something that's been confirmed or is it something that you're assuming re: pirates?
I thought I remembered Llama saying something to the tune of "it was left over from a former draft of the game"?

Epignosis wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:MP's ISO on DFaraday reinforces my scumread there, though; would be happy with seeing them dead today.
Then be happy.

Hooray!

MP's ISO on DFaraday reinforces my scumread there, though; would be happy with seeing them dead today.

With Boomslang, I agree that his early Quin suspicion looked town; the conviction he pushed it with seemed very genuine and I'm fairly confident that Quin and Boomslang aren't on a scum team together.

However, I do think that his redirection from Black Rock to Wigly outweighs that a bit; I wouldn't be as bothered by it if he redirected, to say, Quin but it seems like he completely forgot about his suspicion there and decided to press an easier target instead which is not awesome.

Then I misread your tone, sorry about that.

As far as the Zebra read, I think there's a little more to parse from it than MP pointed out.

For one, I liked the "I think that Llama fucked over mafia last night and I'm happy about it" string of emotions is a bit town; it's a weird thing to theorize in the first place and I don't think that if Zebra did it in order to get townreads then they would have put it in the emoticon language. I think that Llama's completely unsubstantiated pushes (and quickvote of Snow) are things that come from mafia; I'm sure the argument that Zebra was afraid to make a real vote is going to rear its ugly head once again but those posts are pretty clearly going to perturb Quin and especially Snow Dog and won't endear them to anyone else, so I'm not sure what they're doing if mafia while if they're town it's pretty obvious they're just fucking around and going their own way.

Mind you, this isn't the *most* confident read since I've never played with Zebra before but Zebra would have a pretty insane scum game for this to be coming from Zebra!scum in my opinion.

Epignosis wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
sig wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
sig wrote:I do think our mafia members either didn't vote or voted on a non wagon avoiding both major lynches. I do however, believe night kills where submitted and I don't think we should just start lynching lurkers on the off chance an entire team forgot/wasn't around to submit a kill.
On what basis do you believe both kills were submitted?

It is rather rare for kills not to be submitted isn't it? It also requires very little effort to submit a kill. If only one player could do it I might be able to see that argument, however it is very unlikely a whole team was so inactive that they didn't send in a kill.

Okay Quin I was wondering if you had any other reasoning

thellama73 wrote:Night ends in an hour and I am still missing lots of actions.
The question of how many constitutes "lots" may have no answer. However:

Fact: An hour before the Night ended, the host says he is still missing lots of actions.

Fact: One person got killed when there should have been two.

Fact: Two of those three protective roles are Night actions, which places them within the realm of unsent actions.

Fact: The phase ended at an earlier time than most phases end on this site.

Fact: I have witnessed eight people on two different teams all fail to submit a Night 1 kill.
Fact: Black Rock had two posts.

Fact: Black Rock was Bob.

Fact: LeChuck is the pirate who kills Nightly.

Fact: The Cannibals kill Nightly (i.e., the kill isn't attributed to one particular cannibal).

If LeChuck is responsible for sending in the kill (llama's answer on the matter was deliberately vague), then I'm inclined to believe that the Cannibals killed Golden and LeChuck is somebody who missed out Night 1 but got back on the ball Night 2.

You could be right, you could be wrong.
If the pirates can submit a kill for the team (which seems likely to me when none of them seem to have public powers), then your theory weakens considerably.

I don't think that pursuing inactives is a bad idea in and of itself (in fact, it's a great idea!), but the lesson that you should be learning from the game where eight people failed to submit a nightkill is that believing in a theory that you don't know to be true with 100% conviction can hurt the town in the end.

Enjoying MP's case on Sig now! Again apologies for ditching you, definitely would have liked to have you around to bounce thoughts off now.

Post linked here (hopefully!).

I didn't really think there was significant enough suspicion surrounding motel room until the end of the day where opportunism is something that I'd be on guard against; I think that the lynch was mostly me pushing it through because of a feeling. I think the fact that he had him as a little weird is fine enough reasoning for early game.

I disagree with you that him saying that people should keep focused on me despite me being active and posting and being unable to shake a ping of me is contradictory; saying that people should stay extra vigilant of me only makes sense if he has some concerns on me while talking about being unable to shake a ping of me backs that up nicely.

I don't generally push people for using certain words too much; the way people talk is more often a personality tell as opposed to anything else in my opinion.

I liked the Wigly defense in the same way you did, and I agree with sig's general idea that he's a remarkably easy vote (which is why Boomslang trying to redirect to him yesterday bothers me). I agree the defense doesn't make Wigly likelier to be town, but I'd argue that it doesn't really look like sig has a townread on him here.

I agreed that the Motel Room post was weird, so can't exactly rag on sig for agreeing.

The point where sig came down against MovingPictures a bit unreasonably when he was suspecting motel room himself (and didn't really explain it all that much) is a strong point to me; wouldn't mind seeing sig's response to it if he hasn't given it already.

I'm also in complete agreement about Sig's push on MovingPictures (and his subsequent backoff) being weird and unnatural looking, so nothing new or special there.

The quick and dirty summation of this case (and my read on sig) is that I don't think his early game looked bad at all; I thought that his read on me seemed genuine enough (I'm not sure that mafia would try to rock the boat in that particular situation), but his push on MovingPictures seemed fake for a variety of reasons (why was he so bothered by the motel room vote when he himself suspected motel room before? why was movingpictures not mentioning it was a self-preservation vote when he made it a big deal? why did sig drop the motel room suspicion so quickly?); I think there's a good chance he flips scum here, but I'd definitely like his responses to those things.

Scotty's posts talking about how he doesn't exactly know what a good night kill looks like and general thought process of why he wants to lynch who he wants to lynch also looks pretty solid.

Boomslang wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I voted for Black Rock.

Who opposes her lynch, and why do you oppose it?
I don't oppose a Black Rock lynch, but I think we have a little more time to hunt before committing to a target. Reading over other people, I think there's a case to be made against Wilgy. Starting out with the bold not-checking-my-role gambit, then devolving almost immediately into fluff. He hasn't had a single post of substance all game, other than a "gut read" of MP as bad and claiming to "frown upon those that miss the vote" despite missing it himself. That continual jokey language of helping townies in "their" plight also seems too cute. I'd really like to see something solid out of him, and soon.

This post isn't exactly a good look for Boomslang (who I've mostly liked before this); the whole "I don't oppose Black Rock lynch, but here's a case on someone else!" is sketchy on its own.

I'm looking forward to Soneji's posts!

I think that sig's analysis of the Golden kill looks genuine - I don't think that sig is on the team that shot Golden, which is information that is pretty useless but fun for post-game scenarios!

DFaraday wrote:I'm sorry I missed the vote. The last day of work before break was hectic. Will catch up later today. I'm voting to learn more because more information is likely a good thing.

I have my eye on DFaraday in particular; I find it odd that he popped up and had input on the night vote (which isn't indicative of alignment in any way at all) and yet hasn't really given input on anything else.

Snow Dog wrote:I sense you are trying to rile me. I'll ignore for now.

I agree. And considering Mafia's main motivation is to stay in the spotlight instead of thrust themselves into it, Zebra gets a small townlean.

Scotty wrote:@HOST Are you at liberty to say the exact number of PMs that were missing last night? And if so, how many?

Question for the thread: so I'm never fully sure of what makes a NK a good one when it comes to the victims' suspicions.
Does it help the killer look more civ if the killer was a suspect of the victims? How about if they were defending? There may not be a correct answer, I'm just curious.

I liked this question to llama, even though it's not the type of question I can imagine being answered.
And, a bit of strange reasoning here, but I don't think it's likely that an entire scumteam missed submitting a kill; these things are rare in general (since it takes 3-4 people to miss actions), but I don't think that Llama would mention that a bunch of PMs were missing if a scumteam was missing a kill; call it gut, but it seems weird to draw focus on the mafia team like that.

motel room wrote:Where's the supertown that was campaigning for poor motel room [1]'s lynch? Is he still supertowning?

He took a break for a little bit, but he's back now.
I'm sorry for mislynching you

Epignosis wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.
Your process is BS and I think you know it.
Is that a formal accusation?
No, I think you're town. I just think you're shaking trees to see what falls out. I don't appreciate being the tree though considering how close I came to death yesterday and how I'm low hanging fruit headed into Day 2.
How many trees did I shake?

What fell out?

I liked Epignosis's response to his push on MP on an instinctual level.
I don't really like sig's continued push on MP because it doesn't really make any sense.

DrWilgy wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:So uh hi, where is everyone?
I ate a carolina reaper and made myself sick -__-

I've had one of those before!!!

From the MP-related exchange, I think Epignosis and Long Con come out looking very, very town - sig not so much. And, I know that we've probably passed this point, but if MP was scum then I will be simultaneously depressed/impressed; sorry for ditching you at the end of Night 1.

I think that Epignosis and Long Con's pushes looked town because they took the time to explain why exactly they thought that MP was off; Epignosis's explanation of why MP's view of him seemed inconsistent with the frustration directed towards him made a lot of sense and Long Con's explanation of buddying (in particular, the point where he went "if you were scum and you hadn't been caught for buddying it would be excellent, but unfortunately for you, I'm extremely sensitive towards that type of thing") felt extremely town. Sig was gone for the majority of the exchange with MP, and, when he came back, sig's only response was to go "yeah MP does look town by responses"; to me, that looks like sig was trying to push MP when he looked like a juicy target and then decided to walk back on it when it became clear MP was going to be townread. If it was a legitimate thought process, I think we'd see a little more evidence of the process itself.

Epignosis wrote:Nacho: You were impressively vocal Day 1 when motel room got lynched. When Day 2 came and a pirate was lynched, you were absent to the extent that you didn't even vote. Why? Is the charade too much to maintain after Day 1?

If the implication here is that I was psychic and avoided the thread because I saw my pirate friend was getting lynched and I knew there was nothing I could do to stop it, then I accept your implications fully because that would be awesome.
If the implication here is that I would be unable to post Day 2 in a mafia game where I was able to freely hunt the other team because of loss of confidence or a crippling sense of guilt, then I do not accept your implications because they seem a little silly.
If your desire to paint my absence as something alignment indicative, then my recommendation is that you accuse me of intentionally lurking because I was trying to avoid being nightkilled; otherwise, my recommendation is to sit back, relax, and enjoy the show before I'm dragged off to work.

sig wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:Drunk darts have failed.
I will probably catch up when I get home. Sig, why were you bothered by MP's motel room vote?
It seemed to have come out of nowhere and was an easy scapegoat for a day 1 vote, I do believe that day 1 can be the easiest to catch mafia on weak reasoning, so they're more likely to find something dumb, to throw a vote on and that was something you could throw a vote on. Like I said it seems to be a lack of reasoning and not something civ MP would do.

linki: I find the vote missing more odd then the not reading role card, I think he has and is just saying he hasn't

Sig, I thought that this reasoning was pretty weak; not a whole lot of things actually happened Day 1, and so expecting MP to have some awesome great reasons for his vote seems pretty unreasonable, especially when you didn't have any real scumreads other than MP.

Good to be back!

I will avenge them

All of my friends are dying

This weekend ended up being a weekend that was surprisingly productive for all things that aren't mafia; I'll try to catch up in full in the morning and then will be back to regular activity levels after tomorrow (which will be another mostly quiet day)

I agree that Wigly missing the vote was odd; if he didn't read his role PM, why would he care overmuch about who he voted?

Drunk darts have failed.
I will probably catch up when I get home. Sig, why were you bothered by MP's motel room vote?

It's a little sad that the mod/dead wagon is bigger than the lynch wagon but I still have high hopes!!!!!

Also I think Snow Dog is town if I haven't mentioned that before.

I hope that was the type of response you were looking for; it's mostly an off the cuff response thanks to imminent deadline and mobile posting so don't hesitate to let me know if I don't make a whole lot of sense.

Scotty wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:Also of note, I won't be here that much tomorrow (assuming deadline is when the poll expires) - I have work until the deadline and don't have the type of job that I can post from easily and so if you have any burning questions or things you want to bring up or talk, ask them in the next hour; I'll try to get to other stuff but no real promises.
So I like the cut of your jib jab (or however that phrase goes).

You mentioned earlier that you are trying to weed out like 50% of the pool to give you a better idea of who to vote for in day 1 for some sort of POE (I think that was you), and now you've probably settled on motel room. Do you usually find yourself voting for someone who seems ingenuine as like a tone thing, or who doesn't soundly defend their actions? Just by your tone it feels like the latter, like I used to banter with my lawyer uncle about the anti-establishment in government.

You also seem like MP in that these sort of semantic arguments need a profound conclusion or else you'll subtly threaten to post more until that conclusion is reached and you get the last word in. Am I right in that assumption?

I'm asking because I think I am going to be a different player than you in that I often operate under the assumption that not all answers will be given and so I take my crossword puzzle to the bathroom to think through things while I sit on my throne of thinking.

I vote for both reasons. I tend to focus on tone for people I know well (I find tone reasons ineffective with strangers except for a few exceptions), but I have higher confidence making a vote on people who have done something I find scummy and struggle defending it.

Your assumption is right and wrong; if I feel a player is avoiding answering my questions or attacking me or another player through misreps or things that I don't think they believe, I'll pursue them to the ends of the earth but this is mostly because of my own play style; as scum, I use loudness and conviction and genuine sounding posts to cover up misrepping and extended arguments about things that don't matter so when I find that happening with others I can be a little too aggressive, relentless, annoying.

I don't think we have all the answers before us today. I do believe there is an optimal lynch to make for town every day and I try to get as close to that as possible.

Scotty wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Scotty wrote:Hey @nacho you conveniently skipped my questions to you. Do you have any response at all to what I said?

sig wrote:I don't want to lynch Wilgy all I'm seeing is his normal meta at this point.
Meta is like a Jackson Pollack painting. Easy to imitate with a cat, a can of paint and a few tequilas. Relying on metas, especially on day 1, is hugely unreliable unless that person is predictable to a T. And Wilgy is fully capable of churning out CHRISTMAS in July.

Snow Dog wrote:Well I gotta admit i am not clear at all on who to vote for. It may reluctantly go to a non poster.

I'm not sure what you asked me; as stated before, am working and skimming like a motherfucker so I don't get fired over a mafia game.

I don't understand why moving pictures is getting votes. Epignosis's case is that his tier lists are more nuanced as town but expecting a nuanced reads list in this fluff/lurk fest is equivalent to expecting an ocean in the desert.
Well I was talking about the very thing you're not doing, which is your assumed tendency to finish thoughts soundly. That you are skimming is what I assumed you didn't like doing, but I understand real life commitments. I'm mostly just picking your brain on your playstyle, so just let me know when you have time to get back to me. (I'm assuming nights will be unlocked)

I have a little time, I'll check back.

Snow Dog wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:i don't understand this motel room vote. He's has posted drunk most of the time and he didn't come back after a question. That's it! (better than nothing I suppose, and I don't know him anyway so....urgh)
Yeah it's definitely not winning "Case of the Year", but I don't think that makes it a bad vote. What about the MP vote entices you?
his Buddying up, his last minute motel vote that seemed to come from nowhere, and..I dunno....a feeling.
The motel vote didn't really come from anywhere from my perspective; I had been talking about it in thread for a while, he was townreading me, Golden vetted it, not like he had strong feelings elsewhere.

As for the buddying point, my rebuttal for that is mostly personal but it'd be a shame if he got lynched for making me feel.welcome!
It wasn't just you. He did it to others too.

With Mac? Don't think his interactions seemed buddying to anyone else but that might just be me.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:i don't understand this motel room vote. He's has posted drunk most of the time and he didn't come back after a question. That's it! (better than nothing I suppose, and I don't know him anyway so....urgh)
Yeah it's definitely not winning "Case of the Year", but I don't think that makes it a bad vote. What about the MP vote entices you?
his Buddying up, his last minute motel vote that seemed to come from nowhere, and..I dunno....a feeling.
The motel vote didn't really come from anywhere from my perspective; I had been talking about it in thread for a while, he was townreading me, Golden vetted it, not like he had strong feelings elsewhere.

As for the buddying point, my rebuttal for that is mostly personal but it'd be a shame if he got lynched for making me feel.welcome!

Oh and to add to the whole "motel vote didn't come from out of the blue" narrative he's mostly been town leaning people, doesn't have any real scum leans. This is how most people feel at this point I think.

Snow Dog wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:i don't understand this motel room vote. He's has posted drunk most of the time and he didn't come back after a question. That's it! (better than nothing I suppose, and I don't know him anyway so....urgh)
Yeah it's definitely not winning "Case of the Year", but I don't think that makes it a bad vote. What about the MP vote entices you?
his Buddying up, his last minute motel vote that seemed to come from nowhere, and..I dunno....a feeling.

The motel vote didn't really come from anywhere from my perspective; I had been talking about it in thread for a while, he was townreading me, Golden vetted it, not like he had strong feelings elsewhere.

As for the buddying point, my rebuttal for that is mostly personal but it'd be a shame if he got lynched for making me feel.welcome!

sig wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I'm calling five missing votes for Day 1.
Make that four i voted

Voted mp, his playstyle is reminding me of the scrimmage and his vote fkr motel is odd as is his defensive behaviour. While I'm okay with a motel lynxh it seems really ooc for mp.

Why was MP's motel vote odd for you?

I am free 15 minutes early!!!

Snow Dog wrote:i don't understand this motel room vote. He's has posted drunk most of the time and he didn't come back after a question. That's it! (better than nothing I suppose, and I don't know him anyway so....urgh)

Yeah it's definitely not winning "Case of the Year", but I don't think that makes it a bad vote. What about the MP vote entices you?

Motel room is still where it's at.

Scotty wrote:Hey @nacho you conveniently skipped my questions to you. Do you have any response at all to what I said?

sig wrote:I don't want to lynch Wilgy all I'm seeing is his normal meta at this point.
Meta is like a Jackson Pollack painting. Easy to imitate with a cat, a can of paint and a few tequilas. Relying on metas, especially on day 1, is hugely unreliable unless that person is predictable to a T. And Wilgy is fully capable of churning out CHRISTMAS in July.

Snow Dog wrote:Well I gotta admit i am not clear at all on who to vote for. It may reluctantly go to a non poster.

I'm not sure what you asked me; as stated before, am working and skimming like a motherfucker so I don't get fired over a mafia game.

I don't understand why moving pictures is getting votes. Epignosis's case is that his tier lists are more nuanced as town but expecting a nuanced reads list in this fluff/lurk fest is equivalent to expecting an ocean in the desert.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Boomslang wrote:Well, I've got to get to work. I think MP is trying to make Epi's observation something it's not, but I know MP is prone to that sort of analysis and thus it doesn't ping very bad for me. Voting motel room for the aforementioned reasons; to MM, it's because he signaled engagement with the early check in, seems to have artificially boosted his post count when drunk, and then ducked out when asked to provide some content.
That's not a bad Day 1 case, but are assumptions being made here? Did he actually duck out and disappear when pressed, or has he just not been around since then?

There's good evidence he ducked out; during our exchange, I asked him for a read on LC, he asked who, I linked to LC's ISO, motel room was never seen again. I guess it's possible he got pulled away for something urgent and hasn't been able to pop back in but that's a pretty busy 24 hour period and it wouldn't take that long to make a g2g or brb post when leaving in the middle of an exchange.

DrWilgy wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:Stop voting for me.
Vote Motel Room!

I disagree with Epignosis's analysis but I like that it exists and that means maybe Motel Room was the right vote after all!
But I'm still catching up!

All the more reason to put a little faith in someone else.

DrWilgy wrote:Stop voting for me.

Vote Motel Room!

I disagree with Epignosis's analysis but I like that it exists and that means maybe Motel Room was the right vote after all!

And if I die before I wake then thanks for the game, I had fun and I look forward to seeing you all in the future.

Long Con wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.
As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

I don't really buy into buddying as a tell; I have the tendency to be friendly as both alignments and I get frustrated by "buddying" or "pocketing" accusations often enough where I never use them as town.

And, for the record, town reads in order:

Moving Pictures, Quin, Metal Marsh, Boomslang, Mac, Long Con, Golden.

Long Con is mostly a town read due to Golden vouching for him and due to stuff I was concerned about earlier being cleared up pretty solidly; I feel good about Boomslang and above (to the point where I would be surprised at a baddie flip). Golden has probably been scumhunting legitimately, but this doesn't mean as much as it would in a game where baddies didn't have the ability to hunt baddies.

If I had the chance to vote twice, I'd also vote Epignosis; I liked the post I outlined earlier but his recent play has also had the floating and unengaged problem and is the reason for his fall from grace.

I probably won't be able to check in again before EoD (and don't have much time now so can't catch up on what I missed), but skimming shows no compelling reason not to go with my heart and vote motel room and so that's where I'm going.

Motel Room, for the most part, has felt like he's had time to check in and yet hasn't contributed (as contrasted with others who simply haven't been around or have contributed in the small amount of time they've been around I.e. Long Con & Sig). In particular, we had an exchange where he popped up to say he didn't remember drunk posting yesterday, I asked him his opinion on Long Con, he asked who, I quoted him the ISO, he disappeared without a word and never came back. I know that this case isn't significant in any form whatsoever; the entirety of the read is gut based on him seeming guarded and not being around, but it is the only vote I can make and still honestly expect a baddie flip (while other votes I wouldn't necessarily be surprised with a baddie flip but it certainly wouldn't be something I'd have high hopes in seeing).

Vote: Motel Room

Aaaand off to bed. Will probably vote motel room if nothing interesting happens in the meantime.

Soneji wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Soneji wrote:@Nacho : You look to rely a lot on an ability to townread and then use PoE, even this early. How much weight do you give to conscious vs unconscious scum moves? I have noticed that you approach people's posts as if you were scum in their shoes and make your read based on if you think they'd consciously post what they did with the proposed scum intent, in my experience this is rare.

Mafia generally don't purposely post as if they are mustache twirling villains even if it comes off that way in someones scumread. Their subconscious guilt is how these slips are made.
I think that most things that mafia post are unconscious, yes, but behind each unconscious post there are typically one of three guiding principles: 1) "I want to survive", 2) "I want to look town", 3) I want to lynch town. So when I say that something seems to lack scum motivation, it's because I don't think that a player would think that it doesn't push towards any one of those goals; when I say that I don't think that Metalmarsh would share his Day 1 goal of not being instantly lynched in thread, I don't think that this would be a conscious decision, I think that it's just something that he would feel uncomfortable doing. My argument for Quin being town isn't that they would sit down and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of self-voting versus not self-voting; it lies more along the lines of thinking that he would put some sort of thought before locking down one of his weapons against town so quickly and no lines of thought really point towards "no, self-vote".

Was there a argument in particular you were referring to when you made this post?
No one argument, you addressed the main two there.

Voting isn't a mafia weapon so much as it is town's. A lot of mafia players view voting as an inconvenience rather than a tool at their disposal and being freed from any pressure to vote is a blessing. Mind you, on the forum I come from I have never played a game where votes weren't changeable, mafia would be even more uncomfortable voting if they couldn't change. That they can't change weakens it's use as a weapon for them as well. The main point in Quin's favor to me is that the host wouldn't state if votes are final, forcing someone to vote to find out. Would have been preferable for him to vote a scumread but as is, hes not high up on potential lynch candidates.

Would you say your suspicion of Long Con stems from a differing view on if chaotic posts like Wilgy's are scummy? I don't see any way to look at Wilgy's post favorably. If he is telling the truth about not looking at his role PM, then he is going against the spirit of the rules and if he did get randomized scum, will not display the subconscious guilt that comes from one knowing they are scum. If he is lying then his motivation can only be to deceive or troll.

[VOTE: ] aubergine

[VOTE:
My suspicion of Long Con was based on the different perception of the play, yes.

If Wigly didn't read his role PM then it is against the spirit of the game, hence my pushes to get him to read - playing against the spirit of the game doesn't make him any likelier to be scum.

I don't think it's particularly likely that he's lying about reading his role PM as mafia, although that would be an interesting gambit.] aubergine

Boomslang wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:Town is a word that's interchangeable with civilian, apologies for failing my vocabulary test there.

I think that my train of thought is pretty weird - there's no reason for Quin to expect anyone like me to exist of have that train of thought, is there? I find voting to find the answer to whether votes are changeable or not is completely reasonable; do you disagree?
Nacho, you're defending this a lot more than I think it warrants. And you're conflating voting to find the answer with self-voting to find the answer. The former would be a side benefit of an early vote aiming to build momentum against a suspect; the latter is throwing away the power of the vote, possibly with less than honest intentions, to find the answer.

Nachomamma8 wrote:It was a rash move, but I don't really think that rash is equivalent to "more likely to come from a baddie".
I think that asking someone to wait until they have real suspicion in order to figure out votes are changeable or not is pretty unreasonable.
Why do you think that's unreasonable? If you have real suspicion of someone, it shouldn't matter if votes are changeable. You would gain that knowledge without sacrificing the efficacy of your vote.

You're right, I haven't properly introduced myself yet.

Hi, I'm Nacho, I defend things no one cares about until I'm blue in the face and then I defend them some more; I won't drop anything until I understand your side and you understand mine or until you decide I'm an obnoxious asshole and stop responding to my posts. Nice to meet you!

An early vote doesn't mean that it's a valuable one. If I voted Moving Pictures when I suspected him, I'd feel like an idiot now and have a useless vote. Quin sacrificed a day 1 vote (again, not a big deal) for information.

Your position is unreasonable because you expect everyone to play like you. You are assuming Quin would analyze the advantage of voting early versus voting later instead of voting on impulse; that is a bad assumption to make.

Also of note, I won't be here that much tomorrow (assuming deadline is when the poll expires) - I have work until the deadline and don't have the type of job that I can post from easily and so if you have any burning questions or things you want to bring up or talk, ask them in the next hour; I'll try to get to other stuff but no real promises.

Soneji wrote:@Nacho : You look to rely a lot on an ability to townread and then use PoE, even this early. How much weight do you give to conscious vs unconscious scum moves? I have noticed that you approach people's posts as if you were scum in their shoes and make your read based on if you think they'd consciously post what they did with the proposed scum intent, in my experience this is rare.

Mafia generally don't purposely post as if they are mustache twirling villains even if it comes off that way in someones scumread. Their subconscious guilt is how these slips are made.

I think that most things that mafia post are unconscious, yes, but behind each unconscious post there are typically one of three guiding principles: 1) "I want to survive", 2) "I want to look town", 3) I want to lynch town. So when I say that something seems to lack scum motivation, it's because I don't think that a player would think that it doesn't push towards any one of those goals; when I say that I don't think that Metalmarsh would share his Day 1 goal of not being instantly lynched in thread, I don't think that this would be a conscious decision, I think that it's just something that he would feel uncomfortable doing. My argument for Quin being town isn't that they would sit down and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of self-voting versus not self-voting; it lies more along the lines of thinking that he would put some sort of thought before locking down one of his weapons against town so quickly and no lines of thought really point towards "no, self-vote".

Was there a argument in particular you were referring to when you made this post?

Golden wrote:Especially in the early game, when you are bad you want to hang on to every advantage you have and see how the game is playing out before you commit yourself.

I think that this point is a good one.

Golden wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:I don't mind slower paces but I get antsy as shit when deadline approaches and I don't have a vote I feel even vaguely positive about.
So do I and it is a problem when there is less than 24 hours and I don't have a single bad lean yet.

If I had the ability to vote without committing I'd be voting Motel Room - no real reason to think that he's town other than the "I don't think he'd wish me a happy birthday while blackout" reasoning I don't buy into at all and I thought his exchange with me over his Long Con read was a disappointment.

Search found 150 matches