Moderator: Community Team
Epignosis wrote:Because it's time to go.Epignosis wrote:We're getting the fuck out.Long Con wrote:Does it make you feel intimidated? Or will you confront them and bid them to get off your lawn, as it were?Epignosis wrote:People acting like hooligans outside.Long Con wrote:What'cha thinkin' about, old chum?Epignosis wrote:
srs bsns! Glad to see things are looking up. Hard work and determination are the shizznit! 
What do you think of his assertion that zebra and Mac were performing a distancing spectacle?Epignosis wrote:In the past two games, Eloh was bad, busy, and bearing it. She also killed me in both of those games. She subbed out here.
For that reason, I don't think she's bad, and I don't think motel room 2 is.
I don't buy it.Long Con wrote:What do you think of his assertion that zebra and Mac were performing a distancing spectacle?Epignosis wrote:In the past two games, Eloh was bad, busy, and bearing it. She also killed me in both of those games. She subbed out here.
For that reason, I don't think she's bad, and I don't think motel room 2 is.
Maybe, but I think it is something we should keep in mind, however that was more of preemptive defense of myself and with two baddie teams it proves very little.motel room wrote:What do you mean? I'm not sure how you can assume that.sig wrote:I do want to point out it seems that Zebra and myself were two counter wagons, but I don't think it very likely that the mafia would stack one of those wagons or push to hard.
MovingPictures07 wrote:ISO of sig
==========================================================================================================================
Day 1
This is an admittedly minor grievance, but I don't have anything to like in this post. The vague sentiment that my tongue-in-cheek town team-up comment "seems early" shifts attention in my direction but in a noncommittal and unspecific fashion.Spoiler: show
Here's sig's first meaty post of the game (fourth overall). He concludes that he had minor pings for three players, so I highlighted what he wrote about those players to compare/contrast with what he wrote about the rest.Spoiler: show
Although sig's thoughts on me and Mac were a bit vague, and I think those thoughts could be easily fabricated, I can see a potential link between his initial thoughts expressed here and concluding that they were minor pings. I'm having trouble reconciling sig's thoughts on motel room with a minor ping, however, since "seemed a little weird" is an incredibly vague version of a ping/accusation. This is potentially bothersome if it came at a point in the thread in which motel room was already receiving negative attention (note to self / others: investigate this).
Also, sig, where's that LC ISO?
There is an unexplained discrepancy in sig's posts back to back, which is a bad look. In sig's previous post, he said "Nacho is posting alot looking good, but I think we should watch him a mafia member becoming a town leader can be devastating", but here he says he can't shake his ping of Nacho. The ping he can't shake is also completely vague (gut read). This needs to be explained by sig ASAP, because there is nothing in either post that indicates a change of mind, which implies that sig lost track of whether he found Nacho a town or mafia read. I don't see how a member of the town genuinely could lose track of that. This is troublesome.Spoiler: show
I don't like sig's mention of "odd" twice in this post, because I feel like "odd" and "weird" and similar synonyms are easy ways for mafia members to manufacture suspicion without much substance. Furthermore, I find it highly dubious that odd behavior translates to suspicious behavior, as townies act oddly or irrationally often.Spoiler: show
Here sig doubles down on a defense of DrWilgy (in a previous post he said that Wilgy's behavior is 'normal meta'). I like his thoughts on Wilgy here, as he sticks his neck out for him, but I'm not sure how alignment indicative it really is. The rest of the post is full of noncommittal statements indicating no thoughts about whether sig finds anything alignment indicative of those players' behavior. Overall I don't feel much of anything about this post.Spoiler: show
Another vague post. Says motel room's post is "super weird", but doesn't elaborate upon it. Slightly bad look.Spoiler: show
Here sig elaborates upon his suspicion of me, which I feel is difficult for me to attempt to judge without some sort of bias, so your thoughts would be appreciated. He says he is eyeballing Wilgy voters (Blooper and Soneji) and motel room. I still find it bothersome that sig is continuing to bang the motel room drum. It's especially ironic given sig's subsequent post here:Spoiler: show
where he criticizes me for my "weak" vote after saying he suspects motel room all d1 with next to no reason. I find this incredibly suspicious behavior.Spoiler: show
I find it intriguing that sig says if I am mafia, he would like to look into lynching Wilgy, yet he defended Wilgy more than any other player prior to this point. This presents further reason for me to believe that sig is manufacturing his thoughts on players.
Votes for me based on being out of character yet simultaneously similar to another game (Scrimmage game). Not sure why I didn't find it off previously, but there is a bit of cognitive dissonance there. sig, if you can elaborate how my behavior was simultaneously out of character yet similar to my behavior in another game, that'd be great.Spoiler: show
Further alarm bells. He doubles down on criticizing me for my motel room vote when he previously said he suspected motel room and said he'd be okay with it. This is suspicious.Spoiler: show
Pushes suspicion of me further. Quin's post expressing dislike of this content makes an excellent point; sig's post implies that he doesn't care whether I am being genuine in whether my vote was out of self-preservation, only the fact that I didn't state that it was.Spoiler: show
I commented on this post at the time with basically "No". I feel the same way now. sig's "odd = suspicious" statement here is something I think is absolutely false, and he provides no substantive backing for his assertion.Spoiler: show
In response to Quin wanting sig's head, I expressed that I believed sig is the most likely accuser of me to be bad, but I stated three clear hesitations in heavily pursuing that train of thought. Perhaps I shouldn't have done that quite yet, since here sig comes back into the thread and basically says "yeah, what MP said". It could be that I did indeed hit the nail on the head, but this is also an easy way for a mafia sig to backpedal a bit and not have to provide his own response to Quin.Spoiler: show
==========================================================================================================================
Day 2
sig states that LC, Epi, and I all are town reads. sig's gradual change from strongly suspecting me to less so during n1 to not at all now, with no associated reasoning, again would be an easy thing to fake. I also find his thoughts on me tend to coincide opportunistically with sentiment currently in the thread, which lends more credence to the theory that he is manufacturing them.Spoiler: show
What is further problematic is that sig states here that he believes the mafia didn't vote at all or voted on a non wagon. This is a 180 from everything he was blasting me and Wilgy voters for the prior day, with no apparent reason for the change. Suspicious as hell.
Here are sig's thoughts on the lack of n1 kill. He argues against the inactive argument. I find this null, but thought it was worth highlighting in here.Spoiler: show
I initially felt good about sig's contribution here with an night kill analysis / ISO of Golden. I feel a bit less inspired now, since I don't think there is any reason to town or mafia read sig for this contribution, seeing as it could have been easily made with a mindset from either alignment. This is still the best post he's made so far though. It at least has the semblance of appearing as though he wants to solve the game, whether that's true or not.Spoiler: show
It is intriguing that sig is really downplaying his NKA ISO post. I'm not sure what to make of that.Spoiler: show
A continuation of the prior post, sig is waffly on whether his NKA ISO was helpful or meaningless. That's great and all, but at this point if he really cared about solving the game I think he'd start investigating some players.Spoiler: show
==========================================================================================================================
In conclusion, I would place sig in the orange (moderate mafia) section of my rainbow. There is plenty of reason to doubt whether sig's contributions are genuine, though I wouldn't say this is a slam dunk case by any means.
Please throw your thoughts at me regarding this analysis, especially since sig is typical mislynch fodder, and some of this was admittedly difficult for me to analyze 'objectively' given I was sig's biggest target of suspicion during d1. Where do you agree? Disagree? How are you reading sig?
LC does seem to be posting less then normal, however I haven't really gotten any mafia vibes off of him yet.Epignosis wrote:Long Con, are you a people eater?
Why Quin? You never give any reason.a2thezebra wrote:I want to lynch Quin.
That's right suckers I can talk.
Also why if you wanted to lynch Quin did you vote Snow Dog? Why did you lynch Snow Dog anyway?a2thezebra wrote:But I already voted for Snow Dog who is also bad so #YOLO
She was wrong on BK, but also doesn't give any reasoning for why BK or Epi are civs. This isn't a good look seeing how BK flipped.a2thezebra wrote:Black Rock and Epi are civ
Again not explaining her vote or anything.a2thezebra wrote:Voting Snow Dog again.
Never mind on my night 1 theory for Mac, he made a post during this time period and if he posted he'd have submitted night actions. I do find it interesting since he calls out Zebra who now is attacking him today.MacDougall wrote:Zebra post more or be obliterated.
MacDougall wrote:You are trying too hard.Long Con wrote:Hello, I did check my role PM before I came here.
Yeah, Wilgy is already suspicious to me.Scotty wrote:Man, I would hate to be on your team if I were bad.
Indeed.DrWilgy wrote:Yeah, I've decided that being blind will be my meme play this game.
Good point. Same-same.Golden wrote:Voted melee island - that's always where the adventure starts. You can't cut right to the third act.
MacDougall wrote:Just forcing his read.MovingPictures07 wrote:What specifically in LC's post gives you that impression?MacDougall wrote:You are trying too hard.Long Con wrote:Hello, I did check my role PM before I came here.
Yeah, Wilgy is already suspicious to me.Scotty wrote:Man, I would hate to be on your team if I were bad.
Indeed.DrWilgy wrote:Yeah, I've decided that being blind will be my meme play this game.
Good point. Same-same.Golden wrote:Voted melee island - that's always where the adventure starts. You can't cut right to the third act.
I dislike this style of posting, I guess it could be said he is trying to get conversation going.MacDougall wrote:Haha thanks.
Epignosis is bad. Discuss.
sig wrote:I need to go to bed for real now, did a quick read over of Boom's post they don't look bad.
I'd like some opinions on quin? I had an early ping on him and I disliked his day 1 vote, but from there I haven't had time to read over his stuff in depth. I also disliked the fact that Quin had both me and Epi pegged as mafia along with BK, he votes for me bringing me closer to BK in votes and is still smearing Epi.
Tell me why my case against you or Epi was disingenuous. I don't get the rest of whatever point you're trying to make.
After BK flips his opinion of Epi changes.
Why is this suspicious?
There is the potential of some bussing here, he didn't jump on the BK wagon but he had her down as a mafia lean.
I had multiple people as a mafia lean. You and Epi were the only ones I'd made proper cases on. Obviously my vote was going to one of the two of you. There was no Black Rock wagon either. I believe she only had one vote at the time.
However, I find it odd he had her down as mafia read along with both myself and Epi.
Tell me why you find this odd.
He also defended BK by saying we shouldn't target lurkers and used that as his reasoning agaisnt Epi.
I didn't defend anyone; I specifically accused.
In fact the more I think about Quin being a baddie the more logical it seems. I'll attempt to do a real ISO of him tomorrow.
I could see my vote going to Quin or Zebra.
Nah, I'm a manhunter. Get back here, you mans!Epignosis wrote:Long Con, are you a people eater?
Put the bong down. Actually nah you do you.Long Con wrote:Zebra-Mac, together again.
Nah, I'm a manhunter. Get back here, you mans!Epignosis wrote:Long Con, are you a people eater?
Well, I ain't gonna do you. You ain't my type.MacDougall wrote:Put the bong down. Actually nah you do you.Long Con wrote:Zebra-Mac, together again.
Nah, I'm a manhunter. Get back here, you mans!Epignosis wrote:Long Con, are you a people eater?
What do you have you got to back up that hypothesis?motel room wrote:Consistent is bad though. Especially on Day 1 and 2.Snow Dog wrote:I don't understand. What is wrong with my voting record? I have been consistent. Explain please!MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm not a fan of his voting record either, but his content has seemed genuine to me. I'll take a look at his ISO though and maybe I'll come up with a different perspective.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I didn't like Snow Dog's vote yesterday. I like it even worse today.
Just my two cents after the lynch. I'll be looking at him.
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I meant to address this a while ago, but I haven't had more than a few minutes to check in, or I was on my phone.Snow Dog wrote:I don't understand. What is wrong with my voting record? I have been consistent. Explain please!MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm not a fan of his voting record either, but his content has seemed genuine to me. I'll take a look at his ISO though and maybe I'll come up with a different perspective.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I didn't like Snow Dog's vote yesterday. I like it even worse today.
Just my two cents after the lynch. I'll be looking at him.
You posted this on Day 1.
Your reason for voting zebra then. It isn't very strong, but you immediately followed up with this.Spoiler: show
I disagree, my reason is strong enough on Day 1
You questioned the motives for the motel room votes. Neither reason is great, but I didn't like that you came up with a poor one for a Day 1 zebra vote, only to question another poor Day 1 vote (or rather multiple votes).Spoiler: show
I didn't come up with a poor reason for zebra. I had already said I may vote for low poster and she had only posted emoticons.
Later on you posted this, and I only just now realize I'm uncertain what you meant.
You toyed with an MP vote near the end of the day. Per this post, did you mean that you want to see how many votes motel room got, or that you were considering voting for him to see his lynch-flip?Spoiler: show
Still, you wound up voting zebra anyway.
I never considerdd motel as a vote. Mp I was unsure on. I don't actually remember what i meant
You also voted zebra Day 2. Yes it's consistent, but is it sincere? Additionally, you placed a vote that put zebra and Black Rock closer together in the lynch, which considering BR flipped bad doesn't look good for you.
I'm torn on you overall Snow Dog. I see one part of your playstyle that I remember from playing long ago. The fact that that pattern has carried over to now (what almost 2 years later?) suggests that you're playing your "normal" game, and looks good for you. There's also another post you made this game which to me screams civ (or potentially the opposite). I know that's an ambiguous comment, but that's how I feel.
Who are you looking at today?
I've gotta run, but I'm going to look at MP's ISO of sig when I get back.
Linki: NO U
Would you be a monkey's uncle?Vompatti wrote:I'd be surprised if either Zebra or Mac turns out bad.
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.sig wrote: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.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?
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
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.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?
I liked Epignosis's response to his push on MP on an instinctual level.Epignosis wrote:How many trees did I shake?MovingPictures07 wrote: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.Epignosis wrote:Is that a formal accusation?MovingPictures07 wrote:Your process is BS and I think you know it.Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.
What fell out?
I've had one of those before!!!DrWilgy wrote:I ate a carolina reaper and made myself sick -__-Metalmarsh89 wrote:So uh hi, where is everyone?
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.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 agree. And considering Mafia's main motivation is to stay in the spotlight instead of thrust themselves into it, Zebra gets a small townlean.Snow Dog wrote:I sense you are trying to rile me. I'll ignore for now.
I liked this question to llama, even though it's not the type of question I can imagine being answered.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.
He took a break for a little bit, but he's back now.motel room wrote:Where's the supertown that was campaigning for poor motel room [1]'s lynch? Is he still supertowning?
About the missing PMs. I agree with you. I am of the opinion that the first night kill was likely blocked or something. For no member of a mafia team to send a kill is extremely unlikely, I think llama was refering to town PMs most likely.Nachomamma8 wrote: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.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 agree. And considering Mafia's main motivation is to stay in the spotlight instead of thrust themselves into it, Zebra gets a small townlean.Snow Dog wrote:I sense you are trying to rile me. I'll ignore for now.
I liked this question to llama, even though it's not the type of question I can imagine being answered.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.
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.
He took a break for a little bit, but he's back now.motel room wrote:Where's the supertown that was campaigning for poor motel room [1]'s lynch? Is he still supertowning?
I'm sorry for mislynching you
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.Boomslang wrote: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.Epignosis wrote:I voted for Black Rock.
Who opposes her lynch, and why do you oppose it?
Fact: Black Rock had two posts.Epignosis wrote:sig wrote:Epignosis wrote:On what basis do you believe both kills were submitted?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.
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 reasoningThe question of how many constitutes "lots" may have no answer. However:thellama73 wrote:Night ends in an hour and I am still missing lots of actions.
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.
[VOTE:Snow Dog wrote:[VOTE:Soneji wrote:[VOTE:Epignosis wrote:[VOTE:Soneji wrote:Not fully caught up but Epi and MP would be my top suspects at the moment. MP's vote on motel room can certainly be attributed to self preservation, yet with all the time he spent making posts d1, he didn't make any push against anyone. No courage of conviction. More then that, his response to Epi's rainbow analysis was pretty blown out of proportion, a tl;dr defense against what was a pretty ridiculous analysis by Epi.
That ridiculous analysis plus him going after an inactive at this point in the game is why I suspect Epignosis. The analysis seems more like a premeditated move than having an epiphany and pursuing it with fervor, by the way in which it was written and it being on a day one that was noticeably barebones in terms of reads. Even if his general findings were true and he did happen to notice this pattern specifically, hinging on it D1 is folly. Better to let MP continue what hes doing and get him with more concrete evidence later, then let him weasel out of your weak reasoning and straighten his act.
It is possible they are both scum, one pirate, one cannibal. MP's high volume of posts certainly lend itself towards a larger chance of slipping.
[VOTE: ] aubergine
Your attributing "rainbow analysis" to me troubles me more than your vote.] aubergine
I am quite sure you know I was referring to you analyzing MP' s rainbow lists and not you making one. It is called context.] aubergine
I don't know why you call his analysis ridiculous.] aubergine
[VOTE:Epignosis wrote:[VOTE: Somebody bad voted for Black Rock. Black Rock was a prime candidate to be bussed, but there are two mafia teams. I would bet my left nut someone who voted Black Rock is bad. Maybe even two people. Don't give anybody credit for voting her.
Soneji can get lynched for his move against me. That was lazy.
Quin too because fuck that guy.
If my theory is right, then Black Rock, who was on the pirates team, missed the kill. That means the Cannibals are organized and getting shit done. The Cannibals killed Golden.
Leaving this here for now.] aubergine
[VOTE:nijuukyugou wrote:[VOTE:MovingPictures07 wrote:[VOTE:nijuukyugou wrote:[VOTE:MovingPictures07 wrote:[VOTE: This game is like a patient in the ICU. Where is everyone? Where is the baddie hunting?
Seriously folks, why should I even try if the rest of you aren't going to do shit? Honest question because I'm feeling a bit frustrated with this entire day cycle's wasted potential right now.] aubergine
It's the middle of the day for many of us, dude. You know this. I'm only on because it happens to be a day where my planning is in the afternoon. And it'll be a holiday soon. And it's Day 2. Cool your jets :P
As for your sig review, what pings me more than anything about what he's been saying is his being so resolute that an entire mafia team couldn't have missed its kill last Night. This sort of thing has been happening in several games lately on this site. It would be one thing to offer his counter arguments, but to so staunchly oppose it as a non-possibility? Nah. Looks defensive. Pings real bad.
I still want to knock off inactives/slight inactives. There is no reason except inactivity to vote BR, so that's cool with me. I want to know where Wilgy went. You say zebra has played a detached and gut-read game in the past, but what she's doing right now is just detached without even gut reads. It's just...randomness. Chaotic. It's the same reason I voted Wilgy Day 1 - zebra's behavior is not civ, whatever she's doing.
So I'm good with voting any of those (includes sig, but less so than the inactives), and I need to get back to work. I'm going to mull over it a bit (maybe ten minutes or so) before I make the final call.] aubergine
Look, I know right now is the middle of the day, I'm referring to all of Day 2. There has been next to no discussion of anyone other than inactives for the past nearly 48 hours, and that's what bothered me, not just the lack of current content. Anyway, I was just venting. Feel free to ignore that nonsense.
Help me out here; you lost me a bit with your thoughts on sig. Why is it that his staunch opposition pings you? Like, walk me through the mindset of why a mafia sig would do that, that's where I'm lost.
She provided gut reads in saying BR and Epi are town and Snow Dog is bad, for example, but yes, they're completely unsubstantiated. The only problem with just lynching everyone who behaves in such a way (your bolded/underlined sentiment) is that just because someone is behaving chaotically does not mean their role card is mafia. It is up to us to make a determination based on the available content. I don't think lynching inactives blindly right now will serve us anything particularly productive; if we happen to hit a member of the mafia, great, but it's essentially flipping a coin.] aubergine
True about a chaotic player not necessarily pulling a mafia role, but their behavior doesn't help civs. A lynch vote for zebra would not be a blind vote for an inactive - it would be voting for someone who I think is exhibiting non-civ (and I'll just outright say it - mafia-or-indy-chaotic) behavior.
What I'm saying about sig's opposition to the idea is that it sounds defensive of inactive mafia behavior, i.e., steering people away from discussing inactivity as more than a possibility for an entire mafia team because he doesn't want us to look at them. As in, perhaps he is part of an inactive mafia team, and is defending it because oh shit, they all missed their kill chance last night, better cover it up. That's what it looks like when the behavior of late on the site points to the opposite of his stance.
And I think the discussion of inactives needs to happen - personally, I'm tired of seeing it ignored and seeing active players lynched so early and then having a dead game, so I'm happy we're going on that vein this game. Hell, it's encouraging ME to post! (Well, that and I also have more time recently to play than I have in the past couple of games.) Lynch inactives, encourage participation through group force :P
With that, I'll vote zebra today, even if it's for pressure. Gotta finish grading these quizzes, dammit.] aubergine
You could be right, you could be wrong.Epignosis wrote:Fact: Black Rock had two posts.Epignosis wrote:sig wrote:Epignosis wrote:On what basis do you believe both kills were submitted?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.
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 reasoningThe question of how many constitutes "lots" may have no answer. However:thellama73 wrote:Night ends in an hour and I am still missing lots of actions.
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 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.
[VOTE:Soneji wrote:[VOTE:Snow Dog wrote:[VOTE:Soneji wrote:[VOTE:Epignosis wrote:[VOTE:Soneji wrote:Not fully caught up but Epi and MP would be my top suspects at the moment. MP's vote on motel room can certainly be attributed to self preservation, yet with all the time he spent making posts d1, he didn't make any push against anyone. No courage of conviction. More then that, his response to Epi's rainbow analysis was pretty blown out of proportion, a tl;dr defense against what was a pretty ridiculous analysis by Epi.
That ridiculous analysis plus him going after an inactive at this point in the game is why I suspect Epignosis. The analysis seems more like a premeditated move than having an epiphany and pursuing it with fervor, by the way in which it was written and it being on a day one that was noticeably barebones in terms of reads. Even if his general findings were true and he did happen to notice this pattern specifically, hinging on it D1 is folly. Better to let MP continue what hes doing and get him with more concrete evidence later, then let him weasel out of your weak reasoning and straighten his act.
It is possible they are both scum, one pirate, one cannibal. MP's high volume of posts certainly lend itself towards a larger chance of slipping.
[VOTE: ] aubergine
Your attributing "rainbow analysis" to me troubles me more than your vote.] aubergine
I am quite sure you know I was referring to you analyzing MP' s rainbow lists and not you making one. It is called context.] aubergine
I don't know why you call his analysis ridiculous.] aubergine
It is based on equating lack of nuance in a rainbow list on a d1 with very little in the way of reads as a scum tell for MP, due to some general pattern of MP's rainbow lists having on average less nuance when hes scum, without accounting for the context in which those other rainbow lists were made compared to the ones he has made this game.] aubergine
[VOTE:Epignosis wrote:[VOTE: Somebody bad voted for Black Rock. Black Rock was a prime candidate to be bussed, but there are two mafia teams. I would bet my left nut someone who voted Black Rock is bad. Maybe even two people. Don't give anybody credit for voting her.
Soneji can get lynched for his move against me. That was lazy.
Quin too because fuck that guy.
If my theory is right, then Black Rock, who was on the pirates team, missed the kill. That means the Cannibals are organized and getting shit done. The Cannibals killed Golden.
Leaving this here for now.] aubergine
Coming from the dude that went after an inactive. It hit scum but it was a blind shot.] aubergine
This is Mafia. If I cared about 100% conviction, I would play something else.Nachomamma8 wrote:You could be right, you could be wrong.Epignosis wrote:Fact: Black Rock had two posts.Epignosis wrote:sig wrote:Epignosis wrote:On what basis do you believe both kills were submitted?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.
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 reasoningThe question of how many constitutes "lots" may have no answer. However:thellama73 wrote:Night ends in an hour and I am still missing lots of actions.
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 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.
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.
Then be happy.Nachomamma8 wrote:MP's ISO on DFaraday reinforces my scumread there, though; would be happy with seeing them dead today.
Hooray!Epignosis wrote:Then be happy.Nachomamma8 wrote:MP's ISO on DFaraday reinforces my scumread there, though; would be happy with seeing them dead today.
Is that something that's been confirmed or is it something that you're assuming re: pirates?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: showSpoiler: show
Shame on llama for not updating the front page with the correct information.thellama73 wrote:I think that's a remnant from an earlier draft of the game. The civvies need the pirates and cannibals dead to win. If only Herman, the Head, and the Cannibals are left alive, the game will end and the cannibals will win.DFaraday wrote:Llama:
The role post says the civvies only need Lechuck, Bob, and the Cannibals dead to win. Does that mean the game will end if the other two baddies are still alive?
Also, the civvies need the cannibals dead, but the cannibals can win even if Herman Toothrot and Head of the Navigator are alive. Does this mean that the game will end if any cannibals are alive and only Herman and Head are remaining for the civvies?
Haven't really liked anything that I've seen coming from Vompatti lately.Vompatti wrote:I voted for MP k
If you knew DFaraday died, then your recent posts about him make no sense.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.
Nachomamma8 wrote: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.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.
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.Epignosis wrote:If you knew DFaraday died, then your recent posts about him make no sense.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.
Nachomamma8 wrote: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.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.Nachomamma8 wrote:MP's ISO on DFaraday reinforces my scumread there, though; would be happy with seeing them dead today.
)meaty posts in a row from MP.
