GY!BE Mafia [E.N.D.]

#2701

You're right, 3J. ISO's incoming.

#2702

Trice and Scotty:

~ Supportive of Scotty's early suspicion of BWT
~ Same "arrogant" comment he attached to Dom
~ Idle mechanical chatter
~ Kind of halfway supports MP in his suspicion of Scotty, in an offhand way while actually discussing MP himself
~ Light contest of Scotty's theory about a low poster being responsible for insanification
~ Implicates Scotty as a possible silencer of Sloonei, but also gives him positive marks for his play on Night 1
~ Again discusses Scotty in relation to Sloonei being silenced without stating a conclusive read
~ Day 3 prod of Scotty in his effort to catch up
~ Asks me for clarification on my suspicion of Scotty
~ Mafia shortlist on Day 4
~ A bit of a waffle in that read -- seems to imply Scotty looks good at face value but not in the evidence
~ Still unwilling to take a harsh stance against Scotty

Conclusion: This one feels similar to the LoRab review -- there are some valid indicators but none of them are inspiring. He was willing to implicate Scotty in the evidence but otherwise he left Scotty well enough alone. There'd be no clear signal if Scotty is the SK. The reads progression is at least compatible.

#2703

Quin wrote:You're right, 3J. ISO's incoming.

I'm glad to have a fresh perspective arriving. I look forward to seeing how you feel about everyone without the blinders of 5 previous day cycles and reads entrenchment.

#2704

Trice and sig:

~ Pseudo prod of sig among other low-posters
~ Defensive of sig with strong language -- suggested his critics responded "obtusely" to his Boomslang vote on Day 2
~ Specific mention of the SK to sig
~ Talks about A Person with sig
~ Discusses high posters with sig after sig's assertion that one of them is likely bad. The SK is mentioned again, this time with trice implying it could be one of the high posters

Conclusion: There's not much here. One thing to say is that there's at least one possible moment which can be viewed as a signal, in trice's earliest unsolicited mention of the SK to sig. The second mention of the SK seems to discount that though, since he theorized aloud about other people being the SK -- something that'd likely throw sig off the casketjack trail if sig is the SK. I think that second moment is more meaningful than the first, which would be a nice look for sig.

#2705

Trice and timmer:

~ Prods timmer among some low posters. timmer probably didn't deserve to be lumped into this group
~ Questions Marmot for his suspicion of Boomslang and timmer / Continued / Again but this time with suspicion of Boomslang (this was a point of focus for much of Day 2)
~ Sharp language used against timmer with regard to suspicion of sig -- "I just have better reading comprehension"
~ Parlays timmer's grievances with Epi into a new statement of suspicion of his own
~ Neutral theorizing of role mechanics in response to timmer
~ Insists to timmer specifically that I'm the SK and provides his "rationale" / Dialogue continued

Conclusion: There's again not much to be said, though trice interacted with timmer quite a lot throughout the game. The effort he went through to try to convince timmer of his specific case that I am the SK makes me wonder how timmer could be the SK himself. That'd be a backwards way for trice to manage that dialogue unless he just had no desire to be found by the SK in the first place. I'd call timmer an unlikely SK.

#2706

Based on all those checks, here's a loose order of how likely I feel each remaining player is to be the SK, from most likely to least likely:

G-Man
BWT
MM
Scotty
LoRab
sig
Quin
timmer
Epignosis
Dom

#2707

I'll look into the mafia team now as best as I can before I collapse from exhaustion. There's much less conclusive evidence to work with on that front, but I don't think votes have gotten due attention yet so I'll start there.

#2708

It's been like 3/4 of an hour and I'm still only on the first page of BWT's ISO.

#2709

Quin wrote:It's been like 3/4 of an hour and I'm still only on the first page of BWT's ISO.

A recommendation from the resident ISOFreak which you can accept or ignore as you please:

Sometimes it's very easy to get absorbed into the ISO process and feel the urge to comment on everything. If that's happened to you: don't. It usually ends up making the review post so massive that it is less likely to be read in full by anyone short of the subject of the ISO, and it probably doesn't help you much to convey your read in a way that will influence others. It makes things a bit more convoluted. Save your energy for the moments which truly inspire the most substantive responses from you.

#2710

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Quin wrote:It's been like 3/4 of an hour and I'm still only on the first page of BWT's ISO.
A recommendation from the resident ISOFreak which you can accept or ignore as you please:

Sometimes it's very easy to get absorbed into the ISO process and feel the urge to comment on everything. If that's happened to you: don't. It usually ends up making the review post so massive that it is less likely to be read in full by anyone short of the subject of the ISO, and it probably doesn't help you much to convey your read in a way that will influence others. It makes things a bit more convoluted. Save your energy for the moments which truly inspire the most substantive responses from you.

I do think BWT has a lot of meat to talk about. I'm trying to filter a lot of the junk out. But I do get into that habit sometimes, so I'll try and keep it more broad for now.

#2711

ISO of birdwithteeth11:

---

Spoiler: show

Keeping this in the bank to see how BWT's opinion on MP develops, because this heavily indicates that BWT is aware of some sort of MP alignment tell.

Spoiler: show

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:triceratopzeuhl:

In your first post you acknowledged the quick beginnings of the baddie hunting in this game with what looked like an air of approval. Your content since though has been about the POE strategic discussion. Do you derive any reads from that?
Just impressed with the gusto from some people even if it might be mostly hot air. I can't tell much on day 0 and I seriously doubt anybody else can, no matter what they claim. We don't even have a lynch vote today, no night actions have happened, there isn't even a semi-nonsensical day 0 poll like some hosts like to do (MP comes to mind). At best one of the over-enthused paragraphs here will sound funny & gather suspicion - but who is more likely to be theorycrafting and looking for a winning strategy for the civs, goodies or baddies? Baddies benefit more from not directing attention at themselves.

Anyway, if alex is going to be posting his rainbow list here instead of keeping his reads private, it will if nothing else provide fodder for discussion
Which is why I'm personally okay with Day 0 discussions. It has helped me identify and catch baddies later on. Forcing them to be active and post a lot gives more opportunities to read them and more opportunities for them to slip up.
Just popping in for a second here (won't be around for longer than to make this post), but I wanted to inquire something of you, BWT.

You emphasize that you prefer Day 0 discussions like the one we've had in this game because they provide more content by which you can find baddies subsequently. Do you have any even very minor potential leads based on what has already transpired? Or are you merely indicating that revisiting Day 0 once you have subsequent leads may bring more light to whether those reads are more or less accurate? Give me your thought process here and provide a concrete example of a read you've already started developing, if you can.
More the second. Because I'm not really sure how concrete Day 0 reads are in a vacuum and I would need to see enough evidence on that for me to change my mind. I think looking at Day 0 once you hit around Day 3 or 4 can help emphasize those current reads based on past actions or make one reconsider based on said past actions.

Reads I have so far? Uhhhh.....not much. But if I had to pick one or two:

- Scotty doesn't feel good to me yet. Seems awfully contradictory on your POE methodology.

- I was surprised this many players didn't know what POE was. But it makes me feel better that I'm not the only one. :P

- I'm iffy on Jay. Maybe I'm just used to him being more assertive and decisive. So that may be why I feel the way I do about him currently. But he's a solid grey and would lean ever so slightly civ on him.

- The theme is as awesome as I figured it would be.

- Nothing on Dom yet. Other than his naturally inquisitive self.

- Nothing on Boomslang yet. I'm just not seeing where you are coming from on him.

I think that's all of my definitive feelings, or as definitive as this Day 0 is so far.

I think this is a nice look. He says he was going to pick out 'one or two' reads, but I'm getting vibes that he just took the thoughts that were in his head as he wrote them and just word vomited everything he could think of. I question whether civs are more likely to break their own restrictions like that.

Spoiler: show

This sounds genuine. And his motivations were essentially what I thought they were, so I'm happy with this.

Spoiler: show

The first part is an unnecessary preface, but it's not alarming as much as it is ...unnecessary?

Spoiler: show

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:This trio of posts from birdwithteeth intrigues me:
Spoiler: show
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:I lost interest after reading PoE 3 times

JJJ and MP, are you teammates again?
I don't use POE myself that much if at all, but I do find it an interesting strategy and, while not perfect, can be effective in certain situations.

What makes you think they're teammates? Just because they have similar feelings on certain players, albeit with slight disagreements on other opinions? Because I have null reads on both so far.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:Linki @MP - idk. I think it's the PoE discussion along with your mannerisms. Declaring PoE as your playstyle gives you a means to stick to something and have at least have that method of play be true. Your mannerisms make it hard to read you in general.
While I can see the argument for the first part, I disagree very much with the bolded. Since I started playing mafia, I think MP's mannerisms have changed considerably. I used to be able to tell much more quickly in games if he was civ or bad. But I think he has evolved and adapted well enough that he's become a much more difficult read, regardless of playstyle and mannerisms.

That being said, there are some thing he is more likely to do if he is civ vs. bad and vice-versa...

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:That's exactly what a baddie would say.

Eh, I guess it was the mannerisms were just subject of my thoughts at the moment, but you are correct. This defined PoE playstyle is what has my feathers rustled. Your argument that it produces content doesn't settle my stomachache either as I know you have the potential to out tons of posts as a baddie just as you do while civvie.
Sooooo....you feel his defined playstyle and him stating so bothers you, but then say it isn't indicative-alignment right afterwards?

I thought you were trying to make your mind up on something. Are you sure you aren't just trying to stir the pot early on?
All three posts are responses to DrWilgy about MP. In all three he is either vaguely defensive of MP or vaguely critical of Wilgy, or both. BWT has also been very wishy-washy with regards to Edgar Allan Poe all game long with posts like this one where he expresses skepticism of the strategy but does not condemn it or MP at all.
birdwithteeth, how are you reading Wilgy right now? How are you reading MP? What compelled you to respond to these posts in this way?

Others, how do you feel about these posts?
I felt slightly not good about Wilgy before. But I often feel that way about him early on in games so I'm waiting to see more from him before I make up my mind.

I am reading MP as if Spacedaisy gave him way too much coffee and he is pulling an all-nighter. So hyperactive and super enthusiastic to be playing. I'm leaning civ on him still.

I responded to those posts that way because I was trying to pick Wilgy's brain and figure out where he is coming from while trying to form my own opinions. If I felt strongly enough or his posts had pinged me enough, then I would have placed a vote on him. And while several things have pinged me so far, nothing strong enough has happened to make me place a vote yet, plus I am still catching up after not having checked in at all yesterday.

In a game where votes are changeable, I don't see what the point of withholding a vote is when you feel the need to engage in a dialogue of a player you suspect in order to justify that vote. Sorsha got away with something like that in LOST so I'm scrutinising that a lot more now.

Spoiler: show

I like that BWT was concerned about that comment from sig. It's an easy thing to look past, especially considering it was coming from the king of the low-hanging fruit. Ironically, I do suspect sig for that comment.

Spoiler: show

I feel icky about this. It's in the same realm as a sub asking about the rep of the person they replaced (Yes G-Man, I'm talking about you). This sounds a bit like someone trying to get players to pick a side when he's not even being suspected. It's *too* inquisitive for my liking.

Spoiler: show

Meh. Satiating his accusers appetites. What he said to Vompatti in this text is the only interactions the two shared. If I recall correctly we're all assuming he was bad based on the lack of details of his death - if that's the case, then the conversation they did share could be interpreted as one had for the sake of creating an association between them.

Spoiler: show

This was a hot topic from what I recall. I find myself on the bad side of the fence. It's not the word itself, more-so the assumption that it's something we should be able to unlock the key to understanding. I think the tone is off too.

Spoiler: show

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
timmer wrote:Yeah, I'm conflicted. On one hand, A Person isn't evidently trying, short of asking the baddies to kill high posters which is actually the opposite of trying. On the other, is that indicative of him being bad? Or just unengaged? i don't like putting votes on people for acting weird, until that weirdness outweighs the cases in front of me.
He's definitely not engaged. I think the better question is "why isn't he engaged?"

Three options that I can see:

1) He's a civilian who is accustomed to playing in a brand of Syndicate Mafia from the pre-Economics era where games tended to move a little more slowly and conversation was engaged with a little less intensity. He doesn't feel like adjusting to this newer scene and is content enough to express his laziness brazenly as a contest to the style of play he is averse to.

2) He's a baddie who is accustomed to playing in a brand of Syndicate Mafia from the pre-Economics era where games tended to move a little more slowly and conversation was engaged with a little less intensity. He doesn't feel like adjusting to this newer scene and is content enough to express his laziness brazenly as a contest to the style of play he is averse to.

3) He's a baddie who was overwhelmed by the early pace of the game and decided to keep a low profile -- and now as the game has progressed he has felt a need to maintain that profile for the sake of consistency and filling the lurkbait role he's fallen into.

I am hesitant to give him too much credit for the possibility of #1 is that it can apply similarly from the other side (#2). I'll grant though that #2 would represent a careless approach that is less common in baddie team contexts where allies are known. That'd be a let down. #3 is at least a strategically logical notion, though it requires more of what feels like reaching (and it'd be a bit of a let down in its own right).

Having typed all that out, #1 actually feels the most sensible. It's all muddy because the dude has single digit posts, but it's something. I welcome other thoughts on this.
I came up with similar ideas as well. But I voted for him already for 2 reasons:

1) I'm playing the Law of Averages here. Which would state there is a 66% chance AP is bad.

2) I want to see if it motivates him to come in here and give us some more substance.

Most of my reasoning is on #2 right now though. Because I do not have a super-definitive read on him yet. But re-reading Lorab actually made me feel better about placing a vote that way.

The law of averages is not a legitimate cause of suspicion and I don't know why he even brought it up.

Spoiler: show

Again, some pretty shaky logic.

Spoiler: show

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:Sig: rico was brought over from progarchives (not a mafia website) a few years ago by MP, same as me, epignosis, BWT, and A Person

Golden targeted by mafia twice in 3 nights, seems they didn't like what he's been saying.

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:This Fellow [JJJ -ed] is Not a Civilian
I did not like his reasons for being against the Marmot vote. He broke the tie, and it amounted to him claiming that MP and I only suspected him because he suspected us, which was chronologically inaccurate. It was almost like a brush aside.

I could see a Marmot/Jay team. Heck, I could see a Marmot/Jay/Dom team.

Golden wrote:Or maybe Marmot is an innocent bystander.

In any event, epi, I agree about Jay. He worries me. I feel like there is a lack of fire in his opinions. His whole game feels - clockwork, like a man calculating the impact of each post. I can't describe it any other way. He's always bothered me a little but in this lynch it felt much stronger than just tinfoil.
I could see him being NK'd once as a possible misdirect kill, but both mafia and SK trying to kill him implies they were uncomfortable with his reads

Also as per my earlier theory, if one of the insanifiers is civ then that player at least thinks JJJ is bad. I wonder if the role also has an info-getting element? As me and MP have both said this game, civ insanifier use could be reckless if you end up removing teammates' ability to communicate

triceratopzeuhl wrote:biggest change in Golden's theories over the course of day 3 was JJJ from Moderate Town & less likely than sloonei to be bad, to worried about JJJ
As much as I was enjoying the slugfest with epignosis, which I will surely resume when he's un-insanified, I would like to know what others think about this as it's the direction I'm looking most right now
I mean, it's certainly possible. I think mafia primarily makes 1 of 2 types of kills:

1) They kill players who do not make any sense i.e. untraceable kills

2) They kill to steer the thread, either because they do not like what someone is saying or they are trying to discredit someone.

I think Golden's death firmly falls with Option #2. The questions I have at this point is: Are JJJ and Marmot bad? And if one of them is bad, what is the possibility they are teammates?

I thought I was figuring some stuff out, and that the Golden death threw a wrench into some of my thoughts. But I'm starting to think his death might be pushing us in the right direction for finding baddies.

Actually something for BWT to address if he hasn't already - what brought you to this conclusion? Which direction has Golden's death taken you?

Spoiler: show

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'd like to know what others think of Scotty right now. Each time I look at the player list his name stands out loudly to me.
I kind of feel the same way about him as Dom. I think both have struggled to find their grounding in this game. You quote Dom's self-assessment as proof of this. I think Scotty's is a bit different, in the sense that every time he tries to catch up, he fails and falls further and further behind.

I read Scotty as bad earlier. And I do think a baddie could use the "not caught up" excuse for quite awhile before the ruse becomes apparent. But I do not feel like I am seeing that from Scotty yet.

I do feel like he never stated what he saw from me that made me think he was bad though. So I am curious if he does come back soon to know what that is.
I see the difference between Dom and Scotty this way: Dom has struggled to find his grounding as you say, but not for lack of trying. His time in the thread has been limited to shorter stretches, but when he's been here he has seemed to try to push things in some direction or another. He states clear reads, he hurls clear accusations, and he doesn't seemed bothered by the consequences. That's a nice thing. Scotty's appearances however have appeared more lifeless, like he has given up on making use of himself just because he hasn't read every post. That follows what I perceive to be a suspicious post history before his time constraints tightened.
I agree about Dom. He is at least trying to contribute to discussion, and is doing his never-ending prodding in regards to things he does not like and does not care if he gets heat for it or not.

Scotty just seems distant period. And like I said, the "not caught up" excuse can only go so far for so long before I start to see it develop into "you can't lynch me because I don't know what's going on".

So of the two, I definitely feel worse about Scotty right now. But it's more a ping rather than a gut feel.

These last two posts seem contradictory. In the span of an hour you went from 'I'm not seeing the haven't caught up defence from Scotty' to 'He's suspicious for not being caught up'. Mind that I'm just rushing through these posts and not actually checking the thread, but if there weren't any Scotty posts in between these posts to lend credibility to your thought process, I'd call this suspicious.

---

He has some good moments early on, but his game since has been specked with things that I just can't bring myself to feel good about. I think he's unlikely to be the SK, but his interactions with and about Vompatti (not something I made mention of, but he sporadically makes references to the thought about confirming Vomps as a baddie) make me think he could be bad.

@3J... I accidentally clicked one of your ISO links. I nearly had a heart attack thinking I'd lost all of this.

#2712

On the Scotty's not having caught up thing, I just looked back and he doesn't post at all between those two BWT posts.

#2713

I've compiled all the final votes placed in this game by players who are still alive. The information is presented as follows:

[total number of votes received by] Player X: living players who voted for him/her
Civilian
Deceased with unknown alignment
Independent

Day 1:
[3] Epignosis: Scotty
[6] insertnamehere: JJJ, MP/G-Man, timmer, Sloonei/Quin, sig
[2] timmer: MM
[1] trice: Epignosis

Day 2:
[2] A Person: LoRab
[4] Boomslang: MM, BWT, sig
[5] DrWilgy: JJJ, Epignosis, Dom, MP/G-Man
[1] LoRab: Scotty

Day 3:
[6] A Person: LoRab, BWT, timmer, JJJ, MM
[1] BWT: Dom
[1] Dom: sig
[1] LoRab: Sloonei/Quin
[4] MM: MP/G-Man

Day 4:
[6] MM: timmer, Scotty, BWT, MP/G-Man
[1] Sloonei/Quin - sig
[6] trice: Epignosis, JJJ, Dom, LoRab, MM

Day 5:
[3] BWT: MM, Scotty
[1] Scotty: Sloonei/Quin
[5] trice: LoRab, JJJ, timmer, Dom, Epignosis

A few statistical extractions...

Votes cast for players who were lynched the same day phase (nobody is being counted here for Day 4 because it was a tie and nobody died):
BWT: 1
Dom: 2
Epignosis: 2
MP/G-Man: 2
JJJ: 4
LoRab: 2
MM: 1
Sloonei/Quin: 1
Scotty: 0
sig: 1
timmer: 3

I'd say the standout here is Scotty with that goose egg. His votes leave him untraceable by the alignments of each lynched player, none of whom have been on the mafia team. That's not a great look. The exception for him is on Day 4 when he contributed to the tie, but the [non]-result leaves us unable to draw much from that.

Votes cast for confirmed non-members of the mafia team (including trice):
BWT: 1
Dom: 3
Epignosis: 4
MP/G-Man: 2
JJJ: 5
LoRab: 4
MM: 2
Sloonei/Quin: 1
Scotty: 0
sig: 1
timmer: 3

It occurs to me having counted these that the numbers are very similar to the previous tally plus Day 4 (not exactly that, but close). So the insight may be limited. Scotty's zero is the same zero, so there's nothing to add on him.

At the moment I feel okay with LoRab's 4 non-mafia votes. She has gotten her fair share of crap for most of the game but has still been willing to stick her votes on people whose flips did not reflect beautifully on her at face value. It's very easy for mafia to stay out of trouble in this regard since they already know with 94% certainty everyone's alignment from the beginning (and 100% certainty who's not on their own team). I get the impression a baddie LoRab would have been more evasive in her voting pattern than this.

MM's 2 may as well be a 1 since one of them was a self-preservation vote. It should be stated though that in two cases his votes ended days on multi-vote wagons which were at least somewhat relevant. Boomslang especially was quite close to being lynched on Day 2. In that regard I am not super troubled by his voting record. I am less thrilled with his record of uninspiring vote rationales.

Votes cast which did not have a meaningful impact upon the development of EOD discussion and the final tally:
BWT: 0
Dom: 1
Epignosis: 1
MP/G-Man: 0
JJJ: 0
LoRab: 1 (D2 A Person vote is debatable)
MM: 1 (D1 timmer vote is debatable)
Sloonei/Quin: 2
Scotty: 1
sig: 2
timmer: 0

It's unlike Sloonei to have any of these. I think he typically views off-wagon flier votes with as much suspicion as I do. Unfortunately he can't talk about that now, and I am willing to chalk it up to his having been too busy to be involved. Quin had the second one and he is much more known for those. sig's couple of whatever votes aren't my favorite things. He's had difficulty keeping up, but that hasn't stopped him from stating opinions. Also, on Day 2 he was eager to involve himself in the more dramatic EOD proceedings. It was that Boomslang vote that got him into some trouble after all, so that he abandoned any effort to involve himself similarly after that point is not great.

~~~

The voting records which thrill me the least here are Scotty's and sig's.

#2714

I'm done for the night. My time will be pretty limited tomorrow; I'll be seeing Rogue One and doing other Christmas-related shit. I should have a little time to be around to talk about whatever in the morning/early afternoon.

#2715

I understood almost none of that post, but good on you 3J.

I don't want to lynch 3J. I appreciate that he's a fitting SK given trice's actions, but off the top of my head he's not a fitting baddie. Throw me a case if you disagree.

I think MP is fitting for either, and I'd rather vote for players with compatibilities for both as a priority.

#2716

However damning the circumnstantial, I'm not sure I believe 3J to be bad. It just seems too obvious a set up. And I don't understand the logic of throwing a potential teammate under the bus, in a situation in which one wasn't necessarily going down. And why if 3J were the SK, he wouldn't have checked trice after he named him. I'm not ruling out the possibility, but I'm not ready to just vote him. Yet.

I don't think we were seeing a baddie MP--that wasn't my read of him, at least. I'd need convincing to put a vote there.

BWT is a possibility for my vote. Since there was no night, we know he isn't silenced this round. So, there's no reason for him to have not answered suspicion from the last day. That he hasn't makes me more suspicious ofhim.

#2717

#2718

If 3J checked trice when he named him, the role would have gone public and it would have been obvious what happened.

#2719

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Based on all those checks, here's a loose order of how likely I feel each remaining player is to be the SK, from most likely to least likely:

G-Man
BWT
MM
Scotty
LoRab
sig
Quin
timmer
Epignosis
Dom

Dude. Branding the new guy the serial killer when he lacks the time and resources to disprove such an accusation is lame. That being said, I'm also curious about the case on BWT. Can anyone fill me in on that?

#2720

Dom wrote:If 3J checked trice when he named him, the role would have gone public and it would have been obvious what happened.

My own thinking is that the SK knows that Jack knows his identity, but that the SK doesn't know Jack's entire role description. You seem to be assuming the opposite.

I get why you would vote 3J, but it just seems to be a set up to me.

#2721

G-Man wrote:Dude. Branding the new guy the serial killer when he lacks the time and resources to disprove such an accusation is lame. That being said, I'm also curious about the case on BWT. Can anyone fill me in on that?

I understand you're not in an advantageous position to answer to that material, though I'm not sure anyone is. It's a combing of trice's posts and the reads develop from that content. One special variable applying to you and Quin which I've not considered yet is that of replacement. Neither original player was under pressure really, and it appears the replacements occurred before the casketjack reveal. It's fair to question whether they'd be as likely to bail on the game as the SK given the circumstances. That could be one point in your favor.

#2722

I will have no ability to influence the progression of this tally later today, so I'm going to make an Official Statement right now:

If you're going to lynch me, there will be an effort void left in the civilian faction. Believe that or don't, this is about preparation. I want to know that someone else will be willing to take on the mantle of the analytic and faciliatory grind in my place. Being lynched would be a frustrating thing, but not as frustrating as watching this thread turn into a cadaver afterword. There are baddies out there who are delighted by my plight right now, and their advantage will be felt as long as the thread moves like a snail. That thoroughly irks me.

If you lynch me, you accept the responsibility to kick it into high gear. That is my demand.

#2723

Quin, your read on BWT develops a lot like my own: positive marks in the games earliest eras for what looks like genuine investigative effort followed by a gradual decline in that positivity to this point. I think he's a viable suspect in general, mafia or SK. I hope he's able to appear today to discuss the misgivings which have been voiced by a number of people now.

#2724

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Join the circumstantial suspicion club.

Do you feel the circumstantial suspicion you've faced has been unfounded?

I'll note: the matter of balance has been addressed for the SK. A recruiting power is always a strong boon. The mafia team however remains unaddressed in this regard: a 3-player team against 14-15 high-powered civilians and a recruitment-capable SK still sounds like it needs help.

#2725

I'm about to leave for this movie and I'll be out for most of the evening thereafter. I may be able check in on my phone a little bit but I make no guarantees.

Voting BWT

#2726

Okay, so I'm open to suggestions regarding this lynch. To me, JJJ is a slam dunk. I think trice panicked and tried a very weird way to signal his would-be partner to move his vote. BUT... if people can't see that, then we HAVE to find a baddie, and right now. I swear, if we have our SK sitting there (and I'm sorry JJJ, I applud your efforts today but I'm not changing my mind about you) and we lynch a civ, I'm going to be pissed.

So if you don't want to lynch JJJ, please show me a damn good case for a baddie. I'm at work today, I don't have time to do it. But I can tune in enough to read your thoughts.

#2727

Desperation is what I'm getting from Jimmy's post this phase. I'm having trouble, though, figuring out if he is desperate just not to die in general or if he does have genuine concern about this game going quiet without him.

#2728

#2729

triceratopzeuhl wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:5. town trice v. serial killer JJJ
Quick question, trice:

You've said repeatedly today that I'm the SK, and you've also repeatedly questioned the sincerity of my reads (suggesting I am deliberately misrepresenting or OMGUSing or what have you). If I am specifically the SK and not mafia, I don't know who the bad guys are and thus have the ability to provide real scum hunting effort. What is the motive to fake my reads in this scenario you've painted?
beats me, I can't read your mind

even if you can provide scum hunting effort, you also have another night kill tonight, unless we have another secret role blocker (hint hint if we do there's a foolproof way to prove JJJ is the sk, just saying)
I'm trying to understand you here. Could you at least attempt to answer the question. I don't know what relevance the SK's night kill has to my question.
Increased urgency before you kill another civ, which is why I wanted to lynch you today

I don't know what motivation trice would have in specifically gunning for 3J as the SK. If the role description were to remain hidden after recruitment, then a recruited trice could set somebody if he were on the verge of getting lynched. That would be clever indeed, but there was clearly no recruitment.

The only other motivation I could assign trice for calling 3J the SK is to troll, a salty sort of "If I'm going down, I'm taking this bitch down with me."

And even if that's true, it doesn't preclude 3J from being mafia.

#2730

Epig, it is looking like a considerable number of people are not around, and this lynch only has a few hours to go.

Are you voting for BWT, or JJJ, or dodging with a third party? I'm curious to know where your head is at, in regards to this lynch. I trust MM, and he is voting BWT, so I'm conflicted as hell and could use some input.

#2731

timmer wrote:Epig, it is looking like a considerable number of people are not around, and this lynch only has a few hours to go.

Are you voting for BWT, or JJJ, or dodging with a third party? I'm curious to know where your head is at, in regards to this lynch. I trust MM, and he is voting BWT, so I'm conflicted as hell and could use some input.

I will probably be voting 3J, but I wanted to look at some other things first. I'm $500 up on NBA DFS just for December so far, so I'm looking to keep it going tonight.

#2732

Doing the sheeple thing and voting Jimmy. Epi's case is intriguing but speculative. Sometimes you have to go with speculative in order to break a game your way. Jimmy's votes don't look good or bad, which gives me pause, but I also haven't had enough proper time to dig through them all to look for tinfoil patterns. I can see them as the intentional work of a baddie or the unintentional work of a civvie but not the intentional work of a civvie.

#2733

And you still trust MM after it was clear he survived a lynch...adding to that the fact that a Night was skipped? One civilian role already skips a night by blocking all actions. Now there's a second night passed.

Do you still think it's reasonable that MM survived a lynch for a good reason?

#2734

Tied it back up. If there's a reason beyond trice's post that make him look bad then tell me, but I don't think that's enough to warrant a vote.

It's like I said before, I don't think trice is likely to actively seek out to lynch his serial killer and deny himself a fallback win condition.

#2735

This was nijuukyugou's last living post:

nijuukyugou wrote:ARGHHHH so I'm all for lynching either MM or trice now, the latter a lot for this (among other reasons read, although not as compelling and beautifully tinfoil-y):

Boomslang wrote:Fun fact: Lorab only started posting in "sad" and "sadness" acronyms after Trice used the Donald Trump syntax.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Crooked Epignosis thinks he can keep throwing whoppers after a civvie insanified him, sad!
I have no idea if that means anything, but it's just funky enough that it tickles my brain.

Linki w/MP: And my half-baked theory is that Trice triggered Lorab's curse with that post.
Linki w/MP2: Uh, starting a lynch this late? Do you really not believe in either of the big trains going right now, or are you conveniently copping out of culpability?
Linki w/Scotty: DAMMIT I TYPE SLOW
Whoa. Nice catch! I refuse to ignore stuff that stands out like that, and this smells so bad. I see the other reasons (as far as I can tell) are for general snark and not doing much baddie hunting. Similar to MM, except I feel more strongly about MM from the last time I voted because of those reasons. My only reservation is the sudden train catching on for MM (like a possible save?), but...I think, because I'm starving and do have that stronger conviction towards MM at the moment (and he appears to have a convenient curse/"curse" on him), I'll go that way today.

Linki - DAMN YOU AND ALL OF YOUR LINKI

#2736

G-Man wrote:Doing the sheeple thing and voting Jimmy. Epi's case is intriguing but speculative. Sometimes you have to go with speculative in order to break a game your way. Jimmy's votes don't look good or bad, which gives me pause, but I also haven't had enough proper time to dig through them all to look for tinfoil patterns. I can see them as the intentional work of a baddie or the unintentional work of a civvie but not the intentional work of a civvie.

I know you just got here, but this post reeks of trying too hard to say very little.

First, I don't really have a "case" against 3J. Somebody who knows who the serial killer is called 3J the serial killer. That's about all there is to that.

Second, if 3J is the serial killer, how is looking at his votes is a useful way to spend your time? If you've read my "case," then your comment about 3J's votes doesn't make sense.

Third, that last sentence...

#2737

Epignosis wrote:
G-Man wrote:Doing the sheeple thing and voting Jimmy. Epi's case is intriguing but speculative. Sometimes you have to go with speculative in order to break a game your way. Jimmy's votes don't look good or bad, which gives me pause, but I also haven't had enough proper time to dig through them all to look for tinfoil patterns. I can see them as the intentional work of a baddie or the unintentional work of a civvie but not the intentional work of a civvie.
I know you just got here, but this post reeks of trying too hard to say very little.

First, I don't really have a "case" against 3J. Somebody who knows who the serial killer is called 3J the serial killer. That's about all there is to that.

Second, if 3J is the serial killer, how is looking at his votes is a useful way to spend your time? If you've read my "case," then your comment about 3J's votes doesn't make sense.

Third, that last sentence...

Can you dig up the post/s where he does that?

#2738

Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
G-Man wrote:Doing the sheeple thing and voting Jimmy. Epi's case is intriguing but speculative. Sometimes you have to go with speculative in order to break a game your way. Jimmy's votes don't look good or bad, which gives me pause, but I also haven't had enough proper time to dig through them all to look for tinfoil patterns. I can see them as the intentional work of a baddie or the unintentional work of a civvie but not the intentional work of a civvie.
I know you just got here, but this post reeks of trying too hard to say very little.

First, I don't really have a "case" against 3J. Somebody who knows who the serial killer is called 3J the serial killer. That's about all there is to that.

Second, if 3J is the serial killer, how is looking at his votes is a useful way to spend your time? If you've read my "case," then your comment about 3J's votes doesn't make sense.

Third, that last sentence...
Can you dig up the post/s where he does that?

It's at the top of this very page.

#2739

#2740

I don't see an advantage for trice to explicitly paint someone as the SK if they're not, so I voted 3J. Hopefully this thread doesn't completely die without him.

#2741

I'm currently on a ferry somewhere between Vancouver and a port in Washington, i don't have service and have been using this shitty wifi which takes 10 minutes to load a page.

I'm caught up-
I will be voting BWT or JJJ today but would rather lynch a mafia than the SK right now if I had a choice. The convenes is JJJ being the SK, which I'm actually confused as to why timer would call it a "slam dunk". I know it has been explained but I'm a little slow and still don't get it. Because I'm basically Casper this game I don't feel like losing a potential civ voice yet is our best option. If JJJ is civ, then lynching him eouornsuck, and the capable addition of Quin, who I firmly think is doing a great civ look, will most likely get killed in the night (he would if I were bad). So I'd rather vote out a mafia member.

I think that's BWT

#2742

Scotty wrote:I'm currently on a ferry somewhere between Vancouver and a port in Washington, i don't have service and have been using this shitty wifi which takes 10 minutes to load a page.

I'm caught up-
I will be voting BWT or JJJ today but would rather lynch a mafia than the SK right now if I had a choice. The convenes is JJJ being the SK, which I'm actually confused as to why timer would call it a "slam dunk". I know it has been explained but I'm a little slow and still don't get it. Because I'm basically Casper this game I don't feel like losing a potential civ voice yet is our best option. If JJJ is civ, then lynching him eouornsuck, and the capable addition of Quin, who I firmly think is doing a great civ look, will most likely get killed in the night (he would if I were bad). So I'd rather vote out a mafia member.

I think that's BWT

Raise my death flag, why don't you

#2743

Voted BWT. Want to see how this shakes out before EoD in a few hours, should I be on US soil by then and use my phone. Canada's been nice this week but not having cell service sucks donkey ass

#2744

Actually, I agree with Scotty. I'd rather lynch a mafia then a SK. And even if that SK is 3J, he's going to be scum-hunting and he'll bring activity into the thread. He's more of an asset to us alive than dead.

#2745

I don't understand the certainty surrounding birdwithteeth.

If you lynch birdwithteeth, and he's good, you done fucked up real good.

#2746

Quin wrote:Actually, I agree with Scotty. I'd rather lynch a mafia then a SK. And even if that SK is 3J, he's going to be scum-hunting and he'll bring activity into the thread. He's more of an asset to us alive than dead.

He's done a bang up job lynching civilians so far (and night killing them too).

#2747

Epignosis wrote:I don't understand the certainty surrounding birdwithteeth.

If you lynch birdwithteeth, and he's good, you done fucked up real good.

What do you think about BWT?

#2748

I understand that if birdwithteeth gets lynched and comes back bad I'm going to get shit for it, but I don't care.

birdwithteeth11
4
Metalmarsh89 (2), JaggedJimmyJay (9), Scotty (11), Quin (12)

Quite a party.

MM, who survived a lynch in a game where the civilians can skip a Night, block all actions including the kill, have BTSC and potential BTSC, a serious numbers advantage, among other abilities and secrets, is the first to vote birdwithteeth (a guy who apparently hasn't been around). If birdwithteeth is bad, I'd still say MM threw him under the bus (keep in mind, MM is the sort who Night killed his own teammate before).

The second is probably the serial killer and despite what he tells you, doesn't care who dies.

The third is a guy who has hardly been around.

The fourth is someone who recently subbed in, and whose best judgment was to keep a killer around simply because he posts "useful" things.

None of these votes seem well-informed or well-intentioned.

#2749

Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I don't understand the certainty surrounding birdwithteeth.

If you lynch birdwithteeth, and he's good, you done fucked up real good.
What do you think about BWT?

No clear opinion except that people like lynching him for some reason. One thing I believe that is a point in his favor is that he is posting as he catches up. That's hard to do if you are bad. Look at the machine gun nature of his posts when he was around.

#2750

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I don't understand the certainty surrounding birdwithteeth.

If you lynch birdwithteeth, and he's good, you done fucked up real good.
What do you think about BWT?
No clear opinion except that people like lynching him for some reason. One thing I believe that is a point in his favor is that he is posting as he catches up. That's hard to do if you are bad. Look at the machine gun nature of his posts when he was around.

A more specific question then - do you approve of a BWT lynch?