[ENDGAME] Bullets Over Broadway Mafia

[Cobalt]

Cobalt seems to be hypnotized, but even so he still voted for LC which is consistent with the previous days. Can in theory the mafia target another mafia player from the same team to get hypnotized?

Yep, that's been known to happen. A silencer or insanifier could target a teammate to keep them off the chopping block for a day.

That's not what's happening they're just trying tantalize make scaffolding look bad

[G-Man]

That's not what's happening they're just trying tantalize make scaffolding look bad

[Canucklehead]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

[FZ.]

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

[G-Man]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

[Sloonei]

Sloonei, why the hard push for the early votes? Does omeone on your team have a "Stop the Day Early" power?

no. votes are changeable. i want to take advantage of that by having everyone vote for their top suspect early and not worry about what the poll results might be. it will give us a very clear indiciation of what people think and who the top suspects are. Do you think this strategy is beneficial?

The chageability of votes has nothing to do with my accusation. I think stating suspicions in the thread gives us the same information, without the threat of someone (your teammate, methinks) swooping in while people are futzing around with "hypothetical" votes and ending the day when the poll is in a beneficial position for them.


So, no. I do not think this strategy is beneficial.

What if one of my teammates is a top suspect? We can't end the day then, we'll be lynching one of our own!
have you allowed yourself to entertain the idea that I might not be bad?

[Canucklehead]

Sloonei, why the hard push for the early votes? Does omeone on your team have a "Stop the Day Early" power?

no. votes are changeable. i want to take advantage of that by having everyone vote for their top suspect early and not worry about what the poll results might be. it will give us a very clear indiciation of what people think and who the top suspects are. Do you think this strategy is beneficial?

The chageability of votes has nothing to do with my accusation. I think stating suspicions in the thread gives us the same information, without the threat of someone (your teammate, methinks) swooping in while people are futzing around with "hypothetical" votes and ending the day when the poll is in a beneficial position for them.


So, no. I do not think this strategy is beneficial.

What if one of my teammates is a top suspect? We can't end the day then, we'll be lynching one of our own!
have you allowed yourself to entertain the idea that I might not be bad?

Oh noes! I hadn't thought of that! My idea must be totally wrong! I'm such a dumdum....

Yeah, I've entertained the idea that you're not bad, but I didn't enjoy it much so I switched it off.

Seriously, though. Stop Day powers are fairly common in games here, and iirc skew towards being baddie powers (though I have seen civ ones). Early voting, and "hypothetically voting for people except for the top two suspects", are strategies that do not seem civ-friendly in a word where such a power might be in play. So even if you're not bad, I think this strategy adds nothing and is potentially dangerous. So I'm against early votes and hypothetical votes and "warning" votes unless and until we're certain that there's not going to be any baddies taking advantage of people feeling a little freer with their vote.

[Scotty]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

Come on dude, don't reference other game play as a basis for argument.

[Marmot]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

Get out of town.

[Sloonei]

Sloonei, why the hard push for the early votes? Does omeone on your team have a "Stop the Day Early" power?

no. votes are changeable. i want to take advantage of that by having everyone vote for their top suspect early and not worry about what the poll results might be. it will give us a very clear indiciation of what people think and who the top suspects are. Do you think this strategy is beneficial?

The chageability of votes has nothing to do with my accusation. I think stating suspicions in the thread gives us the same information, without the threat of someone (your teammate, methinks) swooping in while people are futzing around with "hypothetical" votes and ending the day when the poll is in a beneficial position for them.


So, no. I do not think this strategy is beneficial.

What if one of my teammates is a top suspect? We can't end the day then, we'll be lynching one of our own!
have you allowed yourself to entertain the idea that I might not be bad?

Oh noes! I hadn't thought of that! My idea must be totally wrong! I'm such a dumdum....

Yeah, I've entertained the idea that you're not bad, but I didn't enjoy it much so I switched it off.

Seriously, though. Stop Day powers are fairly common in games here, and iirc skew towards being baddie powers (though I have seen civ ones). Early voting, and "hypothetically voting for people except for the top two suspects", are strategies that do not seem civ-friendly in a word where such a power might be in play. So even if you're not bad, I think this strategy adds nothing and is potentially dangerous. So I'm against early votes and hypothetical votes and "warning" votes unless and until we're certain that there's not going to be any baddies taking advantage of people feeling a little freer with their vote.

I've never seen a power used on the site I come from and would never have considered that it exists, so it certainly was not in my head when I proposed the plan. I think it's a reasonable concern, at least. Who would you vote for, if you were going to vote right now?

[Sloonei]

*I've never seen such a power used

I've seen power roles before.

[G-Man]

Come on dude, don't reference other game play as a basis for argument.

Get out of town.

[Cobalt]

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?

Trust me accentuation would love to help Eko out Jabberwocky heliogram

[Canucklehead]

I wouldn't vote for anyone right now, because it's early in the day and I only vote early when I'm not going to be around for the deadline and have the foresight to do so (spoiler: this happens very rarely because I am a person uniquely lacking in foresight).

The people I need to think more about/re-read are BR, hedgeowl, TB, TH, Bullz, and bass. BR and TB because others have brought up suspicions on them that I didn't pick up on myself, but are worthy of further thought. hedgie because there's been very little response from her after some not-insignificant suspicion of her yesterday (or maybe Day 1? can't remember) and that pings me. Bullz and bass because they are so blendy that I only knew they were playing by looking at the poll.

[Canucklehead]

^^ That was in reply to Sloonei's question, ftr

[Sloonei]

I wouldn't vote for anyone right now, because it's early in the day and I only vote early when I'm not going to be around for the deadline and have the foresight to do so (spoiler: this happens very rarely because I am a person uniquely lacking in foresight).

The people I need to think more about/re-read are BR, hedgeowl, TB, TH, Bullz, and bass. BR and TB because others have brought up suspicions on them that I didn't pick up on myself, but are worthy of further thought. hedgie because there's been very little response from her after some not-insignificant suspicion of her yesterday (or maybe Day 1? can't remember) and that pings me. Bullz and bass because they are so blendy that I only knew they were playing by looking at the poll.

What about Turnip Head?

[Canucklehead]

TH because I always vote for TH. It is known.

[FZ.]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

I don't care if all of your posts are with pictures. What I'm bothered by, is the fact that you're wasting so much time doing that, while you won't bother catching up, or trying to figure out what's going on.
And referring to another game helps how? If you're trying to claim you're a civvie because that's what you did in that game, then spare me, I've seen baddies use that tactic.

I looked back a few pages ago, where I think it was Golden who suggested out of thread evidence for the person you replaced being bad. Since I come from another site, where I used to use out of game evidence all the time, I don't see it as inappropriate, and I think he might have a good point there. Add that to the fact I didn't get a good vibe from the gamer guy on day 0, and you just look bad. So if you care at all, how you appear, I'd suggest you start trying to help

[timmer]

Long Con says this recently today. Long Con has not mentioned or interacted with TinyBubbles all game. However, he suddenly states he's seeing her as fishy, but convinces himself otherwise all in the same post.

Trimmed it, but MM's comment about Tiny and LC makes some sense. Tiny has pretty much no input into this game, but managed to defend LC AND jump on my initial Cobalt vote which had been, at the time, based on an erroneous read of his post history. And Long Con managed to pseudo-suspect Tiny without committing to it in a meaningful way. Very interesting read, MM.

[timmer]

@DOM, can we change the thread title to Day 3 please?

[FZ.]

Another question I'd like to ask the new people or whoever knows:

Who among the players knew each other from other sites? For example, does anyone know how Cobalt plays, or Tiny bubbles, Scotty etc'?

[Neverwhere]

Long Con says this recently today. Long Con has not mentioned or interacted with TinyBubbles all game. However, he suddenly states he's seeing her as fishy, but convinces himself otherwise all in the same post.

Trimmed it, but MM's comment about Tiny and LC makes some sense. Tiny has pretty much no input into this game, but managed to defend LC AND jump on my initial Cobalt vote which had been, at the time, based on an erroneous read of his post history. And Long Con managed to pseudo-suspect Tiny without committing to it in a meaningful way. Very interesting read, MM.

I totally agree. I had put my early vote with Bubbles this am, and have a feeling unless I can get on board with group lynching another member, my vote will stay with Bubbles. I feel quite strongly that she is mafia.

I never got much of a read on Gamer guy, but I think I'm going to go back and re read all his posts because G man is coming off scummy to me. However, I'm not sure if it's just his style of posting with the pictures or not.... He seems to have a lot of time for making up memes while claiming he has no time and contributing nothing. I don't like time wasting. Kind of the same issue I had with Cobalt...although I haven't the foggiest what Cobalt is trying to say at the moment.

[Canucklehead]

Is the case on Tiny Bubbles contingent on LC also being bad? Or is there a case for bad TB with a civ LC?

[Marmot]

Another question I'd like to ask the new people or whoever knows:

Who among the players knew each other from other sites? For example, does anyone know how Cobalt plays, or Tiny bubbles, Scotty etc'?

Cobalt comes from JTM, as does Gamerguy (who was just replaced) and I think sig as well.

TinyBubbles comes from INFJ, as does Neverwhere. Golden, fingersplints, and I have each played a couple games with both of them, and she and Neverwhere are both relatively new to mafia.

I honestly could not tell you where Scotty comes from, but I think this is his second game ever from what I've gathered, so I don't think it really matters much.

[timmer]

Stuff I'm thinking:

- Sloonei is still on my list for all the questions which gives the appearance of substance but isn't actually substantive. I'd like to implement a rule where every 5 questions sloonei asks, he has to post a summary of what he's learned by asking those questions and how his opinions have changed. If these questions are actually important to your play, I'd like to see precisely how.

I've noticed that bout Sloonei's posts... TONS of asking people questions. Tons.

[DFaraday]

TinyBubbles comes from INFJ, as does Neverwhere. Golden, fingersplints, and I have each played a couple games with both of them, and she and Neverwhere are both relatively new to mafia.

I was there too, in the Narnia game.

Canuck brings up a good point, all of this early voting is more likely to benefit the baddies than civvies, especially with how far out the votes are spread. I probably won't be voting for Cobalt after all since he's apparently insanified, so I'll look over my other suspects and move my vote accordingly.

[Sloonei]

Gonna try to collect my thoughts on everyone, going down the list alphabetically.
Bass
I gave a fairly small read on Bass earlier here and he's fallen almost completely silence since then, which makes me feel less good about him. It seems his current suspects, according to his posts, are Cobalt and Black Rock. They're both popular targets and Bass hasn't done a whole lot to make his reads stand out against the others, so it could very easily be read as parroting, and I grow more and more wary of that the longer he stays quiet. I'd like to hear a read from Bass on someone that has not been discussed a whole lot.

birdwithteeth/FZ

birdwithteeth made three posts and none of them suggested a strong interest in the game and he backed this up by subbing out, so they're essentially null to me.
FZ is off to a good start.

Spoiler: show

Just finished reading day 0


I'm not going to give reasons, just going on my vibes. The people I felt were more civ like:
MP, Golden, Devin, Cobalt, Epi, Timmer.


People I felt pinged by:
LC, BR, the guy with the impossible name (I think people called him the gamer guy or something like that). Sig also got my attention, but I'm still on the fence whether his questions surrounding MP and Devin's interactions was genuine.

People that seem okay but there are moments:
Bass, Gumshoe, Scotty.

Thought I'd just give initial vibes. I'm sure things are bound to change when I keep reading.

I look forward to hearing more about these reads and seeing how they change once you've had more of a chance to get caught up FZ. I'm most interested in your reads of Scotty and Gamerguy mentioned here. Gamerguy because I've had a vague bad feeling about him all game as well, and Scotty because I've generally been leaning town on him. What stood out about him on Day 0?
He then questions G-Man's style (for the record, I was in the Economics game with him and he kept up the picture posts all game long and was town. I'm not going to dismiss him as a suspect just because of that, but there is precedent for this), and asked a question about LC and Cobalt, which I actually think would be useful right now if those two could answer it:

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?

These two (mostly Cobalt) have been at each other's throats all game. It would be nice to know where they both stand on each other right now, on Day 3. If Cobalt can talk at all, that is.
Until FZ shares more thoughts, this combined read is pretty much null.

Black Rock
A good deal has been made about her already, and I've weighed in minimally here.
NOW I hope to add more thoughts with a reread, and this post looks like a good place to start:

Spoiler: show

If you have any sandwiches suggestions I am open. My staff might kill me if I make my menu any bigger though.

I am so sorry about my lack of communication day 1. I tried to post a couple of times. I forgot to press submit once and came back 12 hours later to see my post sitting there and then it got caught up in linkitis and then I failed. That's what I get for rushing about. My schedule is a lot more open for the next couple of weeks so I will have time for Mafia.

I would have likely voted for Cobalt in the lynch. I'm not used to his style but I find it hard to take his suspicions seriously. I hadn't really suspected SVS, if I had seen her self vote I would have suspected her less, I have seen her do that recently and it wasn't a baddie mood. I haven't read the whole lead up to lynch yet but if she self voted she was likely frustrated, that's a shame.

Bass seems more involved this game. I think somewhere back there he was pointing at SVS for style change while he himself seems to be going through a transition. I am putting him on my watch list.

I will say (and this is all I'm saying about LC at this time) he was telling the truth. We got our asses handed to us last night. The only time we didn't have 50 people lined up was when we closed. We had about 10 minutes of heavy downpour and they still stood in line.

I'm mostly going by memory of what I have read the past two days so if I got some things wrong I am sorry...

I think Golden brought up Hedgeowl and I do what to look more into what he was saying there and where it went from there. I will be looking more seriously at Cobalt and I will read LC. I also want to look an nutella and TH. nutella because some of her earlier day 1 posts seemed too agreeable and TH because.

She gives a number of reads here, which is good, but some things caught my eye. First, she mentions Golden bringing up Hedgeowl. But it was really Turnip Head who first went after Hedge, if my memory is correct. BR then says she wants to take a closer look at Turnip's posts. The fact that she misremembered such a crucial post from Turnup when professing to have a vague suspicion in him is a slight inconsistency that does not BR look great. But this is hardly a sure thing and I know how easy it can be to get names jumbled up like that, especially in the early going. The theory, though, is that if BR really was suspicious of TH then she would have been paying extra close attention to his first big casing post in the thread.
She also mentions Bass as a suspect because he's been "more involved", which is typically something I'd associate with town play, but that's just me and I don't know a whole lot about Bass's style yet. In her next post about Bass, BR points to one post of his and says he's "just trying to fit in", which doesn't really line up with the statement that he's been more involved, though it doesn't really exclude it from possibility either. They're just two thoughts that don't seem to coincide naturally with each other.

Spoiler: show

I have some suspicion of Cobalt, he is new to me but he seems to be basing his LC suspicion on a different game and some things he says seem off.

I'm watching Bass as well.

Sorry everyone for not voting I got super drunk yesterday and forgot. I would have voted Cobalt he never addressed any of the points he made he commented on one thing I said and I think he was wrong about what he commented on, but I will have to go back and look to make sure.

Who would you say are the next scummiest players ever after Cobalt?

I just caught up, but when I was reading I kept getting this bad vibe from LC I want to go over all his post like I did with Cobalt and get a better read on him.

This post in particular seems like he's trying to fit in. Just didn't seem right.

Otherwise I have to take the time to go back and read, which I haven't done yet but I plan on doing that when the kids go to bed.

She seemed to do a pretty good job deciphering the Night 1 Book message, which is a point in her favor, but not a huge one because scum would have just as much incentive to do that as town.

Then she makes a post about Turnip Head, explaining that she meant to post it earlier. The read expressed in that post felt a bit fabricated to me either way (or, I could see it being a fabrication).

I might vote for TH this time. He didn't even give me a roll eyes, likely he doesn't want to get me charged up and wants to stay under the radar. Under the radar is exactly how I feel he is playing this game.

To this point she had only mentioned TH as a suspect that one time (from what I see, perhaps I missed something), and that was hardly a strong suspicion. I don't see why it would have demanded a response from TH and this post feels a bit opportunistic to me.

Spoiler: show

I'm voting Bass now. I am certain he is bad.

I am tired and cranky and will not be posting anymore tonight. If you are certain I am bad then vote for me. It makes sense right? I will post how I wish, maybe I'm just a big flake and horrible at this game.

Epignosis, I find it very odd how your opinions haven't changed since you have a new role and you have completely switched gears. Bass your teammate?

linki: That's good Golden. If your civ your wrong, if you aren't then you don't care.

BR you were recently teammates with Bass in the Econ game. What are you seeing here that makes you certain he's bad?

I can't even have an opinion about that game and who played what. I was swamped with posts and had no idea what was going on. We hardly communicated in BTSC and when I died I stopped following. If you have an open mind just read his posts. He is literally following the leader and he even followed the leader with Golden after I had expressed suspicion on him.

BR's suspicions continue to make me suspicious of her. She's "certain" about Bass now. The progression of her read against Bass has not felt nearly as strong as the language she's using here would indicate, and the point about her and Bass having just been scum partners in the Economics game is a perfectly valid one (that I was also hoping they could both address) that she entirely shrugs off here (though, again, I do not doubt that her answer could be a legitimate one. That game was hectic).
I may not be as suspicious of BR as this post indicates, but these are all points I'm considering about her and I'd like to hear a response. I'm particularly interested in hearing more of an explanation of your reads on Bass and Turnip, BR.

posting this now before it gets too huge.

[Sloonei]

Stuff I'm thinking:

- Sloonei is still on my list for all the questions which gives the appearance of substance but isn't actually substantive. I'd like to implement a rule where every 5 questions sloonei asks, he has to post a summary of what he's learned by asking those questions and how his opinions have changed. If these questions are actually important to your play, I'd like to see precisely how.

I've noticed that bout Sloonei's posts... TONS of asking people questions. Tons.

Do you have any thoughts about my tons of questions?

[Neverwhere]

Stuff I'm thinking:

- Sloonei is still on my list for all the questions which gives the appearance of substance but isn't actually substantive. I'd like to implement a rule where every 5 questions sloonei asks, he has to post a summary of what he's learned by asking those questions and how his opinions have changed. If these questions are actually important to your play, I'd like to see precisely how.

I've noticed that bout Sloonei's posts... TONS of asking people questions. Tons.

I quote andask because I am headed out to the vets shortly and don't have time to do a search...but am I wrong in thinking Sloonei is asking a lot of questions but not answering many?

linki: yes, Sloonei, what have you learned?

[timmer]

I'm getting very intrigued by the opinions on Black Rock. I can see both sides of the argument, to an extent. Black Rock is, I think, being completely honest when she says that her early game here reads exactly like her early game always does. So from that perspective, I can get why she is trying to suggest that there is nothing abnormal about her output.

But there is an important fact that she isn't (understandably) dwelling on; her early game doesn't indicate alignment. So she's defending her early posts in the game as "normal Black Rock" and pseudo-suggesting that it is a civ thing, when in reality it is alignment-neutral for her. She ALWAYS sounds like this. But she isn't saying that part.

But also, Epig's point about BR's post that was lost in linkitis is also very telling (I'm posting as I read, so I have yet to see a proper reply from her). When you leave a window open, and then try to hit post hours later, you should get at a minimum a "here is the posts that have been posting while you were typing" or whatever it is, page. There is something odd about the whole situation.

[G-Man]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

I don't care if all of your posts are with pictures. What I'm bothered by, is the fact that you're wasting so much time doing that, while you won't bother catching up, or trying to figure out what's going on.
And referring to another game helps how? If you're trying to claim you're a civvie because that's what you did in that game, then spare me, I've seen baddies use that tactic.

I looked back a few pages ago, where I think it was Golden who suggested out of thread evidence for the person you replaced being bad. Since I come from another site, where I used to use out of game evidence all the time, I don't see it as inappropriate, and I think he might have a good point there. Add that to the fact I didn't get a good vibe from the gamer guy on day 0, and you just look bad. So if you care at all, how you appear, I'd suggest you start trying to help

Long Con says this recently today. Long Con has not mentioned or interacted with TinyBubbles all game. However, he suddenly states he's seeing her as fishy, but convinces himself otherwise all in the same post.

Trimmed it, but MM's comment about Tiny and LC makes some sense. Tiny has pretty much no input into this game, but managed to defend LC AND jump on my initial Cobalt vote which had been, at the time, based on an erroneous read of his post history. And Long Con managed to pseudo-suspect Tiny without committing to it in a meaningful way. Very interesting read, MM.

I totally agree. I had put my early vote with Bubbles this am, and have a feeling unless I can get on board with group lynching another member, my vote will stay with Bubbles. I feel quite strongly that she is mafia.

I never got much of a read on Gamer guy, but I think I'm going to go back and re read all his posts because G man is coming off scummy to me. However, I'm not sure if it's just his style of posting with the pictures or not.... He seems to have a lot of time for making up memes while claiming he has no time and contributing nothing. I don't like time wasting. Kind of the same issue I had with Cobalt...although I haven't the foggiest what Cobalt is trying to say at the moment.

It seems I am unable to enjoy myself in these games without getting peed on. Thanks a lot,

[timmer]

Just a quick two cents on BR's "slip". While I suppose it could have been, a careful reading of the posts tells me it wasn't. It makes perfect sense to say what she said there, in those exact words.

[Neverwhere]

G-Man: is there a reason for the picture posts (other than general levity, which I support fully )?

Before I continue to read back on day 1, can Cobalt and LC please sum up why they think the other is bad, and how strongly they feel about it, or at least point me to a post where they did that?


linki: An added question for G-man: Are you planning to catch up at all, or is this how you're going to play the entire game?

I don't care if all of your posts are with pictures. What I'm bothered by, is the fact that you're wasting so much time doing that, while you won't bother catching up, or trying to figure out what's going on.
And referring to another game helps how? If you're trying to claim you're a civvie because that's what you did in that game, then spare me, I've seen baddies use that tactic.

I looked back a few pages ago, where I think it was Golden who suggested out of thread evidence for the person you replaced being bad. Since I come from another site, where I used to use out of game evidence all the time, I don't see it as inappropriate, and I think he might have a good point there. Add that to the fact I didn't get a good vibe from the gamer guy on day 0, and you just look bad. So if you care at all, how you appear, I'd suggest you start trying to help

Long Con says this recently today. Long Con has not mentioned or interacted with TinyBubbles all game. However, he suddenly states he's seeing her as fishy, but convinces himself otherwise all in the same post.

Trimmed it, but MM's comment about Tiny and LC makes some sense. Tiny has pretty much no input into this game, but managed to defend LC AND jump on my initial Cobalt vote which had been, at the time, based on an erroneous read of his post history. And Long Con managed to pseudo-suspect Tiny without committing to it in a meaningful way. Very interesting read, MM.

I totally agree. I had put my early vote with Bubbles this am, and have a feeling unless I can get on board with group lynching another member, my vote will stay with Bubbles. I feel quite strongly that she is mafia.

I never got much of a read on Gamer guy, but I think I'm going to go back and re read all his posts because G man is coming off scummy to me. However, I'm not sure if it's just his style of posting with the pictures or not.... He seems to have a lot of time for making up memes while claiming he has no time and contributing nothing. I don't like time wasting. Kind of the same issue I had with Cobalt...although I haven't the foggiest what Cobalt is trying to say at the moment.

It seems I am unable to enjoy myself in these games without getting peed on. Thanks a lot,

Apologies for wrecking the fun, but if you're going to play with new people you have to know that if you play an odd game you are going to be scrutinised.

[Sloonei]

Stuff I'm thinking:

- Sloonei is still on my list for all the questions which gives the appearance of substance but isn't actually substantive. I'd like to implement a rule where every 5 questions sloonei asks, he has to post a summary of what he's learned by asking those questions and how his opinions have changed. If these questions are actually important to your play, I'd like to see precisely how.

I've noticed that bout Sloonei's posts... TONS of asking people questions. Tons.

I quote andask because I am headed out to the vets shortly and don't have time to do a search...but am I wrong in thinking Sloonei is asking a lot of questions but not answering many?

linki: yes, Sloonei, what have you learned?

I haven't answered many because I haven't been asked many
I'm in the process of posting some of the things I've learned, but I'd also like to add that the questions aren't just for me. Everyone can see everyone's responses. Again, this is just how I'm used to playing.

[Canucklehead]

I'm getting very intrigued by the opinions on Black Rock. I can see both sides of the argument, to an extent. Black Rock is, I think, being completely honest when she says that her early game here reads exactly like her early game always does. So from that perspective, I can get why she is trying to suggest that there is nothing abnormal about her output.

But there is an important fact that she isn't (understandably) dwelling on; her early game doesn't indicate alignment. So she's defending her early posts in the game as "normal Black Rock" and pseudo-suggesting that it is a civ thing, when in reality it is alignment-neutral for her. She ALWAYS sounds like this. But she isn't saying that part.

But also, Epig's point about BR's post that was lost in linkitis is also very telling (I'm posting as I read, so I have yet to see a proper reply from her). When you leave a window open, and then try to hit post hours later, you should get at a minimum a "here is the posts that have been posting while you were typing" or whatever it is, page. There is something odd about the whole situation.

I actually don't think you get that post if, while your post was sitting forgotten in a separate window, in the MAIN window you've read all the posts and are caught up. Like, I often type long posts in a separate tab, and while I'm typing my long-winded shit I keep reading along as the thread goes along. Then, when I post my blabber, I never get a linki page.
So I don't actually think that whole post thing is condemning at all. Even besides the fact that I do think it is possible to post an old/forgotten post many hours after having written it, I don't understand why fabricating such a thing would in any way either indicate or be beneficial to a bad BR. I think the whole line of suspicion is really odd, tbqh.

[Sloonei]

Just a quick two cents on BR's "slip". While I suppose it could have been, a careful reading of the posts tells me it wasn't. It makes perfect sense to say what she said there, in those exact words.

I wasn't initially too serious about it when I brought it up, but I was hoping to provoke a response out of her, which she's not given yet. Others have responded to it, however, which is also good. I think Neverwhere was the only one to really hop onto it as a "slip".

[timmer]

@Cobalt, I HATE the way you played Day 2.

Assuming things happened because of the reasons you said, let me list the reasons why.

1. If you are a civ, and Long Con was a civ an died, you'd have manipulated the game into burning your ability AND taken out a civ. Lose-lose.

2. If Long Con had died and was civ, we'd still have no way to know your alignment, thus you would have managed to kill a civ AND not actually bolstered your civ credentials at all.

3. You were blatant in saying how your role was going to work. I don't know if you realize this, but that broke one of Dom's rules pretty baldly, and often, when a player breaks rules, the host will provide the opposition with an extra power or some kind of ammo to counteract the unbalancing of the game that you caused. So, if you are indeed civ, you very likely handed the baddies something extra to balance out your rule break. In fact, it wouldn't shock me, if Long Con eventually flips bad, to fin out that he survived the lynch because Dom hd to balance your info dump.

4. Your play has forced the game to focus on you and Long Con. If you are civ, that's the dumbest possible move.

All of this to say, I think you've really mishandled this game, if you are a civ.

[G-Man]

Apologies for wrecking the fun, but if you're going to play with new people you have to know that if you play an odd game you are going to be scrutinised.

I can tolerate your Bigsimpsin approach to the game, as it has become quite common on other forums it seems. Too bad you can't tolerate a little silliness instead of shrieking at it like an intruder.

For the record, I was not following the thread prior to being replaced and I have no intention of reading through what happened prior to my replacing of Gamer Guy.



I'm taking in what has happened since I joined the game and will proceed from there. I understand that some of you may not like this decision but know this:

to read 30+ pages of paranoia, angst, and bickering.

[Canucklehead]

Sigh.





I think that's my cue to go an try and do some actual work today (HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA as if that's actually going to happen LULZ). I'll check back in periodically throughout the day as I attempt to avoid the lurking and terror-inducing responsibilities of my job.
Laterz, yo.

[timmer]

Test.

Canuckle, I just tried to recreate what you said, but it didn't work. I started this post, left it for a few minutes, opened another tab, read through the new posts from the main page, and then went back to this post and hit post and there the new posts were, waiting to be checked before I post my post. I just don't see it.

[timmer]

Put my vote in for long con, because there are far too many votes on cobalt right now, i dont trust that thre's not a scummy reason to get him lynched (even if he is mafia). Could be a willing sacrifice, to call attention away from the others. And long can has been slightly suspicious from the start, though i dont know him fromprevious games so cant be sure its not just his usual style. He seemed an easy target last poll so i wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. however now there is no point, most likely cobalt's going to get lynched.

And sorry for not posting much. some posts have seemed kind of hostile, made me reluctant to involve myself. I am still around though

I think i recall bass suspecting i'm scum? I dont know if that was just meant to provoke a reaction or if it's his real opinion. Either way it's fishy.. and yes, for the 1000th time im still civ and will be civ ALL GAME and if you think that it's scummy of me to reiterate that, you don't really know me at all or you're misdirecting.

Another note about Tiny...

This post came after Cobalt had said flat out that Long Con was going to die, and most crucially, after Long Con had started making jokes about getting his affairs in order. IMO, this post was written after Long Con already knew that he was going to survive the day, either because he is bad and his team has a lynch save, or Dom balanced Cobalt's rule breaking, or whatever it was. So getting Tiny to show up and vote for Long Con would be a nice baddie teammate move at that juncture.

[Canucklehead]

So in your mind, does bad TB = bad LC? Or is there a world in which only one of the two is bad?

[Canucklehead]

I am also testing my previously mentioned post theory.....I started writing this post at 12:50, immediately after reading Timmer's test post.



....and it failed my test, too. Got the linki screen. So I guess I was wrong. But I still don't understand why BR being able to post her post many hours later might indicate she's a baddie?? Someone unpack that one for me...


AND NOW I'M REALLY GOING TO WORK FOR REAL FUCK OFF ALL OF YOU :P

[timmer]

So in your mind, does bad TB = bad LC? Or is there a world in which only one of the two is bad?

As I'm reading through, I'm indeed feeling like both may be bad. I'd say it is much more likely both are baddie teamies than that one is bad and glomming onto a civ.

The lynch was going to Cobalt, who was saying Long Con would die, and then Tiny shows up after not posting much content and votes for Long Con. Then Long Con posts a rainbow post listing his colour coded thoughts on players. He lists Tiny at the top of the suspect list. As of where I'm at with my reading, that seems a bit odd. Like seriously, even above Cobalt? This after Long Con clearly, I think, knew he would Not be lynched. The whole thing smells.

Also in Tiny's corner is the way she(?) glommed onto my Cobalt vote. Her post about it said she agreed with my reasoning, but as it turned out, I was completely backwards, and if Tiny had actually read any posts she'd have caught my mistake. Thus, I feel like she just jumped on a bandwagon, baddie-style.

[G-Man]

AND NOW I'M REALLY GOING TO WORK FOR REAL FUCK OFF ALL OF YOU :P

Who peed in your maple syrup this morning? :P

[nutella]

I hope G-man is actually going to stop posting all those images. It's annoying as hell. I don't care if you lost a bet or whatever. You're not being a helpful participant.

Is the case on Tiny Bubbles contingent on LC also being bad? Or is there a case for bad TB with a civ LC?

This tbh. I suspect LC a little bit more than Bubbles, and if LC ends up bad I'd look at her as a possible teammate, but I don't see any independent reason to suspect her.

And yeah I don't understand the thing with BR's post. I don't get how it happened but I don't get how it makes her suspicious either.

[timmer]

I just read Cobalt's epic meltdown. Cobalt, I'll reiterate here one more time... have you ever considered that LC survived because you broke the rules? I don't know why others haven't brought this up (yet in my read) as a possibility. I know I've been a host on other sites and had to hand certain players or teams extra powers to balance a blatant rule break.

And I remember when I info dumped my lunch up all over the Computer Lab game that the host had said she had "contingency plans" in place. Like dude, Long Con may only have survived because you broke the fucking rules. I personally cannot even be sure if Long Con had a lynch save power at all.

[FZ.]

Another question I'd like to ask the new people or whoever knows:

Who among the players knew each other from other sites? For example, does anyone know how Cobalt plays, or Tiny bubbles, Scotty etc'?

Cobalt comes from JTM, as does Gamerguy (who was just replaced) and I think sig as well.

TinyBubbles comes from INFJ, as does Neverwhere. Golden, fingersplints, and I have each played a couple games with both of them, and she and Neverwhere are both relatively new to mafia.

I honestly could not tell you where Scotty comes from, but I think this is his second game ever from what I've gathered, so I don't think it really matters much.

Thanks. I think I remember Sig saying he hasn't played online mafia, or something in those lines. Or did I misinterpret? Because back in day 0, he jumped on something that seemed to easy and convenient for me, and then he made it look like it was because he was new. Is he only new to this site, to playing mafia online or any other version?

[FZ.]

I just read Cobalt's epic meltdown. Cobalt, I'll reiterate here one more time... have you ever considered that LC survived because you broke the rules? I don't know why others haven't brought this up (yet in my read) as a possibility. I know I've been a host on other sites and had to hand certain players or teams extra powers to balance a blatant rule break.

And I remember when I info dumped my lunch up all over the Computer Lab game that the host had said she had "contingency plans" in place. Like dude, Long Con may only have survived because you broke the fucking rules. I personally cannot even be sure if Long Con had a lynch save power at all.

Since I don't want to waste all my time catching up, can you refer me to the breakdown, as well as to the breaking of the rule? What rule did he break?

[timmer]

I don't like bringing out of game stuff into a game, generally speaking, but I'm calling gamerguy as bad.

Given his posts in the hosting thread about 'only voting for games that don't allow deadies to sub back in', I think the real reason why TGG has asked to be subbed out of this one is more because of his opposition to epi subbing in, and less because of his internet issues (not saying the excuse isn't legitimate).

I'm beginning to think the reason for it is because he is annoyed that he killed epi and epi is back.

Gamer Guy was Mordecai in Bible Mafia? He definitely got heated about what he felt were game design flaws in our BTSC, so i could see this being true, actually. However, I'd put that last on my list behind my other reads because that's a pretty crazy reason to vote someone. While there dis a bit of a logical possibility to it, it's just odd to build a case around stuff not even in the game.

@FZ, he blatantly, over and over again, said that he was not going to get lynched, and that he was going to move the lynch to Long Con. Tons of variations on "yeah, keep opting for me guys, so that Long Con gets lynched, muhuhaha". It was one of the bigger info dumps I've seen in awhile.