Alright, so I've re-read/re-skimmed now that I'm feeling a bit better and my brain's not like BLARG, and here are observations and responses to various posts. If you see your name bolded/underlined, that doesn't mean I am "fake voting" for you or suspect you, it just means I am addressing you specifically.
Regarding the planet discussion between DDL, zebra, Russ, etc., the mafia
must know which planet it'll be, if this wording is any indication:
DharmaHelper wrote:
Grand Moff Tarkin
Grand Moff Tarkin has selected a location to destroy. The last person to vote in the lynch during that Day will explode with the planet.
Consequently, this means that zebra's concern/questioning of first DDL and then Russ assuming that the mafia know the planet to be destroyed was misguided. I don't necessarily think anything can be made of that regarding zebra's alignment, but I thought it should be clarified.
Regarding
zebra's posts, let's revisit this one:
a2thezebra wrote:Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Russtifinko wrote:2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.
Well I got someone to start baddie hunting, so I guess it was successful in that sense at least.
Well I like to discuss tactics. Not the first game I've done that. In any case, I have no intention of using such methods as failproof evidence of anyone being mafia, while ignoring other evidence. I just want to have them in mind in case we need to use them later, or maybe help people have their own ideas on how we can use the game mechanics to find mafia.
I get what you're saying DDL, and I appreciate your efforts to look for certain strategies (assuming these efforts are genuine, but I'll get to that in a bit), but I don't think I fully understand your logic here.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:DFaraday wrote:I'm sure there would be plenty of civs as well as baddies who would avoid voting rather than risk being the last vote, so I'm not sure how that would make a player suspicious. Placing their own interests ahead of the town, sure, but not baddie per se.
Well I'm assuming the empire mafia knows what the planet is going to be destroyed is, so that means they wouldn't have to worry about being the last ones to vote in the other phases, but would have to worry in that specific phase where the planet explodes.
I'm speculating that we could try to find that pattern. Of course there would be other players avoiding voting last, so it wouldn't be a conclusive evidence.
Of course, now that I've said that, they could also worry about it in every single phase just to attempt to mask the pattrn. Then again, if I get mafiosos to play in a non-optimal way just to avoid being found, that's a profit.
I love metagaming.
I agree with DFaraday. But more importantly, how would we able to find a pattern? What pattern? Assuming you're right and the empire knows which planet will be destroyed (which I wouldn't be too sure that that assumption is correct) that only means, as you said, they would only have to be cautious with that particular planet. One planet. So where's the pattern we're looking for? And you seem to be tip-toeing a bit here with your reasoning. Proposing a method of finding baddies only to follow it up with "so it wouldn't be conclusive evidence" makes me wonder why bring up that potential tactic in the first place? It seems like you're just saying things like this to appear as if you're contributing. And you make it worse by excusing that this imaginary pattern could be copied for each phase, so again, what's the point? And finally, how would you, and you mention you specifically rather than town as a whole, (why?) be able to get mafiosos to play in an unorthodox way to be spotted? Or am I simply misunderstanding your reasoning here? Please help me out here. Finally, to return to the original post:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Not the first game I've done that.
I'm not a fan of players hiding behind their meta especially in response to
slight pings. Consider me slightly pinged as well.
Does
anyone find this interrogation of DDL by zebra to be genuine? If so, why? I can't decide what I think of it.
Roxy wrote:Still not quite sold on Dragon his idea of analysing votes for locations and lynches but I am all for info and what Dragon is proposing will give info just not sure how it will be of use. He was a bit on the fence with his own idea just like - Russti was with his initial suspicion of Dragon. zebra is all over everything. MP is already suspicious of Russti and Matt is being his usual self.(though I will be honest I thought the votes for Death Star were off to begin with. Sorsha day 0.
Its where I am.
, where are you at now? Usually you have some gut reads to share early in the game.
bcornett24 wrote:Russtifinko wrote:Ok, so for the srs bsns I promised:
1) Voting Tatooine. Less for movie reasons and more because if we want info about Jabba's plans and our operatives found his plans in his palace, it makes sense to think his palace is a good place to start the search.
2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.
I'm rather confused why the focus of the conversation happens to be on the 2nd statement russ made here and not the first. I would encourage everybody to read the statement in red. To me this comes across as a scum hunting for third party players (or vise-versa).
I find this to be a very anti-town statement. What does everybody else think?
I'm still lost as to
bcornett24's post here. Can either he or someone explain to me why this is a very anti-town statement?
Enrique wrote:It struck me as pretty odd too. Like, wouldn't it stand to reason that (as somebody pointed out to me earlier) that Jabba would benefit from going to his own lair? I mean, we're just going to a planet, that doesn't mean we'll suddenly find out everything about Team Jabba.
I'm also not really caught up with the thread and I apologize. Shitty day. I'll make an effort tomorrow to get up to speed.
This post of
Enrique's actually pings me a bit because he immediately expresses agreement with bcornett that he found it pretty odd, yet doesn't indicate any gut evaluation of Russ from it; nor did he mention this earlier when I wanted opinions on Russ.
a2thezebra wrote:I don't want to talk anymore about Russ or DDL until I hear from them both about everything that's been addressed
Now that we've heard from Russ,
zebra, how do you feel about his response (and him)?
My back-and-forth conversation with
MacDougall is getting a bit messy... so, for reference,
here is his most recent response to me.
I'll respond to everything line by line below, just extracting his most recent (pink) responses:
MacDougall wrote:Yes but using the eye emoticon so far that I've seen has been a "you are suspicious to me" stance not a "you are default to me" stance.
Oh, okay. Consider my usage of it in that instance to be not the norm then.
- Perhaps so, but it came across quite belittling to me. You asked her a question that had a really obvious answer to anyone who knows how to play the game. Why not just make the statement instead of asking what I read as a patronising question? This is quite unimportant anyway, I don't see this uncovering some magic scumness.
That's my fault for wording my post quickly; I had no such intention. I could have made it a statement, yeah, on reflection.
- He has pinged me, but I am reading him as a pingy civ that doesn't read posts properly and doesn't consider his use of words.
Is there any way you could elaborate further on this read? I'm just trying to get a feel for both you and DDL, and I'm having trouble connecting specifics to your expressed read here.
- Why not say "having read through that exchange while I didn't see the suspicion either zebra or DDL etc. It's just more examples of your verbose waffliness, which to me is the heart of my scum read on you.
Why not? I don't know, didn't think to say it like that, but your wording expresses what I wanted to. Over the years both in person and over the internet I've found that I've encountered repeated instances where people don't seem to understand what I'm trying to convey. I consider that more to be my fault in constructing sentences that express my train of thought than I do anyone else's fault for misconstruing my sentences. I'm an accountant, so maybe that's why? Or, better yet, maybe that's why I'm an accountant and not a writer? :P
- The content of what you were saying isn't relevant to my case on you, it was your choice of words. That being said, I actually see what you mean now and it's that level of detail of your suspicion on him that looks like a case forced out of knowing that he is scum, by virtue of being his teammate. I had to really squeeze my brain to get your point there. Perhaps that's on me.
Oh, I see, and this makes sense given what I just typed above. It seems I'm not expressing myself well enough. What do you mean by the underlined?
- A suspicious Mac would read this as you attempting to bail on your case on Russ now as it's blown up in your face. But it could just as easily be a discerning man using good judgement so I'll let that slide. 
You're free to interpret it however you wish. But I hadn't thought of what you express here, I think it's a good point, so naturally it has/is going to influence my thoughts on Russ. 
- I would say that you are clearly showing through your word choices that you are being overly cautious.
I wouldn't disagree... it tends to be how I talk anyway.
- Everything I have called you out on is behaviour I tend to exhibit when I am scum with my supatown hat on. Literally all of it.
Well then, I suppose your scum supatown game looks a lot like my civilian game. 
- Sorry I'm not following here.
It's clear that my interpretation of Russ's words conflicts with yours, his own, Golden's, etc., so I suppose I'm the one that's off base here. I'll address this again later in my giant post when I respond to Russ now that we've heard from him. If that post doesn't clear it up, press me more on this.
- Yes, but for someone who seemed to be quite pinged by Russ, for you to not mention that part reads to me like you didn't want to put it on him TOO hard, or that you weren't actually looking through all his posts for genuine opportunities to see a scum. Just enough to distance.
That makes sense, but I still don't really understand that part.
To be fair though, and why you may think this, I wasn't looking through all of his posts with a magnifying glass to see a scum. I've been reading the thread and staying current, but until re-reading just now I haven't been paying enough attention to each post.
- I've elaborated a little on my point on that matter in this post, but it's the fact that your points on him seem to be making a lot out of what I perceive to be a really civ looking ISO, yet the part that pinged me the post you didn't make a point of addressing, whether by virtue of having not bothered reading it, or by virtue of seeing that it would have drawn the heat on Russ a little TOO much.
I guess we just came to the opposite conclusions, interestingly.
, I hope that adequately addresses your concerns. If you still have any, throw them at me.
a2thezebra wrote:MacDougall wrote:Why not say "having read through that exchange while I didn't see the suspicion either zebra or DDL etc. It's just more examples of your verbose waffliness, which to me is the heart of my scum read on you.
See, and this is my problem with your case. What to you is waffliness is, to me, MP's way of speaking as a player in mafia games.
I'm more bothered that MP has clearly been keeping up with the thread yet never responded to this:
a2thezebra wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:a2thezebra wrote:How beneficial would it be to appear as if one is contributing in town's favor when they are not? That's the go-to mafia tactic, MP. Now there's no motive to retract one's hypothesis in the same post that they proposed it, but that's not the issue.
But it clearly is the issue when that is what you "don't understand".
Unless I am misunderstanding you, you are finding issue with DDL proposing his analysis and then retracting it, not the actual proposal itself, correct?
It's not the issue because the action in itself isn't justifiable from a town
or scum perspective. It is only more applicable to the scum perspective because it's more likely (in my opinion) the result of the mafia tactic I described than a town perspective with an undefined motivation. It would help if you could explain how that's just as likely (or better yet, more likely) to be an action from a town perspective than scum mimicking town.
I don't interpret MP's short back-and-forth with me as condescending, but I do think it's odd that he would attempt to usher me into understanding his point-of-view (as if I didn't already) but when upon returning to the thread, he ignored my clarification that was preventing him from understanding
my point-of-view.
, again, apologies for not responding to this at the time. I just hadn't properly absorbed it and mulled over it for a response.
Here are my thoughts now. I understand you better now. I wasn't thinking about the behavior in terms of specifically crafting a town-minded scenario, rather the lack of a convincing mafia-minded scenario wasn't enough to sway me otherwise. The problem with specifically crafting a town-minded scenario is that townies can act illogically. Nonetheless, I could think of a scenario in which a civilian had not fully thought out their hypothesis, as you termed it, to the point where they decided it made more sense to
wait to retract it. I've actually made this exact blunder as a civilian when I aggressively pursued zeek in Doctor Who, only to reveal too soon that my suspicion was fake; it would have made way more sense for my gambit if I had waited much longer to reveal my intentions.
So while I don't immediately think the behavior is townie-minded, I don't struggle to come up with a world in which it is that of a townie. Does that make sense?
MacDougall wrote:Golden wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:If he had managed to explain a thought process behind this switch, that'd be one thing, but the kicker is that he has failed to address your suspicion whatsoever.
I'm not sold, but I'm listening. I'd like to hear Enrique address your thoughts.
What do you think this was (from before your post):
Enrique wrote:thats like the biggest nonstory ive seen presented as a case on mafia
tbh i had no idea what "Yavin" was until i read the descriptions, at which point it was a bit of a no-brainer. like really? the place is literally the civvie base where the civvies do cool things in the movies. i DID consider my options (tattooine, endor) up until i found out about yavin. but then when it looked so good, surely i was missing something that kept people away from it? nobody gave it any consideration so i just put it down to lack of familiarity and went ahead and voted.
like i dont even understand what the baddie logic behind anything there would be.
Whether the truth or not, it definitely is a 'thought process behind the switch'.
Golden I expect better from you. This is a textbook example of taking something completely out of context.
MP was referencing enrique's initial reactions to my initial suspicions and his lack of response to them, anything that enrique said subsequent was not on the table.
Oh man, I never imagined I'd start the extensive discussion that occurred after this post.
MacDougall and
Golden, this is in reference to both of you (wasn't sure what post to use, so just grabbed the first one on the subject).
I'm sure I "read" Enrique's immediate response to your case, Mac, but I clearly didn't recall it, since I really didn't think that he ever responded.
Now, the fact that Enrique didn't explain that until subsequent to your case is another story. I'll respond to some of Enrique's posts in a bit here. I don't like how he isn't offering much of... well, anything in the thread, other than making half-assed attempts to diminish any Day 0-based suspicion he's received.
Does that adequately clear my train of thought?
a2thezebra wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:zebra, I was not implying that you suggested policy lynching MM. I did not intend to. I brought up that possibility to the table and was expressing my dislike for that option.
It definitely came across as more the former than the latter, but in time we shall see which one is the truth.
, I can assure you that it was exactly how I described, not attributable to you, since I didn't even mention you in my post. What would be the motive in doing that?
Enrique wrote:Oh jeez. OK, here's my issue with this whole thing: everyone's talking as if I didn't provide any reason for my vote when I did, from the beginning! I'm on mobile right now so finding it is a bit of a hassle, I'm gonna get on my laptop ASAP and quote the post because really it isn't hard to find. From my first mention of Yavin, before I voted for it, I mentioned what a blatant civvie option it looked like. Mac went on to press me as to why I hadn't voted for it yet, and I said hey I don't know why nobody else has. There's not much to that beyond me making up my mind.
I'm reading the whole thread but honestly I'm not very good at absorbing things from mobile, so I have very little to comment on right now. I will be back with my thoughts on some more things not directly related to me. This whole argument is just silly. I shouldn't have to defend myself here.
Enrique wrote:I think there's a bit much attention on me trying to make up my mind for Day 0. I looked at Tattoine, I looked at Endor. For Endor I looked both ways, and even the Tattooine question wasn't a lot more than "wouldn't this benefit independents? What's the deal with them?"
Maybe I didn't lay out my whole thought process, but I commented on what I found worth commenting. Tattooine got a bunch of votes, and I doubt all of them stopped to consider "wait, isn't that where Jabba is based?"
, all of this seems rather dismissive. Regarding the underlined, why shouldn't you have to defend yourself? Isn't that the point of mafia to accuse others and be accused, no matter what the accusation?
Moreover, I cannot think of a single post of yours that has anything to do with the game other than Day 0 or defending yourself from accusations. What are your thoughts?
Regarding the second post here,
Enrique pings me a bit by saying there's "a bit much attention on me". If you want it off of you, why haven't you discussed something else then?
a2thezebra wrote:Enrique wrote:sig wrote:I don't think enrique vote for Yavin is suspicious.
Though this
Enrique wrote:I think Tattooine, in the worst case scenario, would favor the Independents. Do we know what their win conditions are yet?
The Hutts aren't independent and are based on Tattooine so I find this interesting.
Yeah that seemed really obvious once somebody pointed it out. To be fair, when I think of Tattooine I always associate it with those raider shits stealing the droids, Anakin coming back to kill them, etc. I haven't watched a Star Wars film since I was 10, and though yes I know the Hutts are based there, it just kinda went over my head when I made that post.
Hmmm...I don't buy it.
, can you elaborate? Why don't you buy
Enrique's explanation?
Elohcin wrote:Golden wrote:a2thezebra wrote:Also has everyone forgotten that MM has already voted? Am I the only one that is extremely bothered by that? Even Mac doesn't seem to care.
It's hard to be bothered by MM's normal civilian behaviour.
Just what I was thinking.
Bass_the_Clever wrote:You guys are posting so much lol. I'm reading now but am tried so I might take a nap before I post.
Or wait until your teammates get back into BTSC so you can agree on what you should say? :P
MovingPictures07 wrote:am current on the thread, yes, but I'm still trying to get a hold on everything, since I've been catching up in spurts in between sleeping/feeling sick and doing PhD work.
Are you going to make us call you Dr. MP?
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Elo, you said you believe the people talking the most are civilian. Why? Also, you brought up mafia lying about real life; is there something specific in this thread that you are referring to, or was this just a commentary on what you've seen in general? I got a bit lost there.
I think so b/c they haven't done anything to ping me thus far. Except for Mac bringing up Matt's out of character behavior. The real life comment was only referring to previous games. I was only expanding upon the conversation on off-topic posts and whether they should be considered when suspecting someone.
well, lots of linki as I was all ready to post this and then Epi came in here to distract me for a little while. I'll read more after dinner.
, thanks for elaborating. Do you find anyone else suspect at this time other than Matt F?
Regarding the Dr., I will be so happy when I can call myself that, but I can't make you all do anything. I will take too much pleasure in new business cards though.
Unfortunately, that's still a couple of years away. 
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Here is where zebra brought it up the first time, directly after I placed my vote.
Here is where zebra brought it back up for discussion, about 12 hours or so later.
Golden and MP chimed in immediately with regards to my vote in response to zebra's comment. MacDougall did too, but he was the victim, and this wasn't his first mention either.
Golden - Well Golden had one post in between when the vote happened and when zebra recently brought it up. Also his response read sincere to me.
MP - On the other hand, MP had 7 posts after it happened and before zebra brought it up. Not only that, but this was MP's
response. He didn't comment on it before (not until zebra brought it up saying she was bothered by it). MP agreed he was also bothered by it, though admitted to not knowing how to handle it. But he also awkwardly used the word "also" twice at the very beginning of this post. It looks like sentence restructuring, meaning MP was trying to pick his words.
, you're missing something important here that negates your analysis about my response to your vote. The reason I hadn't pushed you on your vote was because between
the time of your vote and
this post about an hour later, I had not posted.
Why is that latter post important? Because you said you made your vote for observance. I thus did not feel it necessary to press you on it at that time. But when zebra kept going on about your vote, I wanted to make it clear that I was also bothered by your quick vote.
As to my "also" wording, I made that post in a rush, and if anything that blunder should indicate I gave
too little thought to my post wording, rather than the alternative.
If you still have concerns, let me know.
Bass_the_Clever wrote:MM is one of the hardest people to read it usually takes a few phase for me to even to form an opinion on him.
MP is really good at being bad but I don't think he is bad this game only because I don't think he would walk away from his computer when he is being talked about if he was bad.
, why do you feel this way (re: underlined)?
To be clear, I was not feeling well and I'm currently under a time crunch to get some papers done by Monday, so that is why I felt I had to force myself to leave. I don't think you should town read me just because I didn't obsessively stick around.
zebra, I'm a bit confused on this post's relation to your two posts previous. You were discussing how to hunt for the Boba Fett with Simon, then you said to give you a few minutes, and you came up with this. How does this relate to that conversation? (or does it not at all?)
Russtifinko wrote:OMG, you guys are already posting at TH levels. Kill me now....
a2thezebra wrote:Why only that planet? You agree with DDL's logic and he himself said that they are viable to imitate the actions of everyone else by avoiding voting last every day.
First of all, "so quick"? Second, how is partial agreement a ping for you?
Not necessarily only that planet. But IF only that planet then I think it would've been a super good indicator.
Golden wrote:My experience of DDL is that he always seems suspicious early on. I thought he was bad day one in economics and he wasn't.
Thanks for pointing this out, I haven't played with him much.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Okay I'll admit I kind of made a mistake there. I said what was on my mind, then I realized saying it might have ruined it, so I tried to find a silver lining by talking about the metagame thing, which admitelly I still think might work.
Thanks. Not sure i 100% buy this, because the post where you fully explained the idea and the one where you said fully explaining it might not be the best idea were the same post. However, you had at least given the major point in the previous post, so I suppose the cat was out of the bag anyway at that point.
I agree that it might still work, but I think you've severely decreased our chances.
MovingPictures07 wrote:Russtifinko wrote:2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.
I want everyone to discuss this.
How are these two statements compatible?
Yeah, I don't see your point. To me those two statements say almost exactly the same thing. I basically reworded it the at the end because "I can't decide" sounds waffly.
, thanks for responding, despite it being a brief one.
They say almost exactly the same thing? The first statement to me says "I have no read on DDL, whether civilian or baddie, as a result of him exhibiting this action", whereas the second statement to me says "I now am attributing a more likely baddie explanation to DDL's behavior", since that's how I interpret "consider me slightly pinged".
Is this an incorrect interpretation? If so, how are those similar? What am I missing here that everyone else seems to be getting?
Epignosis wrote:MovingPictures07 wrote:Hosts: Can we discuss whether we had information on the Day 0 poll?
Sure.
I had no Day 0 poll information.
And with that... I'm at 14,000 posts. 
On that note, I'm off to bed and I won't be around too much tomorrow; even if I'm still feeling relatively better (as I am at the moment) or even better than that, I have papers to write. I'll still be here for EoD though at the least, and I'll be rainbowing at or before that time. See you later, folks.
to you too. 
