Re: Dr. Who Mafia! - Day 1
Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 5:28 pm
What do you think of Made?zeek wrote:Makes sense. I don't know who to vote for. I might go SVS based on her flying the radar. Being around but no really discussing anything.
What do you think of Made?zeek wrote:Makes sense. I don't know who to vote for. I might go SVS based on her flying the radar. Being around but no really discussing anything.
Does anyone know how this post is suppose to be read, he never clarified what exact he felt was hypocritical.Dom wrote:I find some of the points on Enrique to be valid. I do. However, I couldn't help but notice how hypocritical MP is being.
So you agree-- Enrique is your greatest suspect.MovingPictures07 wrote:Wow, I actually agree here.Epignosis wrote:I waited until Day 1. But you, sir, are my greatest suspect.Enrique wrote:No. It's suspicious that he used it without any indication that he was around when it was used.MovingPictures07 wrote: Fair, I don't feel very strongly about this Enrique suspicion, but I do believe in it, and I do think he very well could be bad. I wouldn't have voted him if we couldn't change votes, but since we can, thought I might as well.Seriously?MovingPictures07 wrote: So now here you go trying to subtly push that my behavior was really forced and over the top, just like Dana, yet you're "not making any accusations"?
I don't buy it.
Am I bad or not, Enri?
Dom in fact clarified about that here: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 493#p85493Made wrote:Does anyone know how this post is suppose to be read, he never clarified what exact he felt was hypocritical.Dom wrote:I find some of the points on Enrique to be valid. I do. However, I couldn't help but notice how hypocritical MP is being.
So you agree-- Enrique is your greatest suspect.MovingPictures07 wrote:Wow, I actually agree here.Epignosis wrote:I waited until Day 1. But you, sir, are my greatest suspect.Enrique wrote:No. It's suspicious that he used it without any indication that he was around when it was used.MovingPictures07 wrote: Fair, I don't feel very strongly about this Enrique suspicion, but I do believe in it, and I do think he very well could be bad. I wouldn't have voted him if we couldn't change votes, but since we can, thought I might as well.Seriously?MovingPictures07 wrote: So now here you go trying to subtly push that my behavior was really forced and over the top, just like Dana, yet you're "not making any accusations"?
I don't buy it.
Am I bad or not, Enri?
Linki- I guess suspicion isn't the right word. She's playing in a way i've never seen nor that i understand, so i think we should critically view all moves she makes.
I understand what everyone on my list seems to be attempting, whether it's playing to their meta, or otherwise. With those not on my list, I have no idea. We learn nothing killing a quiet mafia, and even less doing the more likely; killing a quiet civvie. If given the choice to randomize or no lynch, no lynch simply makes more sense.
linki- ok, so no no lynch. The way i see it, Juliet, angles are how people are being perceived. so if someone,for example, wants to be seen as "manic", they'll avoid situations that make them appear otherwise.
I thought his back and forth with SVS was strange, but he didn't initiate it.MovingPictures07 wrote:What do you think of Made?zeek wrote:Makes sense. I don't know who to vote for. I might go SVS based on her flying the radar. Being around but no really discussing anything.
I presume this is about SVS. So you're not suspicious of her, just confused by her play?Made wrote:Linki- I guess suspicion isn't the right word. She's playing in a way i've never seen nor that i understand, so i think we should critically view all moves she makes.
I understand what everyone on my list seems to be attempting, whether it's playing to their meta, or otherwise. With those not on my list, I have no idea. We learn nothing killing a quiet mafia, and even less doing the more likely; killing a quiet civvie. If given the choice to randomize or no lynch, no lynch simply makes more sense.
Trying to appear as though she's on her own, without help from anyone. She should have found that quote quickly. It's not much and I won't pretend it is, but I've had a bad vibe from her for a while. I don't have much else to go on.MovingPictures07 wrote:I personally am confused by S~V~S's play so far but I'm not sure it makes her bad.
Yeah, the back and forth was strange, but IDK, when people try to argue those type of exchanges make people bad it just doesn't resonate with me because I don't see why baddies would do that.
That's fair, I just don't think I'll be voting for her, unless I have to save myself and it's the only way to do so. I do think her behavior has been strange, but it just hasn't struck me as bad.zeek wrote:Trying to appear as though she's on her own, without help from anyone. She should have found that quote quickly. It's not much and I won't pretend it is, but I've had a bad vibe from her for a while. I don't have much else to go on.MovingPictures07 wrote:I personally am confused by S~V~S's play so far but I'm not sure it makes her bad.
Yeah, the back and forth was strange, but IDK, when people try to argue those type of exchanges make people bad it just doesn't resonate with me because I don't see why baddies would do that.
Son, i gotcha mathsMovingPictures07 wrote:
Dom in fact clarified about that here: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 493#p85493
How does a no lynch make more sense, it gives the baddies an extra night to NK? And how do we learn nothing from killing a quiet mafia? That's not true. We get one mafia member down (yay math) and we could possibly learn information easily based on the way people vote.
Yes, but in a no lynch, we learn absolutely nothing about anyone's alignment, and allow an NK to happen. Even if we lynch a civvie on D1, at least it might give us information on catching a baddie in the future. (which is exactly what you're saying, right?)Made wrote:Son, i gotcha mathsMovingPictures07 wrote:
Dom in fact clarified about that here: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 493#p85493
How does a no lynch make more sense, it gives the baddies an extra night to NK? And how do we learn nothing from killing a quiet mafia? That's not true. We get one mafia member down (yay math) and we could possibly learn information easily based on the way people vote.
In a random lynch we have a 12/31 chance of killing a mafia (assuming the hidden roles are indy/mafia)
in a no lynch we don't kill civvie. I've never participated in the lynching of a mafia and the earliest I've ever seen a mafia lynched was Enrique in Monty.
in voting an active player ( i didn't mean to imply i would only consider especially high poster), while there's a chance that all active posters are civvie, we (ideally) increase our odds because we have post to make our decision off of.
Based on the fact that there is no clear "Hey this person is totally mafia" that everyone agrees on, i feel we might actually nab one.
Also, thanks, misread Dom's post.
linki- MR, welcome to my radar, please have a seat as I evaluate your angles.
I actually thought zeek was the one being opportunistic with his vote for MP. Now I see he has changed it and I don't see anything wrong with an SVS vote.MovingPictures07 wrote:Why zeek, MR?
And what do you mean about neck and neck between me and Enri?
Linki with Epig: Yeah, I agree.
How the hell was I being opportunistic when HE scapegoated me just to stimulate conversation. Even he admits a vote from me would be fair given the circumstances.Mister Rearranger wrote:I actually thought zeek was the one being opportunistic with his vote for MP. Now I see he has changed it and I don't see anything wrong with an SVS vote.
I mean if it comes down to it, I feel more comfortable voting for Eko than you.
Apologies for the rush. I'm posting during a movie, haha.
This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I am reminded of a certain evil dragon who piggybacked on my suspicions for several days, getting me to elaborate on them.juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.
Is that second quote from a different thread?Epignosis wrote:This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I am reminded of a certain evil dragon who piggybacked on my suspicions for several days, getting me to elaborate on them.juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.![]()
I don't want to make things easier. Why don't you tell me what you've pieced together about Enrique now that he has three votes?
I'm not saying that? I'm saying by voting someone who's actually posting, we increase or odds of finding mafia because the vote was influenced by suspicion rather than completely random. I'd much rather one civvie die than two personally.MovingPictures07 wrote:Yes, but in a no lynch, we learn absolutely nothing about anyone's alignment, and allow an NK to happen. Even if we lynch a civvie on D1, at least it might give us information on catching a baddie in the future. (which is exactly what you're saying, right?)Made wrote:Son, i gotcha mathsMovingPictures07 wrote:
Dom in fact clarified about that here: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 493#p85493
How does a no lynch make more sense, it gives the baddies an extra night to NK? And how do we learn nothing from killing a quiet mafia? That's not true. We get one mafia member down (yay math) and we could possibly learn information easily based on the way people vote.
In a random lynch we have a 12/31 chance of killing a mafia (assuming the hidden roles are indy/mafia)
in a no lynch we don't kill civvie. I've never participated in the lynching of a mafia and the earliest I've ever seen a mafia lynched was Enrique in Monty.
in voting an active player ( i didn't mean to imply i would only consider especially high poster), while there's a chance that all active posters are civvie, we (ideally) increase our odds because we have post to make our decision off of.
Based on the fact that there is no clear "Hey this person is totally mafia" that everyone agrees on, i feel we might actually nab one.
Also, thanks, misread Dom's post.
linki- MR, welcome to my radar, please have a seat as I evaluate your angles.
So I'm not sure I totally understand.
Yes. Mistakenly posted in a different thread.Turnip Head wrote:Is that second quote from a different thread?Epignosis wrote:This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I am reminded of a certain evil dragon who piggybacked on my suspicions for several days, getting me to elaborate on them.juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.![]()
I don't want to make things easier. Why don't you tell me what you've pieced together about Enrique now that he has three votes?
That's all I find so I am not compelled to vote for Enrique.Epignosis wrote:I am telling you to vote for Enrique. What do I have to gain from this?
If he is lynched and is bad, then I get Night killed.
If he is lynched and is good, then I get lynched.
Which is par for the course for me.
Vote for Enrique.
Oh, okay then. Why would you feel more comfortable with an Enrique vote?Mister Rearranger wrote:I actually thought zeek was the one being opportunistic with his vote for MP. Now I see he has changed it and I don't see anything wrong with an SVS vote.MovingPictures07 wrote:Why zeek, MR?
And what do you mean about neck and neck between me and Enri?
Linki with Epig: Yeah, I agree.
I mean if it comes down to it, I feel more comfortable voting for Eko than you.
Apologies for the rush. I'm posting during a movie, haha.
Wow, this is really interesting.Epignosis wrote:This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I am reminded of a certain evil dragon who piggybacked on my suspicions for several days, getting me to elaborate on them.juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.![]()
I don't want to make things easier. Why don't you tell me what you've pieced together about Enrique now that he has three votes?
Was the enlarged true or was it not true?juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.
juliets wrote:That's all I find so I am not compelled to vote for Enrique.
Yes I posted in the other game i was playing by mistake. I reposted in this game but decided not to retract my statement just yet. The post I had seen that caught my attention again was the one where you told us to vote for him. That's a pretty hard stance and made we want to look at what was behind it. I tracked down what I just posted but the evidence didn't persuade me.Epignosis wrote:Yes. Mistakenly posted in a different thread.Turnip Head wrote:Is that second quote from a different thread?Epignosis wrote:This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I am reminded of a certain evil dragon who piggybacked on my suspicions for several days, getting me to elaborate on them.juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.![]()
I don't want to make things easier. Why don't you tell me what you've pieced together about Enrique now that he has three votes?
Do we though, if most mafia members are hardly posting? I don't know, I still don't understand how you say "one civvie" v. two dying, but I understand the reluctance to contribute to a D1 civvie lynch.Made wrote: I'm not saying that? I'm saying by voting someone who's actually posting, we increase or odds of finding mafia because the vote was influenced by suspicion rather than completely random. I'd much rather one civvie die than two personally.
In reference to your second post, the only thing we learn when we kill a random is that their intent was genuine. If a civvie didn't post much on topic what did we learn?
This seems SO suspicious to me.Epignosis wrote:Was the enlarged true or was it not true?juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.
If it was true, then what did you piece together and why have you now said the following?
juliets wrote:That's all I find so I am not compelled to vote for Enrique.
But that doesn't require any "piecing together." I didn't lay down a bunch of mysterious comments or even make a huge case. I just told everybody what to do- no mystery there.juliets wrote:Yes I posted in the other game i was playing by mistake. I reposted in this game but decided not to retract my statement just yet. The post I had seen that caught my attention again was the one where you told us to vote for him. That's a pretty hard stance and made we want to look at what was behind it. I tracked down what I just posted but the evidence didn't persuade me.Epignosis wrote:Yes. Mistakenly posted in a different thread.Turnip Head wrote:Is that second quote from a different thread?Epignosis wrote:This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
I am reminded of a certain evil dragon who piggybacked on my suspicions for several days, getting me to elaborate on them.juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.![]()
I don't want to make things easier. Why don't you tell me what you've pieced together about Enrique now that he has three votes?
I'm probably going to vote for someone not on any of these lists we've been discussing.
Ditto.MovingPictures07 wrote:Yep, I voted juliets. She clearly contradicted herself and I believe she is lying. I can always change it if I feel something better comes up, but considering I already was finding JC's lack of wanting to form any opinion at all for herself really odd, I feel OK with this vote.
juliets wrote:Ok, if you think it makes me bad - did you ever explain how it makes me bad, asking someone to help understand their own case and changing what they are saying in the thread - but if you do you lose a civ vote if I get lynched. I think I'm just a convenient target.
Huh.juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies
One civve in a night kill versus a night kill and a civvie lynchMovingPictures07 wrote:Do we though, if most mafia members are hardly posting? I don't know, I still don't understand how you say "one civvie" v. two dying, but I understand the reluctance to contribute to a D1 civvie lynch.Made wrote: I'm not saying that? I'm saying by voting someone who's actually posting, we increase or odds of finding mafia because the vote was influenced by suspicion rather than completely random. I'd much rather one civvie die than two personally.
In reference to your second post, the only thing we learn when we kill a random is that their intent was genuine. If a civvie didn't post much on topic what did we learn?
By this logic though, we should never vote for someone who never posts because then what do we learn?
juliets wrote:Ok, if you think it makes me bad - did you ever explain how it makes me bad, asking someone to help understand their own case and changing what they are saying in the thread - but if you do you lose a civ vote if I get lynched. I think I'm just a convenient target.
These both sound really insincere to me.juliets wrote:You picked me out as a baddie in the last game we played and like this game, I was civ. I'm just one of those you can't read.
In the last game we played together, I was LMS. How does me trying to get you lynched in that game (when I didn't care about your alignment) mean that I can't read you?juliets wrote:You picked me out as a baddie in the last game we played and like this game, I was civ. I'm just one of those you can't read.
Oh, I understand now. Thanks for clarifying.Made wrote:One civve in a night kill versus a night kill and a civvie lynchMovingPictures07 wrote:Do we though, if most mafia members are hardly posting? I don't know, I still don't understand how you say "one civvie" v. two dying, but I understand the reluctance to contribute to a D1 civvie lynch.Made wrote: I'm not saying that? I'm saying by voting someone who's actually posting, we increase or odds of finding mafia because the vote was influenced by suspicion rather than completely random. I'd much rather one civvie die than two personally.
In reference to your second post, the only thing we learn when we kill a random is that their intent was genuine. If a civvie didn't post much on topic what did we learn?
By this logic though, we should never vote for someone who never posts because then what do we learn?
Also, the only reason I brought up what do we learn thing was because it was a benefit you listed to voting randomly. Imo what we learn comes second in terms of importants to who we have a higher chance of killing.
Interesting you say this, since Enri seemed genuine in his defenses to me. Maybe a revisit will be in order, but for now I definitely think juliets has been clearly inconsistent and she is doing a poor job trying to cover for it.nijuukyugou wrote:I've got to drive and celebrate my brother's bday and I don't know when I'll be back (likely after the voting for both games I'm playing), so thoughts and my vote:
1) Still don't see MP as bad. Don't really know why people are voting for him. I've read the thread (or at least most of it in the last hour, since I was stupid enough to leave myself 7+ pages to read) and saw a baddie-hunting MP. Plus, one's gotta feel bad for a guy who can't stay alive past the first day in sooooo many games :P
2) In my catching up, the "supatown" comment by Enrique (giving zeek the suspicious eye for using the term) really honestly pinged me, before I even saw what others said about it. I don't read his defense of the comment as genuine, either - he gave zeek the eye and called him suspicious, then backed off and tried to say "no, I wasn't witch hunting" and "why would I push a lynch for a random civilian?" If you weren't pushing towards a lynch or trying to garner suspicion, and you weren't witch hunting/weeding out suspicion, then what exactly were you trying to accomplish through that comment? Your explanations change with whomever is asking, and it's not consistent. This is the most suspicious thing to me so far.
I see other suspicions of other people popping up, but I really don't have time right now to look at that, as I've spent the last hour and a half piecing the above suspicion together from the last 7 damned pages to read (my fault, no one else's, I know). I gotta look at my other game really quick and then get on the road, so going ahead and voting Enrique.
No.Made wrote:I don't like how fast everyone is hopping on Juliets. Juliets, why didn't you just post the original and- wait a second...What? I just reread the two post and they say pretty much the exact same thing?? Only difference is she didn't voice that she agreed with Epi? Are you guys kidding?
the same question exactly, different framing. One is just more aggressive towards you. Given, the framing posted this thread does conflict with comments she's made after the fact.Epignosis wrote:This is worded very differently than what you accidentally posted in Monty Python:juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.
juliets wrote:I think I may have to retract my statement about not voting for zeek, enrique or mp. I am piecing together Epigs suspicion of Enrique and it holds more water than I thought. Epi you could make this easier by just listing the reasons you voted for him. Just a few key words even.