Mini #564 - Mafia in Crubtown - Game Over

[EmpTyger]

Hello, world. About to start reading thread.

[EmpTyger]

Okay, I’ve read the thread. There’s a lot of good stuff in here, and I’m going to need to go through again before I reform all my thoughts and notes into something postable. However, in the interest of getting things moving before then:

---

PP: I don’t think I caught a single suspicious thing from her.

Akonas: So far, so good.

Talitha: If she’s mafia, her partners are going to drag her down. Solid play, but must recheck after mafia are found.

QF: Has been pretty hard to shake the impression of the first 4 pages, but she’s done well sense then.

windkirby: Protown D1, but some of the overdefensiveness towards others D2 gives me a slight pause.

Cephrir. Yvonne nailed you good in [135], hm?

vikingfan: Not a lot on first read, but an uneasy feeling. Can easily see you a lots of people’s partners.

VoD: I do not buy the “didn’t realize it was hammer” defense. (Note: I don’t disagree with the town lynching mozs when they did; from about [188] onward he was obvious lynchbait.) I just don’t believe VoD’s explanation that he acted in ignorance. But I’m rereading the post in question, and that’s not his biggest offense:

Mozsuggs I dont feel like reading through all your recent posts just yet, I may go back to look over them for amusment at some stage.
I think your biggest flaw in this game has been the I know im innocent and if I say it enough with enough conviction people might believe me. We have no way what so ever to know your innocent on day one but we can judge this on how you play, your actions, votes, accusations, what you say in your posts etc.
<snip>

This sounds like he knew mozs was going to turn up town.

darkdude: I’d probably vote him now if I were ready for the day to end. Just- so many big things, so many little things. I’m not getting a “newbie town” vibe from him- in fact, I’m getting neither. The inexperience feels like an exaggerated act, and the play just doesn’t seem protown. But, no vote yet- I don’t have time right now to catalogue my suspicions of him, and I want to get out more observations of everyone before the day ends. And besides I’m not sure that VoD isn’t a better one to vote, anyway.

[EmpTyger]

I’m anachronologically focusing on D2 here, which I have reread. I’ll go back into D1 later, but this is more currently relevant, I feel.

---

Cephrir:

Cephrir. Yvonne nailed you good in [135], hm?

No. But anyway, do you think I'm scum because of this? I can't quite tell because you phrase it like you're sure I am and then go on to say you want to vote darkdude, and you didn't say anything else about me. So... what's up ith that?

Well, I do think it’s a suspicious strike against you ipso facto, although not conclusively. What I’m more concerned about is how it didn’t get picked up by anyone else. That’s the type of accusation that early D1, with a daystart, should have been picked up by *someone*. And, temporarily assuming that you’re innocent- I just don’t see the mafia letting that go by.
I mean, we could just have a very inexperienced mafia, too. But to me, it’s one of the most hm-worthy things that’s happened. Did not want it to get lost.

This sounds like he knew mozs was going to turn up town.

I can see what you mean here, but it sounded to me like he was speaking hypothetically. If you don't buy his explanation of the hammer, I'd think that would be a bigger strike than this.

They’re not mutually exclusive rationales. I mean, lying + having extra information fits mafia to a tee. For that matter, lying + having extra information + lynching a townsperson.

The darkdude thing is Wifom. So is the fact that he brought it up. I propose that we ignore it for the time being.
<snip>

I was surprised you thought this worth ignoring. See below to darkdude.

---

darkdude:.
So, here’s the thing. At the start of D2 there were plenty of suspects. I don’t see how you could figure out that “The scum did a good job on framing me” and yet at the same time be stumped with “No one but myself seem the most suspicious at the moment “ It just doesn’t seem to add up with the newbie you’re claiming. Like, consider what you say when QF questioned you:

but I have a weird feeling about him introducing that.

I know...I concluded it was best for me to take initiative anyways. Otherwise I'll definitely seem like scum.

So when day began, instead of trying to find mafia, you were instead seeing (a) if the nightkill could be traced to you and (b) what you could do to deflect it. That’s not protown behavior. That’s what mafia- particularly since they would be considering such reactions when choosing their nightkill- would do.

And when you do turn your attention to VoD, it’s only *after* the town’s pretty much backed off. Why did you find VoD suspicious?

Also,

Cephrir. Yvonne nailed you good in [135], hm?

Wasn't that directed at me?

No, I intended it to Cephrir. But you can reply if you’d like.

---

vikingfan:
VoD questioned you on this, and I don’t think you ever cleared it up.

<snip>

After seeing mozsuggs' alignment, I'm not sure about darkdude, especially since it seems that he may be framed by the mafia. It seems like, to me, the mafia were almost entirely sitting back and letting mozsuggs commit suicide (which is basically what he did).

Given that of those left not on the moz vote are only three: Pink Puppy, darkdude, Talitha, and you say you are not sure of darkdude do you have any good reason to be suspicious of PP or Talitha?

Be specific. *Who* were you theorizing might be mafia? Give me names. Give me a couple possibilities. It’s okay if you’re not certain, or if you since changed your mind- but I would like to know what were you thinking when you suggested this.

I’d also like to hear a response to [480].

---

windkirby:

vote: mozsuggs

(Yay! I spelled his name right.)

The my-feeling-like-giving-one/the-need-for-one ratio is pretty sorry explanation-wise, but if anyone excluding mozsuggs has an objection to this vote, I'm happy to explain why I made it.

Did you ever give an explanation to this? If not, I will very belatedly raise an objection for the purpose of your replying.

---

VoD:
Meh. Maybe it’s a matter of timing- I’m reading it without 20 days to rationalize. But I’ll concede that, after reread, darkdude’s defense is much worse and much less plausible.

---

Still not voting on principle, because I’m not ready to end day without rereading/making D1 comments. But, darkdude is solidly in front.

[EmpTyger]

PP:

I will go so far as to say people who use "he's overdefensive" or "he's reactive" as a argument, are probably scum. This is because it is such a gray area -- where does defending yourself become overdefensive? Where does reacting to other people's scummy actions become reactive?

Both overdefensive and reactive can be suspicious, if either is used in a situation where a protown wouldn’t. The key is context. Don’t lose it.

---

vikingfan:
Talitha is making a good point about [199]- especially since you ignored the Cephrir/Yvonne interaction earlier in D1. What makes darkdude different from Cephrir?

---

QF:

Mozsuggs I dont feel like reading through all your recent posts just yet, I may go back to look over them for amusment at some stage.
I think your biggest flaw in this game has been the I know im innocent and if I say it enough with enough conviction people might believe me. We have no way what so ever to know your innocent on day one but we can judge this on how you play, your actions, votes, accusations, what you say in your posts etc.
<snip>

This didn’t sound like someone casting a lynch-1 vote on someone they thought was mafia. This sounded like someone saying goodbye to someone they knew were innoncent.

However- I’ll admit that the more I parse, the less sure I am, and while I *hate* second-guessing myself about instinctive reads, I just caught VoD’s [233] on my on my reread of D1, and that does ease some of my concerns.

<snip>
About Cephrir's whole 3 scum thing: I noticed it, but there are typically three scum in this size of a game, so it seems like an assumption one would hold true and state as fact.

Where’s this coming from? As far as I can tell, your experience with this size consists of this and 2 others, all of which are still in progress. How do you know what the typical number is?

---

darkdude:
No, I understand your defense perfectly. I happen to think you’re stretching it as a convenient excuse. Let me put it this way:

When D2 began, instead of trying to find mafia, you were instead seeing (a) if the nightkill could be traced to you and (b) what you could do to deflect it. Are you saying that, in the medium you usually play in, that is something that a protown player would do? If so, how on earth do you ever find mafia?

---

Cephrir:

<snip>
Okay, that's fine. Couldn't tell what you meant is all. And I would assume the mafia didn't bother because it's a bit weak as a sole means of determining someone is scum, and besides, they knew I was telling the truth. I was surprised no one else commented, as well.

Well, let’s not go so far as to dismiss it as “weak”. It wasn’t.

[EmpTyger]

windkirby:

emptyger - It seems as if you're exaggerating a bit on the darkdude thing. Townies don't want to get lynched either - it makes it pretty hard for them to win.

There’s a lot of theory that I honestly don’t think I want to delve into. But, the short answer is, no.
Mafia, if they are merely trying to avoid being lynched, can kill people at night, and they will eventually win.
Townspeople, if they are merely trying to avoid being lynched, can’t. If they don’t lynch mafia during the day, they will eventually lose.
(Yes, power roles do affect the calculus, although ultimately the fundamental conclusion is the same.)

I don't think darkdude's response to the "frame" as he called it, was that anti-town, especially since he seemed to look for some scum soon thereafter.

For the first 2 weeks of D2, it seemed that darkdude did anything but. First he said that no one was suspicious, and in particular he defended VoD. Then he reversed and said that VoD was suspicious, while still saying that no one else seemed suspicious. Then he voted zeddicus, but specified that it was for lurking, not for any suspicions.
What do you see differently in darkdude’s response?

---

darkdude:
[quote="quote="darkdude "]<snip>
Anyways, looking at the big picture, I notice a strange phenomenon.

As soon as zeddicus' replacement came in, everyone started defending against Tyger's questioning instead of searching for scum themselves. Tyger has the right to question to catch up on the game, but I don't know why everyone else is idling around. At least that's what seems to me.[/quote]
Be more specific. Who and what?

[EmpTyger]

Some tidbits from rereading D1

---

darkdude:

Yeah I guess you're right guys. This new lead seems much more promising to look into.

Yeah I read the whole damned paragraph. Seems like scum.

I don't think I'll vote just yet though. Also it could be just inexperience in general instead of scumming... a townie could freak out in a similar way.

How could anyone miss this post?

This is basically darkdude throwing in a little something to show that he has suspicions for windkirby and then covering his tracks by not voting and saying windkirby could be a townie. Maybe he already knows windkirby is a townie. Supporting a wagon from the sidelines but not committing yourself to it is a really scummy thing to do.

vote darkdude

Besides what Yvonne noticed, there’s something else strange here. You’re conceding that Cephrir was right about windkirby- but yet you’ve left your vote on Cephrir!

Also, regarding your “we seem to be delaying scum hunting”, I’ll repeat myself:

<snip>
Anyways, looking at the big picture, I notice a strange phenomenon.

As soon as zeddicus' replacement came in, everyone started defending against Tyger's questioning instead of searching for scum themselves. Tyger has the right to question to catch up on the game, but I don't know why everyone else is idling around. At least that's what seems to me.

Be more specific. Who and what?

---

VoD:
Any reason you are so concerned about a jester? Odd thing to have brought up even once much less repeatedly.

The posts seem to be dominated by 3 players so far would be nice to hear from some of the others in this game!

If you can remember, which 3 did you consider?

---

Talitha:

<snip>
Darkdude - I hate to try to lynch a newbie on the first day, but can't give out any free passes as this is a cut-throat game! Your reactions strike me as controlled rather than natural, and you're arguing about word use rather than why you're not scum.

vote: darkdude

...Dammit, after reading over his posts, I'm having second thoughts... He might not be scum. And he's new.

unvote: darkdude

<snip>

Specifically, what were the second thoughts you found?

---

Akonas:
What did you think of Cephrir’s 3-scum comment? It seems odd to me that, in your first post after it was mentioned, you ignore it.

---

vikingfan:
How come you ignored Cephrir’s, but said this to mozs:

2 scum? how on earth do you know that? 3 is generally accepted but there can always be more or less. but yes, there's generally MORE than two, but that's not a hard and fast rule.

Explain that very quickly because I don't like where you're going.

---

QF:

<snip>
I can change my vote when I see fit, but at this point, I see most reason for voting windkirby than anyone else (except maybe Cephrir, who I am quite suspicious of at the moment as well for being so dismissive).
<snip>

Could you explain this? This level of suspicion from you for Cephrir seems to come out of nowhere, and never really gets mentioned again.

On yet another reflection on VoD, I think that, if VoD were innocent and thought that mozs were guilty, he would have said something like, “if I say im innocent enough with enough conviction people might believe me”. Instead, VoD said “I know im innocent and if I say it enough with enough conviction people might believe me”. Which very subtly implies that he knew mozs was actually innocent. (I know, this is a bit overanalytical. But I just for some reason cannot let it go completely. This will probably not be my last reflection on the matter.)

[EmpTyger]

Feel better soon, Talitha!

[EmpTyger]

darkdude:

<snip>
Anyways, looking at the big picture, I notice a strange phenomenon.

As soon as zeddicus' replacement came in, everyone started defending against Tyger's questioning instead of searching for scum themselves. Tyger has the right to question to catch up on the game, but I don't know why everyone else is idling around. At least that's what seems to me.

Once more. I want you to name names. Who, specifically, do you feel has been idling around?

---

QF:
And what are your feelings about Cephrir now? High suspicion, moderate suspicion, low suspicion, no suspicion, something else? And why?

[EmpTyger]

It seems absurd, but I was reading up on some mafia theory that I’ve missed during my recent absence from the site, and I saw that supposedly it’s advantageous for millers to claim in advance. So, I’ll come forwards. I investigate as guilty. The flavor behind that is that I only need to survive until the end to win. It’s kind of weird but it sort of makes sense, since to balance it out I do get a vigilante kill I can make once per night.

---

QF/Cephrir:
I asked because I wanted to make sure that you 2 weren’t masons before I inquire further about your almost masonic interactions. You seem to be mutually saying as little as possible about each other.

Random question...if a cop gets replaced, does the replacement know who the other guy investigated and the results?

Yes. Not that this answer should be taken as any kind of indication of anything about my role.

[EmpTyger]

No, we're not masons. We just agree a lot for some reason.

Miller vig claim? Huh. That's.... bizarre. Claiming was probably the right thing to do though. And I'd say you should have kept the vig part to yourself, but... if you only said that you were a miller and tried to claim that later, nobody would believe you.

Oh wait, hold on a second. Miller vig, and you only need to survive to win? Way to claim SK... lol.

Vote: EmpTyger

Huh. You make a good point.

Vote: EmpTyger

[EmpTyger]

Hold on, I just reread my role, and it seems I missed a small detail. Apparently, all of that stuff I claimed is only true on April 1.

Unvote: EmpTyger

APRIL FOOLS

[EmpTyger]

After what happened the first time, haven't you learned not to joke-claim? I've been thinking you were a Jester for the last few hours... Heh.

Oh, I’ll admit to being a "Jester" for the past 24 hours. But no, it’s not my role. At least not this year

---

Akonas:

<snip>

Akonas: it's not the fact that you didn't like me, it's the fact that you felt the need to buddy up to Talitha in the process. So it's not OMGUS.

Fair enough.
<snip>

Akonas: it's not the fact that you didn't like me, it's the fact that you felt the need to buddy up to Talitha in the process. So it's not OMGUS.

Enh... I don't know about that; I was just saying that I liked where she was going. Take it as scummy if you like; I don't see it.
<snip>

Pick one?

---

VoD:
Your vote on me is a holdover from zeddicus. Assuming you are still satisfied with it, could you explain why?

---

vikingfan:
Don’t want this to get lost:

<snip>
I don't think darkdude's response to the "frame" as he called it, was that anti-town, especially since he seemed to look for some scum soon thereafter.

For the first 2 weeks of D2, it seemed that darkdude did anything but. First he said that no one was suspicious, and in particular he defended VoD. Then he reversed and said that VoD was suspicious, while still saying that no one else seemed suspicious. Then he voted zeddicus, but specified that it was for lurking, not for any suspicions.
What do you see differently in darkdude’s response?

---

QF/Cephrir:
I’m serious- the interaction between you 2 really makes me nervous. I’m rereading, looking for something to quantify it in some way.

[EmpTyger]

[There’s a typo in [538]: the section to windkirby was labeled to vikingfan. Hope that that didn’t confuse anyone.]

In terms of voting, I’m currently torn between darkdude and Cephrir, with varying amounts of feeling behind each. Although I would like to hear in again from Akonas, QF, and ideally Talitha. (Glad you’re feeling better!)

---

Cephrir:
I’m not worried about you being masons- I’m worried about one or both of you being mafia.

---

windkirby:
Okay, thanks for clarifying.

[EmpTyger]

QF:

<snip>
@EmpTyger: If it seems as though Cephrir and I are buddying up, why are you suspicious of Cephrir and not of me? It's fairly obvious why darkdude.

The Cephrir-you interaction isn’t the only factor influencing how I will vote. (Cephrir’s 3-mafia slip > your early D1 freakout.) I feel that there’s more against him, so if I’m going to be voting someone over that, it’s going to be him rather than you. If you really want, you can commit some blindingly obviously antitown actions, and I’ll be willing to recalculate.

[EmpTyger]

Cephrir:

<snip>
I toned it down a bit on D2 because, well, D1 is D1. On D1, you sometimes need to be aggressive to get reactions out of people and/or to get things to actually happen. I also am not as sure about my suspects right now as I was about moz.

But this *is* contradictory. If you aren’t sure about your list, then should you be aggressive so that “things actually happen”? Especially if you’re less sure on D1 than D2. Because, there’s a big problem with this: Akonas.

<snip>

I keep thinking about the post where he said "I don't know who to suspect now, everyone looks town." That kind of post always sets off my scumdar. When people "don't know what to do!!!!!1111" For a variety of reasons, I don't like this argument.
1)None of us really know what to do... we're just pushing people to try to figure it out. So... why even say this? It's like you're trying to act town wihtout helping.

Not like that! Sheesh. Of course none of us know for sure, unless we're cops with a guilty; I obviously meant that I didn't know who to vote for. You'll notice that 2 pages later, I came up with a scumlist and voted based on it. If I was acting like I didn't know who to vote for for a substantial amount of time, I could understand your suspicion. But that wasn't the case. Also, you refer to my not knowing what to do as an "argument"; it wasn't. I just needed to reread, and I did, problem solved.
<snip>

Akonas has been consistently highly in the top 2 spots in your list today, yet you’ve done almost nothing against him. You accuse him in [271] of quietly voting mozs and then reversing himself, but in the same post you quickly add that you’re now “less suspicious of those voting for VoD”. In [440] you say that Akonas is high on your suspect list, but when pressed, in [449], you can’t really give any reasons. And yet despite Akonas being the only one on your suspect list at the time, you’re not voting him- in fact, you’ve never voted him. You finally do explain with your list [461], but then you vote *zeddicus*. And after that vote is invalidated and retracted when he was replaced, and despite a couple others turning their attention to Akonas, you barely follow up, and quickly drop that line.

I agree with PP. This just doesn’t gibe with the rest of your play. I think I’m ready for a

Vote: Cephrir

.

---

Akonas:
Cephrir’s consistently been highly suspicious of you. What do you think of Cephrir?

---

VoD:
Interesting theory regarding Akonas-darkdude. How would vikingfan fit in to your hypothesis?

---

darkdude:

<snip>
Does throwing around potential clues not help? When I stated that I noticed the phenomenon, I did not expect anything to come out of it, but I decided to say it anyways because it can't hurt, and could POTENTIALLY be helpful.

I mean, it's not as if everything you say is helpful either. Did you expect that some of your points would be refuted? If so why did you say it in the first place?

Seems to me you're trying to make a nonsensical case based on nothing.

Observation + analysis; it’s not either/or. Simply saying that “everyone is doing something” may be an excellent observation, but it doesn’t excuse you for shirking analysis. Because an observation like that is useless without analysis. I mean, are you going to accuse “everyone”? Vote “everyone”? Lynch “everyone”?

You’ve gone through much of the day avoiding naming names. That’s not helpful for the town, and it’s an easy way for antitowns to slide by. Because they can maintain an illusion of contribution by providing “helpful observations”, which by themselves are useless in terms of *catching* antitowns.

[EmpTyger]

darkdude:
I think you’re relying on your new-ness as a defense, and you’re doing it in such a way that makes me strongly suspect that you’re not doing it innocently.

You clearly know what types of things to look for. D1 you were pointing out QF’s “scum bandwagoning”, Yvonne’s “baseless accusations” and “directing attention”, and the holes in mozs’s defense. And then earlier D2 you deduced that you were being framed, and how to make your defense most plausible. And you’ve also pointed out VoD’s taking a deciding vote less than seriously, and the distinction between voting for a claim rather than a lynch, and you’ve lurkerprodded zeddicus. And you’re especially able to play quite fine when it comes to defending yourself, or when you’ve attacked 2 players who, as it turns out, are innocent (that is, Yvonne and mozs; though also from *my* point of view, since *I* know zeddicus’s innocent).

But then every so often you lapse into this unhelpful cluelessness. You quickly resort to a claiming unfamiliarity with the site, and you just make everything out to be so much more hopelessly complicated than it actually is, that you can’t possibly express suspicions.

Townspeople must try to find mafia.

There’s not necessarily a right and a wrong way to do so- and there are certainly methods particular to mafiascum that I admit you could be unfamiliar with. But there are too many eyebrow-raising times when I just don’t see you *trying*, when you clearly are capable of doing so.

---

Cephrir:

<snip>
Just because he was the highest on my suspect list means I have to vote him? I wasn't necessarily certain enough to vote, y'know.

No- and that wasn’t my point.

<snip>
After a reread, I decided that pursuing zeddicus was a better idea, yes. Akonas is still second on my list, along with darkdude, which has been the case ever since. I also didn't vote because I wasn't sure which of the two was scummier, but dd's play has gotten ever-so-slightly better since then. Since we've gotten most everything we can out of darkdude, anyway, I would be pressuring Akonas at the moment, but I have more pressing issues to deal with (i.e. Pink Puppy being scum).

My point is that, for someone you’re allegedly so suspicious of, you haven’t shown the same kind of aggressive play towards Akonas which you’ve had towards most others. If you legitimately weren’t certain, then why didn’t you aggressively follow up? Like you’ve done with windkirby, mozs, zeddicus, darkdude, and PP? Instead, you’ve found reason after reason to avoid aggressively pressuring someone *despite* the fact that you’ve consistently stated you’re suspicious of him.
Not voting is only a small part of it. Don’t pretend it’s the only part.

---

vikingfan:
It was a typo, sorry- didn’t notice it until [546]. Yes, that was intended for windkirby, not you.

[EmpTyger]

I still like my vote of Cephrir. With so many not voting I’d rather hear where thevampireofdusseldorf, QuantumFruit, windkirby, and vikingfan weigh in, but I could join a darkdude wagon if the Cephrir wagon doesn't get rolling.

[EmpTyger]

Cephrir:

and then states that he isn't sure how to proceed

...for all of two seconds. I have no idea why everyone is making a huge thing out of this; dd had no suspects, like, forever, but I'm the one getting attacked for some reason.
<snip>

Who is attacking you who isn’t also attacking darkdude?

(As far as your “feeling” about Akonas, it’s falling squarely in my “too little too late” box.)

[EmpTyger]

darkdude:

<snip>
Only the last part is kind of weird:

Or if you can't find anything, maybe put it to rest.

That could be interpreted as "if you can't find evidence, don't suspect it anymore" which is weird considering that a gut feeling remains a gut feeling BECAUSE of the fact that it lacks evidence.

I think it’s the interpretation that’s weird, not Akonas’s message. Akonas is essentially telling windkirby (et al) that if he can’t find tangible evidence for X, maybe start looking for a Y. Or, more informally, put up or shut up.

---

Cephrir:

Cephrir:

<snip>
dd had no suspects, like, forever, but I'm the one getting attacked for some reason.
<snip>

Who is attacking you who isn’t also attacking darkdude?
<snip>

Well, PP has sure been all over me for it, much moreso. And there's probably someone.
<snip>

Guess again. PP is *voting* darkdude. Do you have any other empty accusations to toss out?

---

Akonas:
Again: Cephrir’s consistently been highly suspicious of you. What do you think of Cephrir?

[EmpTyger]

To be perfectly honest, right now I don’t feel like doing hypotheticals multiple steps deep. I don’t have anything I’m close to certain about, and there’s a lot more possibilities than impossibilities at this point. But, some thoughts:

Temporarily assuming Cephrir is one of a 3 member mafia:
The biggest red arrow points to Akonas. The way he’s *said* he’s highly suspicious of Akonas, while not doing anything substantial against him, seems classic. From there, no one person jumps out significantly as a third, but there are several who could fit. Maybe VoD or Talitha. darkdude- honestly, I’m skeptical of him being with Cephrir/Akonas, which is the primary reason I’m hesitating against him right now. It’s by no means impossible- Cephrir was instrumental in extricating darkdude earlier today. But, there are, to me, better, I think.

Temporarily assuming that Cephrir is mafia, but Akonas is innocent:
darkdude jumps a lot higher in suspicion. I don’t see PP being with Cephrir in any case. I’m going back and forth on Cephrir/QF.


I think I want to consider separately what happened to the bandwagon against VoD at the start of the day. In retrospect, that looks interesting.

[EmpTyger]

Talitha:

<snip>
Emp: I just read your post 633 again. Can you explain why you think that Darkdude could be mafia with Cephrir, but not with Cephrir & Akonas?
Oh - nevermind, I think I see it now.

My opinion is that darkdude is scum... but IF he turns out to be innocent I'll be looking closely at Akonas. So I think I get where Emp is coming from.

Yes- it’s the specific combination of Cephrir/Akonas/darkdude that just doesn’t seem to work. Look at the last 3 votecounts, look at the votes. *Everyone* else has been consistently voting for 1 of those 3. *Someone* should be getting desperate. Akonas in particular I can’t imagine would be distancing himself from *both* of his comafia’s wagons when there isn’t any other third option. The thing VoD picked up on in [645] is interesting in this light also. (This is incidentally also why I wanted to take a closer look at the VoD wagon, and I suppose also the zeddicus lurkerwagon. Need more data.)

So I could accept either Cephrir/Akonas or Cephrir/darkdude, but I have a hard time with borh. Maybe Occam’s Razor, and they’re just circling the drain- but I’ll wait until 2/3 are confirmed before further speculating that all 3 are mafia. For now, though, three’s no reason to guess about Akonas and darkdude when I feel most confident about Cephrir.

(If Cephrir isn’t being lynched today, then darkdude, being second-most suspicious independently of Cephrir, is my next target. But I’m honestly increasingly having second thoughts about him. And I am not ready to give up on Cephrir yet.)

---

Cephrir:

I don’t have anything I’m close to certain about

darkdude- honestly, I’m skeptical of him being with Cephrir/Akonas, which is the primary reason I’m hesitating against him right now.

If you're not certain about anything, why would you not be suspicious of dd because you don't think he's scum with me? Basing arguments on pairings when no scum are dead is not helpful.

You're also wrong, but I may as well give up on convincing you on that, apparently, since you and PP don't seem to feel like listening to reason.

You might understand me better if you don’t take my phrases out of context. VoD asked me for possibilities regarding pairings, so I gave him some. Which I prefaced by saying:

To be perfectly honest, right now I don’t feel like doing hypotheticals multiple steps deep. I don’t have anything I’m close to certain about, and there’s a lot more possibilities than impossibilities at this point. But, some thoughts:

Temporarily assuming<snip>

I’m not voting based on pairings- you’re my top suspect independently. I wouldn’t vote darkdude under the assumption that you are guilty and Akonas innocent any more than I would vote Akonas under the assumption that you are guilty and darkdude innocent.

I *am* suspicious of darkdude, independently of you. But I’m more suspicious of *you*. So I’m starting there.

---

darkdude:
I think you’re correct that QF kind of overreacted to your thing on Talitha- but I think you’re more overreacting to her overreaction. However…

---

QF:
…taking a closer look at you, now. You don’t seem to be particularly suspicious of anyone other than darkdude, yet you’re not voting him. Is there anyone else? If not, why are you refraining from voting?

[EmpTyger]

If no one seconds my Cephrir vote within 24 hours, I will switch to darkdude.

[EmpTyger]

windkirby:
Did you vote Cephrir because you’re actually suspicious of him, or to stop me from voting darkdude? If because you’re suspicious, then why exactly?

[EmpTyger]

windkirby:
I want an answer to this. Did you vote Cephrir because you’re actually suspicious of him, or to stop me from voting darkdude? If because you’re suspicious, then why exactly?

[EmpTyger]

When darkdude and Cephrir’s alignments become known, windkirby is going to be mighty interesting to look at. And PP, too, although for the opposite reason- that dog did not bark.

---

windkirby:
I wasn’t voting Cephrir because I didn’t want to vote darkdude. I was voting Cephrir because I wanted to lynch him. So if that’s not going to happen:

unvote: Cephrir, vote: darkdude.

[EmpTyger]

I will probably not be able to post until after the weekend.

---

PP:
What do you think of the fact that darkdude and windkirby are the other 2 voting QF? For me at least, the list of those who are voting QF is making me relatively happy that I’m not…

---

darkdude:

When darkdude and Cephrir’s alignments become known, windkirby is going to be mighty interesting to look at. And PP, too, although for the opposite reason- that dog did not bark.

So what is your plan if I turn up town?

Hey, I was the guy who really wanted a Cephrir lynch today. vikingfan’s a better one to ask.

[EmpTyger]

I'll post more later tonight, but quickly:
darkdude:

Well if you want to lynch someone to get information then you should have a plan so that you can benefit town based on the revelation of the role.

If you can't think of any benefits, wouldn't it be better not to lynch the person? (benefits in the case that the player turns up town, not including when the player is obviously scummy)

I'm not voting based on chance or expectation of information. I'm voting based on who is most suspicious. [Or, in this case, who is most suspicious of those who can accumulate enough votes for a lynch.]

[EmpTyger]

No lynch is not the right play. Moreover, we should not be waiting until the last minute to have a lynch target, so that they have a chance to make a final defense/claim.

Akonas, Crub, VoD have been seriously lurking. (And QF, but she’s promising to post later today.)
Akonas has not posted anywhere on site.
wirdkirby has been posting extensively on site, but not in this thread. He has however expressed a preference for his vote.
VoD has been posting extensively on site, but not in this thread. And not only is he not voting, but there is no indication for who he is suspicious of. This is bad. Very bad. So bad that I’m half-contemplating trying to start a late bandwagon against him.

---

Akonas/Cephrir:
Do you have anything further to add against your respective suspects? If not, then who between darkdude and QF would you vote?

[EmpTyger]

darkdude:
That’s 4 voting, plus VoD willing to. (And Akonas, in his last post.) I suggest you claim.

---

Cephrir:

I could go over Akonas' posts between my case and now, but I can see that that wagon isn't going to happen today. If both of us are still alive tomorrow, I'll worry about it then. Between dd and QF I would obviously prefer to lynch darkdude, who has been a suspect of mine all day if not quite a voteworthy one, to someone I find protown. Besides, if we don't lynch darkdude today then we'll probably do it tomorrow and I doubt he'll magically start playing better. I'd want to lynch him even if he did, anyway.
<snip>

I’d rather have your argument against Akonas on record today. Mostly for the possibility of you and Akonas being mafia together- I would rather you 2 not get a chance to coordinate first.

---

VoD:
That is not a good excuse.

[EmpTyger]

Unvote: darkdude.

I still am comfortable with him as today’s lynch, but I want to make sure Cephrir has enough time to present his case against Akonas today.

[EmpTyger]

Vote: darkdude

to prevent possible deadline shenanigans.

On the off chance I should die overnight, please make sure that Cephrir is tomorrow held responsible for, among everything else, his audacious stalling tactic today. No WIFOM-free-pass based on some theoretical possibility of being framed; he would have plenty enough to answer for with me alive.

[EmpTyger]

Cephrir:
You’ve often said you find Akonas suspicious. But you' never show any inclination on following up- I shouldn’t have to force someone to present a case on someone they find suspicious! Now, you’ve [finally] said that you don’t know why you find him suspicious- but the thing is, you never have wanted to find out why. You aren’t aggressive against him in the way you have been towards others. It just feels insincere from the top to bottom.

---

darkdude:
This is more for the rest of the town’s benefit than yours.

<snip>

If we are lynching darkdude, what kind of information are we hoping to achieve?

This is what I asked Tyger. He originally said that it would be easier for town to hunt scum if me or Cephir's alignments were known. I asked back what conclusions would he draw if I turn up town, and he refused to answer. Therefore, he is my second suspect, next to QF.

My primary motivation for voting you is not to gain information about others, but rather over suspicious I have of you.
Regardless of your alignment, Cephrir needs attention.
If you happen to be innocent, then I really like my Cephrir-Akonas theory.
If you happen to be guilty, then windkirby and PP deserve scrutiny.
None of this is anything I haven’t said before.

[EmpTyger]

Well played, mafia. Thanks all and mod for my first game back.
For what it’s worth, here’s what I sent to Crub after reading I had died:

Glad someone listened to me about Cephrir. The other 2 are going to be trickier, though. I don't think it's windkirby or PP, but the rest is almost a toss-up. I'm thinking Akonas-VoD, but Talitha is wicked tricksy, and there's plenty to point to QF. Cephrir was playing really confidentally, which worries me. But this looks winnable, provided the town doesn't fall for the fake-cop claim. Looks like it'll continue to be an exciting game!

The final day I was hoping that someone would remember Cephrir’s slip, and realize that there were originally 3 mafia. And with no one claiming vigilante (which shocked me- I had thought the setup doc+doc+vig), that meant a SK killed Cephrir. So, there were 2 mafia + SK left, so the only hope the final day would be to lynch mafia. (Which was practically impossible: the mafia should be able to force a no-lynch by voting first. And it’s unlikely that the town and SK will be able to agree on a lynchtarget before that happens, since the town can’t tell the difference between mafia and SK, and the SK can’t tell the difference between mafia and town. Realistically, the only hope was for the mafia to misguess the SK.)

---

Talitha/Jenter:
Were you worried about vigilante+SK? I was wondering why you didn’t immediately start the final day with 2 votes for no lynch. When did you figure out who killed Cephrir?

When darkdude replaced in D3 and accused QF and windkirby, you must have done jumping jacks.

---

Cephrir:

I was planning to claim Cop D3 with one investigation being an innocent on QF; hence the buddying. I knew I wouldn't likely survive the game, but it still sucked dying to an SK I hadn't known existed =/

Heh. I knew with 2 full docs from the start, there was no way there could be a cop. I was really hoping someone would claim cop while I was alive. Though would have been a waste with you, since I was already certain.
It was so frustrating that I could only get 1 other person to vote you- well done on fooling the rest of the town.

---

windkirby:
You played pretty well- I wish we had gotten on the same page D2, things might have gone differently. I don’t blame you for attacking darkdude D3; he was playing way too erratically.

---

PP:
Just curious- when you killed Cephrir, did you think him innocent, or guilty, or did it not really matter? (And again N3- were you aiming for town or mafia?)
If the town had played better, I think you probably would have won. I never thought you mafia, and there seemed to be better choices for SK.

[EmpTyger]

Talitha:
Ah, makes sense.
According to the wiki, a paranoid doctor protects and roleblocks their target. I guess to prevent the doctors mutually protecting each other. Don’t see any reason to not reveal that at least on death, though.

---

darkdude:

Well, at least I was correct about there being 3 scum

If you really thought there were 3 scum, why did you push for no-lynch, then? I was actually assuming that’s what gave Talitha pause enough to unvote the final day. I was quite surprised to discover that you were the innocent in the final 4. (Of course, I was wrong about you D2- but even wirdkirby, who was right about your innocence D2, thought you were guilty at the end.)