Mini Normal 2174 | Korean Pop Music | Mafia Wins!

[Trendall]

Hello everybody

[Trendall]

Bob got called out in the last game with me for only saying the word "fellow" in scum games. No one believed it at the time and we limmed the person that said it but they were right :/

Couldn't somebody have just searched Bob's games to find out whether that's true or not?

[Trendall]

the question is more why did you not vote in general?

By not voting and seeing how people react to that, I am participating in the beginning stages of the game just as much as anybody else is.

[Trendall]

t doesn't seem to be doing much

How do you know? I could have figured out who all the mafia are by now for all you know.

[Trendall]

If that's the case I prefer games where people don't teeter on the edge of throwing

What on earth are you talking about?

[Trendall]

Why would you not say anything if you have all the mafia figured out?

I haven't figured out who any of the mafia are.

[Trendall]

Agree with what Noraa says in post #88, I thought the same thing too before she said it.

VOTE: Glitch

[Trendall]

Is this combined sheeping, iioa, AND OMGUS all at one time? And only 90 posts in? Hot damn!

Omgus is when you vote somebody

because

they voted for you, whereas I am voting for you for some other reason. If somebody says something and I agree with it because I already thought the same thing myself, that is not unreasonable, because the alternative is that as soon as somebody votes for one person, I'm then not allowed to also vote for that same person myself, because if I do I 'sheeped' them apparently.

[Trendall]

If I was 'omgusing' then why did I never vote for the other guy when he voted me?

[Trendall]

It feels more like you thought of this reason when asked. Have you done this in any of your previous town games?

Yes, virtually all of them as far as I can remember. Certainly all the ones I've played this year. A person can easily look this up.

Which part of Nora's post do you agree with?

If I ever make a post myself about something that happened either in a past game or earlier on in the game I'm in, I'm

always

going to go back and double check what I've said to make sure I haven't misremembered anything, because either way as town or mafia it's going to reflect badly on me if I say something and then somebody else checks back and finds a contradiction. I'd do this in real life too, like I'll reread an e-mail like twenty times before I send it. I wouldn't have thought that this is massively uncommon and trying to paint this sort of natural human behaviour as somebody 'under pressure' doesn't scan. Plus as Noraa says, it was clear she didn't check back for the same reason that Glitch said she did, that was the part of her post I agreed with.

[Trendall]

Games where I don’t post a random vote in my first post as town are Newbies 977, 989, 1024, 1053, 1066, 1084, 1793, 1893, and 2035. So I’ve been doing exactly this for about ten years. Which again, anybody could have easily looked up. Unless they didn’t actually care and just wanted to cast suspicion on me, I guess.

In games 1075 and 1094, I place a random vote for people who don’t have avatars, but both of these games are from 2011 and I wouldn’t care about this sort of thing nowadays.

[Trendall]

Why didn't you just say you do it all the time and quote your games?

I just did

[Trendall]

Yes which there is nothing wrong with.

[Trendall]

^ this refers to #124 whoops

[Trendall]

Do you consider it AI to cast suspicion on players in the first 5 pages without any reason to suspect them?

Sometimes, each case is different.

[Trendall]

Are you saying that you only random vote as scum? That would be a pretty lame way to play.

No, I've only drawn a mafia sided role on this site once. And in that game I never placed a random vote at the start of the game. Why would I ever do what you're suggesting?

[Trendall]

Sorry but Glitch is all rigid-thinking and acronyms, his analysis is a nightmare, he's probably mafia anyway, there's no way that I'm answering any of those questions that he asked me.

[Trendall]

If Glitch and whoever the other player were think that I 'contrived a reason' for why I didn't place a random vote in, then for what

actual

reason do they think I do it exactly?

[Trendall]

Please explain how me using these acronyms = scum?

I didn't say that. These are just leading questions coming from a mafia.

[Trendall]

This guy has no idea how to find mafia whatsoever.

[Trendall]

a contrived reason

It wasn't 'contrived'. If you perceive it this way then there's nothing I can do about that, there's nothing I can do to actually engage you.

[Trendall]

If he truly thought I were scum, he would engage me, ask me question, poke around, and then case me. But he doesn't.

So this is the crux of the problem for me, the guy's way of playing this game is going 'mafia act like this, and town act like this', and in reality people act in all different ways irrespective of their alignment due to personality styles and play styles and whatever else. So I know already, if I don't 'act right', he's going to think I'm mafia, and if I do make any attempt to 'act right' he'll accuse me of contriving reasons and so forth, he's completely inconsistent with what he wants from me. So I'm just stuck here, aren't I? There's nothing I can do about it other than hope that if I get lynched the other players in the game are capable of interpreting what's happened.

[Trendall]

But then when called on it you needed to look like you were town.

Again, no I didn't, I just needed to say what I actually think, and then it's this guy's responsibility to be able to interpret what I think correctly and how or if that relates to my alignment, which he has failed to do.

[Trendall]

1) If you're not being cooperative, then what are you doing? This is mafia. This is a game where you need to figure out if X, Y and Z are scum and then get A, B, C, D, and E to vote for X, Y and Z. If you find X, Y and Z but Y is also making A through E think you are scum, you've effectively done nothing. I honestly smell a lot of miselim bait on your wagon which is why I am super apprehensive on my vote on you. However, you are not helpful to town at the moment.

2) Why does that make Glitch scum? Because they're wrong? Isn't that the exact same point that you're making? Giving up isn't exactly a towntell in anyone's book FYI.

Everybody knows that this is very early on in the game where little of any significance happens, so if somebody is starting to talk to me about how I haven't done reams and reams of analysis yet, then that is suspect because everybody knows that nobody's reads are massively serious right now necessarily. If something happens that I think is interesting then I'll pick up on it, and as it happens I think that nothing relevant has happened so far in this game other than I think that Flubbernugget is more likely to be town, and that it's unlikely that all of the other players who jumped on voting me are town too.

Glitch's questions are just...I don't know how to explain but this isn't how you get information out of people. Watch a couple of episodes of Columbo or something to see how it's done properly. His questions are very much putting words in my mouth, bombarding me with stuff left right and centre, trying to catch me out. If you're questioning somebody with the intention of making them slip up, like you've already decided what the answers are going to be as he obviously has done, then the person will slip up, it's pointless, it's a waste of time. Like he's certain his technique works, I'll flip town, and he'll just carry on game after game doing the exact same thing without ever evaluating where he made a mistake.

He's already said to me 'if you were town you would have done this instead'. So if he already knows everything about what I would do in a given situation and I have already breached that, then what possible reason would there be to respond to his points further? Then there's all this theatrical stuff about 'oh this should be the definition of omgus on the wiki'. If he thinks something I've said is 'contrived' then there's nothing I can do about that other than say 'no it wasn't'. Saying something is 'contrived' is nothing, it's not an argument, it's just a person looking at a post and going 'I don't like the look of this because of a gut feeling', how could you possibly argue that further? He says that I am 'panicky' and 'feel pressured' which again, I can say 'I'm clearly not' and then we're at a stalemate. You can't reason with a person if that's the extent of their arguments.

And again, with your question 'why does that make him scum?', I never said it did, so again that's a leading question trying to paint is as though I made a bad argument as to him being mafia when I never made such an argument at all. Like I say, his original question against Noraa was unreasonable, I thought that made him slightly more likely to be mafia than anybody else at that point given that I have no other reads, hence my vote is on him for the time being. It's not like a strong read, I don't care about it very much, but apparently if I don't vote for anybody then everybody complains about that too. As for the motivations for his arguing against me, that could go either way so I wouldn't present any of that as being in favour of him being mafia. I'm just saying that either way, nobody should be looking at his arguments against me and thinking 'yeah they're good arguments we should eliminate Trendall'.

Nothing I have done is tantamount to 'giving up' and I couldn't care less what is and isn't a 'towntell' lol.

[Trendall]

598 to be exact!

[Trendall]

do you 2 have a messy history together or do you not know glitch?

Haven't got a clue who he is

[Trendall]

I thought mini games didn't have third parties such as serial killers in them? If that's true then I'd rather eliminate somebody today because I always like an odd number of players to be alive during the day.

[Trendall]

Why does he have to be scum for being wrong?

I never said that he did, I said that on the basis of that element of it it could go either way. I said that the reason I was voting for him was that it's a very light vote based on the fact that I found his point against Noraa unreasonable. If you like, you can look at it as the random vote that ppl were complaining about me not making at the start of the game.

you're admitting that you are just flailing.

I don't know what you mean by 'flailing' exactly so I'm not sure I can 'admit' to something if I'm not even sure what it is. I haven't used this word at all. As I understand the word 'flailing' then I haven't done anything resembling that, I've just sorta...dispassionately addressed the points that have come up against me.

So why would Glitch be held to a higher standard? You said yourself that there's nothing happening because it's early game. Are you content with that? Why can't Glitch just be creating something to talk about to get a lead? Have you never asked questions before in a game to just try and get things moving? I just don't really understand everything in context.

He isn't, I'm doing exactly the same as anybody else is doing in the game, generating content early on in the game. I understand that everybody else is doing that too and that their reads might change, it's not a big deal.

I can't figure out if your reason for wanting me shot is because you think I'm mafia or for some other reason?

[Trendall]

I did, I said that if it

was

contrived then what's the actual reason for my not voting at the day start?

[Trendall]

For what other reason would I do it in every game that you can think of?

[Trendall]

Somebody does something in a mafia game and their reason for doing it is because they want to see how other people react to that. I have a hard time figuring out why anybody would find that contrived or unbelievable?

[Trendall]

If it's a random vote, everybody comes into these games knowing that there are going to be random votes placed on them at the start of the game, it's expected so there's no actual 'pressure' or whatever being applied. My not voting thing catches people off guard and from how they react to it I get to see a lot about what their playstyle is, most particularly whether they the kind of person who will just vote for anybody who does anything out-of-the-ordinary, or whether they're going to analyse in some other way. This information is useful to me in figuring out the motivations behind players' arguments later on in the game.

For example with you, I know now that you think 'if you were mafia you would do this' and other such things as though every single person acts in exactly the same way in the same situation across the board. Therefore if you have some similar argument against somebody else later on in the game and I think 'this is a bad argument', I know that I have no particular reason to suspect you off the back of it and it's just the kind of thing you would normally say as town.

[Trendall]

'if you were town you would do this'* rather

[Trendall]

-

I am responding and engaging, you just don't like the way I'm doing it.

As to how I would sort players, I don't think 'mafia act like this and town act like this' at all. My thing with deception spotting generally is you need to establish what a person's baseline behaviour is first, what their sort of go-to behaviours and attitudes are in any given situation. And then in a mafia game if a person starts to deviate from what I'd expect from them, then I start to question that.

To give an example, in that last newbie game, one of the players presented a meta argument against one of the other players. However I'd already checked their post history and found them saying 'meta is garbage'. So if they think that meta is garbage, why are they suddenly using it to defend themselves in this game? There's no way that a form of argument that they themselves don't believe is a valid form of argument unless they were fabricating it, so you know that person is mafia.

I take things on a case by case basis like that, I would off the back of that game codify it like 'oh if someone presents a meta argument they are scum', that makes no sense to me. It's hard to articulate why I don't deal in 'tells' as such, but it's like, there's a lot of variation in how different people respond to the same situation. In real life, when somebody gets accused of something, one person might get defensive, another might stay cool and collected, one might start offering a logical argument, one might start offering an emotional argument and so on. And then you have to sit and decipher all of this, like 'how would the person normally act and are they deviating from that right now?'. So to me if someone says like 'oh you are being emotional and this is a tell, mafia would try to make an emotive argument here' then it just makes no sense.

Don't apologise at all, I'm having a nice time!

[Trendall]

I'm going to unvote Glitch actually because he's clearly like, trying different approaches to try to communicate with me and actually get stuff out of me. You would have thought that if he was mafia he would continue piling on 'pressure' or whatever rather than sorta backing off in the way that he did there.

Honestly I have no other reads on anybody at this point other than like I say, I had a slight town read on Flubbernugget. I'm sorry but if that's the situation, that's the situation. Most of the time I find all of day one null, and this is no exception.

So Glitch, help me out here. Hypothetically if I flipped town, what would be your opinion of the people who are voting for me so far. Because intuitively to me it feels as though it's unlikely that they're all town but I can't decipher between them?

UNVOTE: Glitch

[Trendall]

Oh yeah totally, I get that, I noticed you read through the thread and reply to things as you read them.

[Trendall]

Oh, and he.

[Trendall]

I have other user names online, and there's one where ppl always assume it's a girl and call me she, and I'd never correct anybody on it, it makes no difference to me, hence why I don't have it listed. But like please nobody get hung up on that.

[Trendall]

-

I am responding and engaging, you just don't like the way I'm doing it.

As to how I would sort players, I don't think 'mafia act like this and town act like this' at all. My thing with deception spotting generally is you need to establish what a person's baseline behaviour is first, what their sort of go-to behaviours and attitudes are in any given situation. And then in a mafia game if a person starts to deviate from what I'd expect from them, then I start to question that.

To give an example, in that last newbie game, one of the players presented a meta argument against one of the other players. However I'd already checked their post history and found them saying 'meta is garbage'. So if they think that meta is garbage, why are they suddenly using it to defend themselves in this game? There's no way that

a person would present

a form of argument that they themselves don't believe is a valid form of argument unless they were fabricating it, so you know that person is mafia.

I take things on a case by case basis like that, I

wouldn't

off the back of that game codify it like 'oh if someone presents a meta argument they are scum', that makes no sense to me. It's hard to articulate why I don't deal in 'tells' as such, but it's like, there's a lot of variation in how different people respond to the same situation. In real life, when somebody gets accused of something, one person might get defensive, another might stay cool and collected, one might start offering a logical argument, one might start offering an emotional argument and so on. And then you have to sit and decipher all of this, like 'how would the person normally act and are they deviating from that right now?'. So to me if someone says like 'oh you are being emotional and this is a tell, mafia would try to make an emotive argument here' then it just makes no sense.

Don't apologise at all, I'm having a nice time!

Sorry, noticed some typo sorta errors, I guess I got really into the game and forgot to proofread this properly or something.

[Trendall]

I want to know why you think grilling people isn't a reasonable way to sort and find scum, and if casing and interrogating isn't your style, that's fine, but then how would you advocate sorting players and moving the game forward?

Again, I am literally doing it right now. I now have a lot of information about you based entirely on your reaction to my not random voting or not explaining it correctly or whatever, and off the back of that I have determined that you're most likely town. I just need to not vote another 11 times and see how each other player reacts to it and shazam, I've solved the game.

If someone does something I don't understand I'll ask them a question about it, it's not about that I disagree with 'interrogation' or whatever, it's about how it's done. You to some extent conceded yourself that your way of doing it just made me not want to engage with you. For example, if I'd identified that a player was particularly sensitive or they were a new player or something like that, I wouldn't go in hard with a load of questions and accusations because I know full well that that's going to make that player act erratically, and they might just get fed up and replace out or whatever and none of the information I get from that is useful. So it's not that I wouldn't 'interrogate' someone, I would just never use your specific method of doing it.

If I were to 'interrogate' somebody I would rather have them being question under no 'pressure', because then the person is reacting at their most natural. Which again, if I'm trying to establish people's baseline behaviours and so on...trying to actively get reactions out of them is not going to help me with that at all.

Also once I think a player is more likely to be mafia, I will generally stop engaging with them directly because I know they can twist it or whatever and will instead start to try to appeal to other town members. That's why to some extent, if you're arguing that I'm mafia and then asking me questions I would just think 'why do you care if you think I'm mafia anyway, surely you think I'm just going to lie?'. Basically I do everything completely backwards compared to how you do it.

[Trendall]

This is not; it's blatantly inaccurate. You frequently refused to address points I made against you and instead chose to discredit me as a player instead of addressing the actual argument. That has changed as of today but yesterday this was not the case.

It's not about whether I was 'flailing' or not though. This person said to me that I 'admitted' that I was 'flailing' when I did not 'admit' to any such thing.

[Trendall]

I think your response was sketchy at best when you were questioned on why you didn't vote.

Nobody has managed to explain

why

it's sketchy though other than 'I think that's contrived' which isn't close to an argument. Again, to reiterate, I did something, and my reason for doing it was because people have to generate some sort of content in some way at the start of the game in order to ensure other people also generate content off the back of it and therefore you have stuff to read and determine alignments from.

[Trendall]

What makes you think this

The fact that you said it in some other post

If he truly thought I were scum, he would engage me, ask me question, poke around, and then case me.

You presume to know what I would do in any given situation.

[Trendall]

You've only got to read them. I had to actually sit and write them.

D: D: D:

[Trendall]

[6] - Why don't you care what is and isn't a towntell? Sorting town is just as important as sorting scum. Process of elimination can lead you straight to the mafia.

You've misinterpreted me here, it's not about 'towntells', I don't care about 'tells' generally for reasons I gave in post 255.

The player in question I was referring to seemed to think that it was my responsibility to like actively towntell or something. It's the responsibility of the other players to interpret my behaviour correctly, it's not my responsibility to 'act correctly' in accordance to their own personal understanding of how a town player behaves vs. how a mafia player behaves - I'd have no way of knowing what that is.

If a player I think is mafia flips town I wouldn't want to be like 'that's your fault for acting scummy', I would be like 'that's my mistake, I misread the situation'.

What they said to me was ridiculous because they were like...trying to give me advice as to how to look more town or something like that? But I'm not trying to actively act like town, I would never do that, that would just confuse things because that's what mafia are trying to do. I'm just sorta like...playing the game how I play it, and this is outside what that player is used to.

[Trendall]

while you have adopted this way of scumhunting and evaluating players, it doesn't mean that it is the only way to sort players.

Oh, I never said it was, it's just the only one I know how to do lol

[Trendall]

What I can't reason with is somebody saying 'this is contrived' or somebody saying 'if you were town you would do this' and stuff such as this, for reasons I've already explained.

[Trendall]

Because it's like 'no it's not' or 'no I wouldn't' and that's the end of it. I can't present a good counterargument to something that literally isn't an argument and is just a statement in the first place.

[Trendall]

Harika wants me killed too as per post 241. What do you make of that? Because that's like...an obviously disproportionate reaction to what I said but what makes me think that that's a town reaction is I think...oh god bear with me here but they tried to invoke a mod for some strange 'spoiler-tags' related reason that didn't really scan, I definitely remember seeing people using spoiler tags before with no controversy. I think what they were sort of hoping for in the back of their mind was that the mod would look at my post and think 'oh this Trendall guy is throwing the game, saying he doesn't care about town tells, he's not playing to his win condition, I'm going to replace them out or ban them from the website or something!'. I think they were genuinely that pissed off about it and that's what they were

really

going for with that. That's like...too imaginative for a mafia-sided player so I think they're town.

[Trendall]

I just have been really frustrated that you shut me out rather than engaged me

I swear I have pretty much just spent my entire evening sitting here talking to you or something lmao

[Trendall]

Oh, not my entire evening, it was other players I was responding to before. But one and three quarter hours now. Don't feel shut out

[Trendall]

Harika

Hiraki*

Sorry, I've had an extremely long day today and obviously my brain isn't firing on all cylinders tonight because I've made so many dumb typos and stuff.

[Trendall]

But I meant yesterday when you were blocking me out. Regardless. We're moving on.

Maybe I was doing it to see how you reacted to it lol.

[Trendall]

Hiraki is reading you as a noob and is really frustrated with you. Then after he spent so much time responding to you, he read something you wrote that really made him feel like he was wasting his time engaging you and he became very frustrated. I understand his frustration but just don't take it that far.

Which again would make me think that they are town because if they were a mafia, then surely if they think a player is a village idiot or whatever they would think 'great, I can take advantage of this' or something similar. Town have reasons for getting annoyed with another player being stupid or whatever it is that they thought they perceived, whereas mafia actually have no reason to be annoyed about that.

That was the basis behind my, again v light town read on Flubbernugget too, they seemed mildly annoyed at me for not conforming to the random vote thing and that was the reason for their vote, which is not suspicious at all.

[Trendall]

This makes a lot of sense and I feel like I can learn from it

Well, if Hiraki thinks that I am a village idiot, and you think that you can learn from me, then I dread to think what they must think of you.

[Trendall]

Well, on my part it was just this relentless stream of excellent well argued points that could not more clearly have come from a town-sided player. I mean I'm sure for anybody reading it...it must have been like 'woah this guy couldn't be more town', and then I'd post another post and it'd be like 'shiiiit I didn't even know it was

possible

for a player to be that obviously aligned with the town, this is amazing, what a great player'.

Glitch was pretty towny too. I'm not sure whether he thinks I'm town or mafia at this point or how confident he is about anything, but he did unvote me because I guess he felt like he got everything he needed to from that avenue of inquiry for now.

So basically at this point you have a very strong town read on me and a fairly confident town read on Glitch too.

[Trendall]

staarling I would have thought is town, yeah

[Trendall]

Is this knowledge of Trendall as a person or just you thinking everyone should act the same?

He's never met me before but he thinks that there's one type of person, and then when they draw town they act one way and when they draw mafia they act some other way.

[Trendall]

Yeah

VOTE: nopointinactingup

[Trendall]

Haha yeah so Staarling must be an alt of somebody

[Trendall]

Nah I'm here

[Trendall]

The nopointinactingup wagon was better

[Trendall]

VOTE: derp

[Trendall]

So if Hopkirk is a real doctor enabler then it's weird because why didn't they bring this up yesterday, like if you know you're a doctor enabler then it seems unlikely there'd be one of these just for one doctor.

But then if they were mafia it seems pointless to fake claim that just to protect derp, like surely just let them get eliminated? So I think Hopkirk and derp are probably both real.

UNVOTE:

[Trendall]

Yeah Staarling is very sketchy

[Trendall]

Why aren't you on this NP wagon Trendall.

I think the Staarling one is good too

[Trendall]

Glitch looks suspect for like, ignoring the argument as to why derp can be town

[Trendall]

VOTE: nopointinactingup

[Trendall]

I think a Staarling elimination would be better, but this one is okay too.

[Trendall]

Why would derp bother fakeclaiming doctor though in order to push through an elimination on somebody who was always going to get lynched anyway, given that it was near the end of the day and no one was active enough for the votes to change fast? Like they could have just left it and not claimed anything and PlusJOYED still would have been eliminated just the same.

[Trendall]

But then why also have Hopkirk then make up a thing about doctor enabler to protect derp? Like if they're both lying that's probably not sustainable so it's a waste of two mafia members.

If derp is mafia but then Hopkirk is actually a real doctor enabler then that is just a weird coincidence I guess.

But it seems more likely to me that they're both telling the truth.

[Trendall]

people were already unvoting the moment plus claimed. Plus would not have died had derp not cc'ed. But I also feel like its a huge gambit for scum to take.

Who else could town have conceivably got enough votes on though? Like I think most of the end of day one is ppl complaining that there are not enough ppl online.

[Trendall]

I don't think keita is that good a lynch, either staarling or Flubbernugget is better.

[Trendall]

Ok if there are only 14hrs then whatever

VOTE: Keita

[Trendall]

No. Im putting this game on the back burner. Learn to appreciate an active noraa bc I stop whenever I want to.

Haha, Noraa's the only person in this game who makes any bloody sense to me.

VOTE: nopointinactinup

[Trendall]

'Vote Count Analysis' proves to be a complete waste of time once again.

[Trendall]

I was working under the assumption that the setup is two doctors, a doctor enabler, and some sort of other pr like cop or tracker or whatever. Rolecop would make perfect sense. I would have said that all those claims are town, but the gunsmith thing is surprising so now I don't know.

[Trendall]

I am vanilla townie

[Trendall]

What is Trendall's readslist?

1. All or all but one PRs are telling the truth

2. If all PRs are telling the truth then that makes Noraa, Staarling and JohnnyFarrar together as mafia. Which is a weird team because that puts Noraa and Staarling on the same team. So either way it looks massively likely that JohnnyFarrar is mafia.

3. If Noraa and Staarling aren't on the same team then Staarling out of those two is more likely to be mafia.

4. Amongst the PRs, if one of them is fake then I believe derp, and nopointinactinup's thing about 'hider' makes perfect sense. Hopkirk gets more suspicious the more I think about them, so I try not to think about them too much. So ignoring them, the final mafia would be between Glitch and Flubbernugget. Glitch behaves more suspiciously, but I somehow just don't feel like you give town a rolecop given how the setup seems to work to me (see Hopkirk post 1185), and it's not as though Flubbernugget is not acting suspiciously as well.

VOTE: JohnnyFarrar

[Trendall]

I posted like two pages ago pipe down

[Trendall]

A lot of classic newbscum moves are present.

I thought we thought they weren't a newb and they were 'hectic' or something though?

[Trendall]

It's very hard to get a word in edgeways what with all the posts complaining about the low activity levels, that's the thing.

[Trendall]

I don't mind either Staarling or JohnnyFarrar, I just think people are more likely to vote for Johnny so it's like..less effort.

[Trendall]

Hopkirk, Glitch's claims are "suspicious"

I didn't say their claims are suspicious, more their behaviour relative to the other players in the town.

[Trendall]

^ See this is like, obviously somebody pretending to be a new player, so if a person's not posting in good faith like this I don't see why they don't automatically get eliminated on day one but whatever.

[Trendall]

Sorry I'm being impulsive and lazy and I need to stop.

Lol, me in my real life every day

[Trendall]

If you do a ctrl+F then you find that it's not true that Staarling ever used the word 'deepwolf'

[Trendall]

Yeah maybe it's better to vote within the PRs actually and flip one of them to make this more decipherable tomorrow. The only thing is I can definitely envision a scenario in which all of these claims are just true.

[Trendall]

gun checked him

What is this? Can you only give a gun to mafia sided players or something?

[Trendall]

Oh, I forgot, gunsmith is an investigative role, it's different to epicmafia.

[Trendall]

Think this is the person with the most votes on them right now

VOTE: Flubbernugget

[Trendall]

Actually I think I hammered him which is fine if the deadline's here, better than not eliminating anybody.

[Trendall]

What is 'macho' dr enabler?

[Trendall]

Like I say, it's impossible to get a word in edgeways inbetween the constant relentless stream of posts complaining about people's participation levels.

[Trendall]

It seems to me that the point of the setup is that it has two doctors. The doctor enabler is a clue to the town that it has two doctors, and is also the thing preventing town from automatically winning off the back of having two doctors protecting each other to the end. You also then add in a couple of investigative roles because otherwise, there's no way anybody is ever believing the second doctor. It's very possible that 'hider' ended up in the setup because someone who didn't understand this concept looked at the setup and went 'two doctors and stuff is way too overpowered' so they added a role that is a bit of a hindrance to 'balance' it.

I don't play these mini games, I just play the newbie games so I'd need to know more about like, what setups are usually like and how much scope moderators have for deviating from norms without everybody complaining that the game was unfair. However if I was running this setup, that's how I'd think about it.

If I've interpreted it right, I think the most likely scenario at the moment is that I'm the final villager, all PR claims have been true all game, and the other three remaining villager claims are mafia (if that's correct as well then I really love this setup!). Second most likely is that Glitch is the fake PR claim out of all of those along with Staarling and JohnnyFarrar. Staarling in particular is somebody pretending to be an archetypical new account, and it's always amazing to me that towns don't ever really get bothered by people actively lying to them and instead allow them to get all the way up to day 4.

[Trendall]

Staarling preference here as well

[Trendall]

VOTE: Staarling

[Trendall]

why would i as mafia kill the only people who thought i was a townie??

The answer to this and all similar questions ever is 'to make yourself look town', this is sorta one of the principles of the game.

it makes no sense for Staarling to do

Staarling slipping into the third person here is another indicator to me that it is another user pretending to be a new character called 'Staarling'.

[Trendall]

Two town docs have no precedence for that statement to have any validity.

Neither does 'town doctor enabler' but there's one in the graveyard right now.

[Trendall]

Yeah thanks for putting the setup together, I found it really interesting.

[Trendall]

I agree that the setup is mafia-sided on the basis that the second you put two doctors in any game for the first time, town are just going to eat themselves.

[Trendall]

It's an Entry-Level for my insanity-inducing setups I plan to make. I don't really like making regular old setups I want it to have a unique-ish twist to them ya know?

I loved it, I actually spent so much time thinking about this game

[Trendall]

I need an answer to that so bad

[Trendall]

I'll tell you why, as soon as the game started, I looked at that account and just thought like, 'that's a weird account, there's something weird about it'. And then someone brings up that it's 'Hectic' or something and then I was like 'that would explain why the account weirded me out'. So I'd love to know if the gut feeling I had initially was actually one that was worth listening to or not.

[Trendall]

Also yeah if it's actually a new player then sorry lmao

[Trendall]

But players like that...they join newbie games, they don't have a profile picture, they don't set their online status to hidden or indeed look at anything in the preferences. And how often does a person who is new to a website create an account where their profile picture correlates with their username? Normally you have a username for years and by now you've cycled through a load of different profile pictures you use and there's no relationship. I have a feeling that in a mafia game, when a person makes an account that is like, a thing, and the profile picture is a picture of that thing, that's like...a brand new identity and therefore the person is more likely to be an alt.