Mafia 96 - Murder in Emerald City (Game Over!)

[Wickedestjr]

Wicked, can you reconstruct the thought process that caused you to word "I got a town read" as "I got an innocent result"?

If this is one of the reasons for why you wanted me lynch, then why did you not say it until now?

1: I usually start bandwagons without giving all (or any) of my reasons. It helps figure out who is actually scumhunting.

Also, when I said I got an innocent result, I meant the result from my iso reading of him. I am sure I have said this somewhere else.

2:I know that's what you said. I want to know if you can explain what would lead you to make that mistake in the first place.

1: How?

2: Somebody, I think VP, said that they read Kmd in iso and got an innocent read on him (an innocent result from reading Kmd in iso). I had also read Kmd in iso night one, so I said that I had gotten an innocent result too. I was not intending on directing the doc protection, but I don't think I did.

[Xylthixlm]

Do you know the difference between a "read" and a "result"?

[iamausername]

-=Vote Count #44=-

Xylthixlm (4) - roflcopter, Wickedestjr, Lowell, curiouskarmadog
Namttam (2) - SerialClergyman, Kmd4390
Hayker (1) - molestargazer
molestargazer (1) - Hayker

Not Voting (5) - Achilles, Namttam, Kublai Khan, Xylthixlm, Faraday

7 to lynch.

[Wickedestjr]

VC = vote count

"Neighbour" is another name for unconfirmed mason

Strawman is the classical logical fallacy where you misrepresent your opponent's argument then attack the misrepresentation

Thanks

Well, I'm willing to believe that Molestargazer is innocent. But here are the possibilities;

Molestargazer is innocent -

If this is the case then there are at least two groups of neighbours, but probably no more than that. If there are two groups of neighbours, then I would expect them to be balanced (one scum, one town per group, or two townies per group). If they are and Molestargazer, and Empking are both innocent, that would probably mean that Mufasa's neighbour is probably innocent too, so he should probably claim.


Molestargazer is scum -

If he is scum, then he could be telling the truth, or lying;


Telling the truth -

This probably means that the other neighbour group has one scum, and one townie per group. I don't know if the scum neighbour would claim or not. I am not really sure which would benefit them the most. Probably keeping it secret.


Lying -

There is probably only one group of neighbours.


I am not sure if this helps any, but I thought some people might find it helpful. Does anybody else think that the neighbour groups are equal?

[Xylthixlm]

Hmm, wicked is assuming that the scumgroups are symmetrical.

[Xylthixlm]

I have a feeling Hayker will be with us day 3.

Breadcrumb?

[SerialClergyman]

rofl - do you think xyl has a connection to zazie? Whenever you've talked about your theory that it's easy to guess which faction players are in you mention connections between players, but despite an extensive case you haven't gone back and had a look for this link.

I started on nam's wagon early in the day. There are a group of suspects who I'm now sussing out, xyl is one of them. I still hold that the interactions and posturing between rofl, xyl and kmd suggest to me that atl east one of them is scum, and it hasn't gone unnoticed that kmd backed off from the discussion greatly after I said that.

Xyl -

I was riding the bus on the way to work, and thinking about my (gut) case on Wickedestjr. Obviously since I was not giving much in the way of reasons he had no way of defending himself, and there was of course a possibility I was totally wrong. I was playing through the inevitable conversation - "How am I supposed to defend myself" "Just find someone who's willing to tell me I'm wrong about you being scummy" - and realized that I didn't need to wait for wickedestjr to bring it up, I could just ask for the reality check myself. I figured that if he's scum, his scumbuddies would be hesitant to go on record defending him, and if they did it would be something to link them later. And if I really was just crazy, some townie should come out and say so. I get a check on my read, and help build connections if he turns out to be scum. Win-win.

This seems totally over-elaborate to me. I wasn't particularly fussed about that point, it just looked like you were strongly advocating your position, which I respect and consider pro-town. But this is such a roundabout way of talking through a simple statement - it looks to me like you're particularly sensitive about the criticism of it.

Same sort of thing in posts 1652-4. You think Cerulean mafia is better to lynch, then 4 minutes later you change your mind, then 10 minutes after that you say you're happy with lynching either. The whole progression looks overly sensitive of anticipated criticism.

And what's with the post above asking wicked if on of his posts is a breadcrumb? Either it's a breadcrumb and he tells you about it, or it's not - it's not like there are accidental breadcrumbs in his posts that you find and then he comments on.

Wicked -

2: Somebody, I think VP, said that they read Kmd in iso and got an innocent read on him (an innocent result from reading Kmd in iso). I had also read Kmd in iso night one, so I said that I had gotten an innocent result too. I was not intending on directing the doc protection, but I don't think I did.

What makes you think that you didn't draw a protection from a doc?

Is reward greater than risk if we lynch one of the claimed masons today? If they flip scum, we've got another caught right away. If they flip mason, the most we do is confirm the other.

next post

No, testlynching would be dumb. We only lynch if we think they are scum. Right now, I'm nowhere near sure enough. Moar Nam votes plz, kthx.

Looks like an epic backtrack to me. The first post could well be feeling out a test lynch. You aren't saying that you think they are scummy enough to lynch anyway, you are discussing the advantages and disadvantages to lynching one of them despite the claim.

Because there's a difference between posting "here's *my* list" and "here's the town's list". roflcopter is doing the latter.

What rubbish. I hate arguments like that. Do you think anyone would seriously be swayed into accepting rofl's list as fact because he didn't put in an 'i think' or 'to me'?

Unlikely? molestargazer did agree to the "Let's testlynch the masons" idea shortly after his claim.

So your theory is that he is scum, invented a new neighbor position in order to try to get us to lynch one of the masons?

What do you think of the case on Xyl?

Lowell - please comment on the mufasa's alt comment. Are you his neighbor?

[Xylthixlm]

SerialClergyman, I'm a bit concerned about that one post because I think roflcopter misinterpreted it - I really honestly wanted someone to come forward and say "no, you're wrong" if there was someone. I'll leave it alone from here on, but since I'm the only one who knows what I was thinking when I wrote it, I added that to the discussion.

Nice "overly defensive" attack. I'm trying to bludgeon roflcopter back to his senses. I can't tell yet whether it's working. My bludgeoning on Kmd worked, so I have hope.

(For the record, that 4 minutes included checking the formula for mafia power in the IRC bot:

Code: Select all

$power += $num->{$team} * 3.00 - 1.60;

so the second member of a given mafia is more than twice as dangerous as the first. I frequently remember it backwards and have to check.)


I'm still trying to convince myself of Wickedestjr's alignment one way or another. Part of my problem here is that I'm having trouble finding good suspects - my best one just claimed mason, I have a gut read on namttam but no evidence, and nobody else seems particularly scummy. I've been doing iso reads trying to find stuff, but nothing jumps out yet. (This is why you keep seeing me dredge up random quotes from previous days.)

[Kmd4390]

no, i understand the case on nam, i want you to go through your thought process when it came time to vote one or the other and explain why you chose nam

I remembered my original read-through. I remembered coming up with "Rofl, Ckool, Wicked, Nam" as my top suspects. FA was one who I went back and forth on and Xyl is kind of the same thing. I think Serial was my other option, but I had a town read on him coming in. So I had either Nam, who I had a scum read on, or Xyl, who I couldn't really decide one way or the other. I went with the scum read.

So, conclusions:
Vermilion is 2 of:

Wicked

Nam
Serial

Xyl

Cerulean is 1 of:
Lowell
Faraday
Molest
Xyl

Ok, Xyl fits as either I think. I still say he could have bussed as his vote was relatively late and Mastin was pretty much going to be lynched. Also, I'm removing Wicked. He's a mason with Hayker.

Vote Nam

you made a valid point against xyl yet still voted nam...

what makes you think nam could be vermillion but not cerulean?

It's a valid point on why Xyl could fit as either scum group as opposed to one over the other. It's not a valid point why he is scum over town.

I don't remember why I put Nam in as Vermilion. Something in my VC analysis.

What is VC analysis? I saw Kmd mention it a few times.

Also, I still don't understand what neighbours are. Can somebody explain to me what they are? Once I get a better understanding, I may be able to give my opinion about it.

Also, what is strawman?

Vote Count analysis. Lynch analysis. Wagon analysis. Whatever you want to call it. It's where I went through a few vote counts and determined a few reads from that.

Neighbors are masons except that they don't know the other is town. It could be town/town or town/scum. The difference between neighbors and masons is that masons know they are town/town.

Strawman is where Player A performs action X and Player B twists action X to be action Y and calls Player A scum for performing action Y, when in reality, Player A performed action X, not action Y.

Example: Let's say I vote you. You haven't voted me or even expressed suspicion on me, but Bob calls my vote OMGUS and tells me how scummy my OMGUS vote is. Bob has strawmanned me.

Looks like an epic backtrack to me. The first post could well be feeling out a test lynch. You aren't saying that you think they are scummy enough to lynch anyway, you are discussing the advantages and disadvantages to lynching one of them despite the claim.

No, I was debating on whether or not Wicked should be lynched because Wicked has been scummy. I wasn't debating on testing the claim with a lynch.

[Hayker]

[quote="VP Baltar"*cough* Lowell *cough*.[/quote]

This was in a post done by vp balter, near the end of day 1. Perhaps he was giving out his investigation expecting to die?

[Hayker]

Vote Mastin

I'm not sure if I agree with the kill this person or that person depending on the flip. My gut read on rofl and Kmd is that they are both town and I think there are better persons to eliminate *cough* Lowell *cough*.

Wicked, do you think Hayker is town or scum as of this moment?

Sorry for double post but i think context helps.

[Xylthixlm]

Hayker, what do you make of the neighbor claims?

[Hayker]

Honestly, I expect both of the second neighbors to be mafia, but I have no way of proving it really. I honestly do think there is 4 mafia is each group, and mafia may have been revealed...

[Xylthixlm]

Lowell, your thoughts on every player in the game.

[Lowell]

I'm still having trouble keeping up. Apologies.

@SC- Who said I'm their neighbor?

[Wickedestjr]

Hmm, wicked is assuming that the scumgroups are symmetrical.

I'm assuming the neighbour groups are symmetrical.

Breadcrumb?

Well, I wouldn't have said it if we weren't masons.

[Wickedestjr]

Wicked -

2: Somebody, I think VP, said that they read Kmd in iso and got an innocent read on him (an innocent result from reading Kmd in iso). I had also read Kmd in iso night one, so I said that I had gotten an innocent result too. I was not intending on directing the doc protection, but I don't think I did.

What makes you think that you didn't draw a protection from a doc?

See post 1368.

[SerialClergyman]

Lowell - at one point you claim to be mufasa's alt as a reason for voting Masitn. In your next post you say something like 'not really, I just didn't want ot think up a reason.'

Given mole has claimed neighbor with empking, that leaves Mufasa's neighbor still unknown. Some poeple including myself though that your comment could have been a breadcrumb of some kind that you were neighbor with mufasa.

Is that theory correct?

[SerialClergyman]

Wicked - that post explains why you think a doctor wouldn't protect you over ckool. But we know for a fact that if there is a doctor, he didn't protect ckool (though there is some possibility that there's another mechanic like a roleblocker blocking him).

So doesn't this point to the possibility that you drew the protection of a doc?

[curiouskarmadog]

I'm still having trouble keeping up. Apologies.

@SC- Who said I'm their neighbor?

fair enough replace out...or do you think that excuse will keep you in the game?

[Lowell]

Lowell - at one point you claim to be mufasa's alt as a reason for voting Masitn. In your next post you say something like 'not really, I just didn't want ot think up a reason.'

Given mole has claimed neighbor with empking, that leaves Mufasa's neighbor still unknown. Some poeple including myself though that your comment could have been a breadcrumb of some kind that you were neighbor with mufasa.

Is that theory correct?

Ah I see. No I was just making a joke, as, like him, I was placing a vote without listing a reason.

No, I am not mufasa's neighbor.

[Xylthixlm]

Hmm, wicked is assuming that the scumgroups are symmetrical.

I'm assuming the neighbour groups are symmetrical.

Not a great assumption IMO.

Breadcrumb?

Well, I wouldn't have said it if we weren't masons.

This makes me believe your claim a lot more.

[Xylthixlm]

vote: Lowell

[Wickedestjr]

Wicked - that post explains why you think a doctor wouldn't protect you over ckool. But we know for a fact that if there is a doctor, he didn't protect ckool (though there is some possibility that there's another mechanic like a roleblocker blocking him).

So doesn't this point to the possibility that you drew the protection of a doc?

I disagree. I think that I was just as likely to get protected as the other non-semi-confirmed players, because of my clarification that I wasn't actually claiming cop. It could have been misinterpreted, but I seriously doubt it.

[Lowell]

Starting from page 20 (just after my entry post on 19):

480s- Zazie pushes the "death miller vs. miller" argument [-]
484- faraday wants to shut down role discussion [+]
528- Zazie wants to know where fallen is [-, coaching]
535- fallen says What did I do wrong? [-]
537- Zazie brushes it aside, moves to talk more about ckool [--]
619- Kise agrees that fallen angel is a good lynch
636- wicked *hearts* zaz [-, buddying, but probably cerulean]
638- Namttam votes KK for distraction [-, buddy to zazie?]
689- KK points out mastin's scumminess [+]
702- SC votes achilles [-, random, safe vote made to look meaningful]
712- VP votes mastin
719- rofl votes mastin
730- wicked votes empking's alt
736- namttam votes KK for being "proven scum" [-, terrible]
746- VP posts 45-point treatise on why mastin is scummy [+, likely cerulean NK]
749- SC offers strange quasi-defense of mastin [---]

Thoughts on pages 20-30:
1) The insane love-fest between mastin and zazie makes more sense now. They were both scum, buddying to each other.

2) VP was almost certainly the cerulean kill

3) People who look good:

KK

- not only is the claim still valid in my mind, the fact that his leading attacker (zazie) AND his leading suspect (mastin) were both scum is a big point in his favor

faraday

- stood up to zazie about role speculation

4) People who look NOT good:

fallen

- look again at 528, 535, and 537. Zazie lightly coaches fallen, fallen says "hey what gives", and zazie reminds him that they should be talking about ckool. Unlike zazie to behave this way, and do it so quickly.

SerialClergyman

- 749 might be the single least impressive post I've seen. In it he subtly suggests that most of the case on mastin is bad, but leaves enough "good points" in to make it looks like he's not blindly buddying. His lurkervote in 702 also does not impress.

wicked

- buddying w/ zazie in 636, then later casts a throw-away vote in 730

5) People who are confused:

namttam

- 638 is a confused mess, and looks vaguely like protecting zazie. 736 more or less repeats the same bad argument. He's tunnelling, either because he's bad or scum. I think the former.

Next 10 pages upcoming.