888: X-COM TFTD Mafia: Over!

[Orski Pavlov]

Hi people!

I'm here. I'm going to posting tomorrow because it's too late now and I want to give it a good read.

It's coming!!!

[Tracey Morris]

But this also brings up a major point I've meaning to mention to you all: Do you want your actual accounts revealed? I personally don't think it has any bearing on the game (and don't just reply to this "Oh, well it's important because we can narrow down who's playing each alt", because that's really against the spirit of the game) so I feel I can leave it up to you. Vote Reveal or Vote Not Reveal, and whatever gets a majority vote, will be enforced for the rest of the game...

Do you mean do we want them revealed now? I want to vote reveal on this just because I have already slipped up once and am pretty convinced I will do it again; I have almost done it because I have this thread watched on my real account and I have been so frustrated at times with Stuart that I almost posted on the other account. I debated for a while after my first slip up about replacing out, because I wasn't sure that I wouldn't do it again on accident and didn't want to ruin the spirit of the game.

I like the spirit of the game, so I would probably vote no reveal. If you mean reveal at the end I could really care less.

Mod: Do you mean reveal now or at the end of the game?

At the end of the game.

Not all questions should be answered mindlessly.

Just some, I suppose?

[Stuart Whyte]

If you mean a list matching real accounts to in-game accounts I don't see the point of having the in-game accounts. If you mean just the list of players then that can be found in the mini theme queue and I've already been using it.

[Gerhard Krause]

@Stuart - If you post some blatantly bullshit reason I'm going to say it's not valid.

Will you please post now?

[Gerhard Krause]

@mod - vote: No reveal, unless it's at the end of the game. You made these accounts part of the game, so let's keep it that way.

[Stuart Whyte]

@Stuart - If you post some blatantly bullshit reason I'm going to say it's not valid.

Will you please post now?

I don't like your need to hold on to that, but I also don't think my reasons are blatantly bullshit so I'll agree to those terms. But I still want everyone to chime in before I say anything.

[Andrew Lemarchand]

What exactly do you want us all to chime in on?

[Stuart Whyte]

What exactly do you want us all to chime in on?

I'm pretty sure people are just fucking with me now.

[Andrew Lemarchand]

What exactly do you want us all to chime in on?

I'm pretty sure people are just fucking with me now.

It would probably help matters if you stopped giving one line non-answers.

[Igor Schultz]

White give us some answers now or get lynched because of it. Answer them now because most people want you lynched because you are not doing it. Sometimes going clean is better than resisting. Not answering stuff is very anti-town (RTFW goddamn you).

@mod:
1) Vote no reveal till end of the game.
2) thx for the x-com info (for the other people.)! However, would you like me to post a link to the x-com one and two manuals? I do have them both on my comp right now so I could upload them if you would like.

[Emile Buchard]

Sorry for not posting guys. Nasty weekend. Anyway, right now, I think we could do a lot worse for a Stuart lynch. His play his flat out anti-town, whether he's scum or not. Even if he does filp town, having him dead will certainly help us down the road.

vote: Stuart

[Claude Lefevre]

Vote: NO REVEAL

@Everyone: can I have your thoughts about Jamie? I still think he was softfishing ("I say something stupid about a dayvig, perhaps he will softclaim...")...

@Emile: do you realise that you are putting Stuart at L-2 with your vote? (Claude raises his eyebrow)...

[Tracey Morris]

Stuart - here is a legitimate question for you that you may elect to answer: if for some reason we decide neither you nor Emilie, will you vote for Emilie tomorrow? Do you have any plans to vote for anyone else besides Emilie until she is dead?

[malthusis]

Just to clarify: I am talking about the end of the game. Since Gerhard Krause wanted to use his account after the game, I was thinking it would be better not to reveal after the game is done, but the choice is up to you...

Also:

1 week till deadline!

Since this game is going pretty fast and there has only been one replacement, there are definitly NOT going to be any extensions. The end of the Day is Dec. 8th.

[Tracey Morris]

EBWOP: added "actually" and "to lynch" below.

Stuart - here is a legitimate question for you that you may

actually

elect to answer: if for some reason we decide

to lynch

neither you nor Emilie, will you vote for Emilie tomorrow? Do you have any plans to vote for anyone else besides Emilie until she is dead?

[malthusis]

The Fourth Vote Count of Day 1:

Jaime Marcelle:2 (Otto, Claude)
Gerhard Krause:1 (Leon)
Orski Pavlov:1 (Andrew)
Stuart Whyte:6 (Spencer, Igor, Gerhard, Tracey, Jaime, Emile)
Emile Buchard:1 (Stuart)

Not Voting:1 (Orski)

Reveal:0
Not Reveal:0

Undecided:12(Everyone)

Notes:

1.Since I don't think you guys got the question at first, I have not counted any votes before I clarified the question.

2.Otto Ulbreicht is getting prodded, and Leon will get prodded later today...

[Stuart Whyte]

Stuart - here is a legitimate question for you that you may elect to answer: if for some reason we decide neither you nor Emilie, will you vote for Emilie tomorrow? Do you have any plans to vote for anyone else besides Emilie until she is dead?

I am capable of changing my mind. Up to now the games basically been stuff before my vote, and then everyone attacking me. I find it untrustworthy to use attacks against oneself to judge the alignment of players so no new info has really been provided.

[Emile Buchard]

@Claude, no I had no idea it was a L-2, I thought it was was an L-1 vote.

Midday Reads

Leon--Started the discussion about the RVS, but it comes off as townie in my book because he seemed like he was trying to lead us out of the RVS, which he did. Lately he's been posting long post that don't mean much, so plus some scum points there. Still, my gut says town.

Gerhard--There's really no reason to think that Gerhard is anything but town, really.

Andrew--Has been kind of going with the flow, but I liked his response to me saying his play was scummy. He isn't obv town, but my gut says he isn't scum.

Jaime--Defended himself quite a bit with that whole RVS junk, but for some reason it didn't come off as scummy, and the claim really was eroneos to begin with. I'm leaning toward town.

Orski (Edward)--Edward's claim was kind of crazy, but my opinion on it was that it was noob town who played some game were a guy used that strategy to get discussion started. Not enough info either way at this point, though.

Otto--Started the RVS discussion, but he can't really be blamed for it. Still, his response when I brought it up left a sour taste in my mouth. Since then he's kind of disappeared. I'm leaning scum on him.

Claude--Has posted little meaningful content. Back in the RVS he gave an answer to the "topic" started by Leon where he tried to get off on some philosophy about randomness and such. Later he vote for Jaime for little explained reason. I'm leaning scum here.

Igor--Hasn't posted much, and what he has posted hasn't been much. I'm going to call scum here.

Stuart--One of the most obvious anti-town people I've ever played with. This guy is such a blatant imparement to the town that his lynch would benefit us scum or not.

Spencer--Has fenced with Stuart since the early game, but for good reason. Probable town.

Tracy--I haven't got much of a read on her, but from what I've seen I'm leaning town.

[Tracey Morris]

Stuart - here is a legitimate question for you that you may elect to answer: if for some reason we decide neither you nor Emilie, will you vote for Emilie tomorrow? Do you have any plans to vote for anyone else besides Emilie until she is dead?

I am capable of changing my mind. Up to now the games basically been stuff before my vote, and then everyone attacking me. I find it untrustworthy to use attacks against oneself to judge the alignment of players so no new info has really been provided.

Okay then... If everyone wasn't "attacking" you and someone else was obviously mafia (and not in a jester way) would you switch your vote? Or would it stay on Emilie?

[Stuart Whyte]

Stuart - here is a legitimate question for you that you may elect to answer: if for some reason we decide neither you nor Emilie, will you vote for Emilie tomorrow? Do you have any plans to vote for anyone else besides Emilie until she is dead?

I am capable of changing my mind. Up to now the games basically been stuff before my vote, and then everyone attacking me. I find it untrustworthy to use attacks against oneself to judge the alignment of players so no new info has really been provided.

Okay then... If everyone wasn't "attacking" you and someone else was obviously mafia (and not in a jester way) would you switch your vote? Or would it stay on Emilie?

I'd switch my vote. I'd switch my vote for a lot less than that too. My confidence in my emile vote is far from absolute.

[Claude Lefevre]

@Emile: when wagons start I normally like to explore the behavior of voters and not just the behavior of targets... my reason for voting Jamie is that, if Stuart will turn out to be town, then his boutade about a daycop (as voluntarily emphatic as it was) would be clearly an attempted softfishing. By softfishing I mean a sentence by which you do not ask explicitly for someone's role, but you just say something to which he could react revealing info about his role. Anyway, my FoS's remain for the moment Jamie&Edward OR Stuart. How is this posting "little meaningful content"? I am taking a clear position and I believe in what I am doing.

@Stuart(1): attacking players is unfortunately one of the better tools town can use on day 1, I guess. I do not think it is a bad policy, and I do not think it does not provide useful information. Would you explain me why you think so?

@Stuart(2): answering a tautological question such as "would you vote a confirmed mafia" is not helping you anyway.

@Tracey: ASKING a tautological question such as "would you vote a confirmed mafia" is not helping anyone.

[Gerhard Krause]

My vote is serious, I'd be happy to see him die atm. I have no intention of revealing why.

I'd switch my vote. I'd switch my vote for a lot less than that too. My confidence in my emile vote is far from absolute.

Now you're back tracking. That is a legitimate scum tell, so your explanation now needs to be that much better.

Seriously, it's time to answer up or be lynched. You're at L-1, and this tight lipped stubbornness is not helping you make any friends here.

You know as well as I do that someone is going to hammer unless you start posting exactly what everyone wants to hear. I agreed to your "conditions," but I don't think anyone else is going to be so charitable.

[Stuart Whyte]

@Stuart(1): attacking players is unfortunately one of the better tools town can use on day 1, I guess. I do not think it is a bad policy, and I do not think it does not provide useful information. Would you explain me why you think so?

I don't disagree with this, I was just misunderstood. Attacking other players, and watching other players attack each other are great ways to judge alignment. It is very difficult to be impartial when you are the one being attacked though. As such I think using peoples attacks against you as a method of judging their alignment to be extremely faulty. For example atm if I were using that info I'd likely be voting spencer, but I'm afraid its just my own bias given that no one else seems to have any issue with him.

[Stuart Whyte]

My vote is serious, I'd be happy to see him die atm. I have no intention of revealing why.

I'd switch my vote. I'd switch my vote for a lot less than that too. My confidence in my emile vote is far from absolute.

Now you're back tracking. That is a legitimate scum tell, so your explanation now needs to be that much better.

Seriously, it's time to answer up or be lynched. You're at L-1, and this tight lipped stubbornness is not helping you make any friends here.

You know as well as I do that someone is going to hammer unless you start posting exactly what everyone wants to hear. I agreed to your "conditions," but I don't think anyone else is going to be so charitable.

Just because my vote is far from absolute doesn't mean I wouldn't be happy to see him hang. I have not back tracked. I guess I can claim if I'm actually at L-1 give me a min to double check that.

[Tracey Morris]

@Tracey: ASKING a tautological question such as "would you vote a confirmed mafia" is not helping anyone.

How does it not help

anyone

? I also didn't say "confirmed" mafia, I said "obviously" mafia, and there is a difference in the hypothetical proposed. I was looking to see if Stuart had some indy role that said his win condition was to kill Emilie. I know nothing about X-COM so I can't say if there is some sort of assassin, but that was where I was going.

Anyway, my FoS's remain for the moment Jamie&Edward OR Stuart.

I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around a logical conditional FoS like this, especially when you've already put a vote on one side of that condition. I'm going to think about this later tonight.