Mini 515 - The Pine Barrens - Game Over!

[ThAdmiral]

/confirm

(sorry...)

[ThAdmiral]

I did forget to insert the /humour tag before and after. My bad.

No, Ryan's bad. It wasn't needed.

[ThAdmiral]

sorry for lack of posting yesterday - my internet was down for about three days. But I'm back now and will be definately contributing to today's scumhunting.

[ThAdmiral]

Some thoughts on the game so far:

Yesterday - this was pretty much dominated by boggzie's accusation and ryan (and to a lesser extent bookitty's) defense. We now know that ryan was town, however I felt there was sufficient reason to vote ryan (both parties agreed that a pm was sent, also ryan was SO defensive its not funny). I probably would have voted him. In any case it was a better case than is normally presented on day 1, which can sometimes just be a shot in the dark on, say, the first person who suggests a no-lynch.
I also didn't like how bookitty said a town ryan would "clear my name", although I think this has already been gone over. Also your setting up of chain lynches ("if ryan is town, i'm definately voting boggzie tomorrow") has also been noted.
Hasdfags voting for boggzie was a little weird, I felt. If I got a pm from someone during the mafia-talking time in a game I was in,

that was unsent before I could read it

, I would definitely go after them. To say that he is making something of nothing is a bit strong. Also you got "good vibes" from bookitty, which strikes me as odd as well.

[ThAdmiral]

Last night: spider jerusalem was killed by the mafia. This is understandable since he had a few good posts. If anything this may incriminate mcaltp as he did mention that he rather liked sj's posts (post 103), but this praise could have easily just been read by the mafia.

[ThAdmiral]

today: Not much has happened today. There has been a general call to get the people who haven't been contributing much (i.e. me) to contribute, which is fair enough.
I am intrigued by the opie-hasdgfas connection, as I am uneasy on both of these two, and am also following elias' attack on bookitty as she is under my suspicion as well.

[ThAdmiral]

I quoted what I felt was the

spirit

of the first of your two highlighted posts.
And even though you later backtracked on this, the fact still remains that at one point you

were

attempting to set up a chain lynch.

[ThAdmiral]

I probably shouldn't have put quotes around the comment, but I wanted to make it clear that this is what she was saying in that particular post.
Basically you are attacking me over a grammar issue.

[ThAdmiral]

Bookitty: the more I look at you the more scummy you seem. From reluctantly accepting that you'd have to lynch a person you thought was a townie, to trying to set up a chain lynch (all the while backtracking on these issues whenever you got a bit of heat for them), and now shifting the attention off yourself when these things were brought to light.

Keeping in mind that a one-for-one exchange, scum for town, is utterly disastrous for scum (I'm sure you know this), if ryan doesn't come up scum, I'm going to be certain that you are. I'm sure that I won't be alone in this. And no amount of "Oh, I guess I just screwed up, then!" on your part is going to change my mind.

This is what you

actually

said, we can both agree on this. And while I was wrong to put in quotes what was, essentially, a summary of this (i.e. if ryan turns up town I'm definately voting boggzie tomorrow) the fact remains that this indeed was your

sentiment

in this post.
Instead of adressing this issue, however, you have accused me of lying and throwing around unwarranted suspicion.
If you weren't saying what I think you were in the above post - what were you saying? How would

you

summarise it?

[ThAdmiral]

@ bookitty: your recent post was very illuminating. I think I have more of an understanding of why you said what you did, and as a result, am inclined to believe there may not have necessarily been any malevolent intent involved.

However I would like to correct you on one point.
When I first mentioned that I thought you may have been setting up chain lynches (in post 227) it wasn't an attempt to set up a case against you, per se, but was just something of interest that I had noted from the happenings of day one. I may or may not have pursued a line of questioning in that area if not for the rather heated response to it.

[ThAdmiral]

I tend to agree with something that was said earlier regarding the unlikelihood of boggzie being both scum and also receiving a pm from a townie, giving him an absolute gift of a play to use to lynch town day one.
Another thing I was thinking about is that scum generally get a town lynch day one anyway, so I don't see why a mafiate would think he would need to use such a risky gambit in the first place.

[ThAdmiral]

Just a quick question for ThAdmiral. I don't think I asked it earlier and Bookitty's post just reminded me of it:

I am intrigued by the opie-hasdgfas connection, as I am uneasy on both of these two, and am also following elias' attack on bookitty as she is under my suspicion as well.

I'm not sure if you were implying this or not, or if I'm reading this wrong, but were you "uneasy" on me

before

Elias_the_thief's comments in Post 181? If so, why?

On opie:

These two (actual) quotes of yours caught my eye.

I feel confident in ruling out Bookitty as scum (for now). The only reason she got roped into this was because of Boggzie's comments in Post 66, which I feel were wild speculation on his part, without any evidence other that the similarity in their names. This is not entirely implausible, but it is tenuous. I know she has drawn some votes for voting for ryan hoping that he be turn up townie, but I suspect it was a move to distance herself and that she got caught up in the overreactive nature of this discussion thus far. Further, her vote was the sixth vote for lynch. While scum will vote for other scum to divert attention. I think its a dangerous tactic for scum to provide the L-1 vote for a fellow scummy.

hasdgfas seems pretty clean to me. He's the only one who consistently defended ryan even as early as Post 70. It would seem to me that scum would have had no interest in slowing down the ryan train wreck. This would be even more true if, as I suspect, that Boggzie is town as well.

Also I didn't like the way you only really started talking right towards the end of day one.

On hasdgfas:

boggzie, did you get a PM?
there's a possibility ryan actually did send you a pm for replacement in his game. have you checked the game that he says he needed replacement in? were you interested in being a replacement for him? is your name close to anybody's name who did want to be a replacement. I find you to be a little too sure about this. PM's are sent out for many different reasons. I think you're making too much out of something that is possibly nothing, and that's scummy.

vote: boggzie

I just think this was wrong. If boggzie had got a pm (which he did) I would say that would be about the best evidence you could hope for day one.

He also seemed to want to rule out bookitty unnecessarily:

but anyway. Bookitty gives me good vibes.

And although I'm not even sure I believe this myself, the fact that he was 100% correct about the ryan situation may have been because he was scum wanting to say "I told you so, listen to me in the future" (note that last quote was not actually said by anyone).


Nothing concrete - hence just uneasiness.

[ThAdmiral]

Note I didn't necessarily think there was/is a opie-hasdfags connection, which is why I said I was interested in it i.e. I wanted to see what the person who brought it up (elias?) had to say about it.

[ThAdmiral]

I can see why the two quotes you posted might seem suspicious, but:

Also I didn't like the way you only really started talking right towards the end of day one.

Are you serious? Are you accusing me of lurking? Let's quickly recap your posts from Day One:
etc.

Firstly I think my absence day one has already been covered. I

was

having internet problems and couldn't get on. If I could I would have posted. If you don't believe me you can check out the other games I am in (picking simplicity, mafia vs wolves, emperor mafia etc.).

Secondly I think the phrase "really started talking" refers not only to posts but posts with real content. As far as I can tell your first three posts (i.e on the 15th, 16th and 17th) were just random comments (or a confirmation post) while the posts on the 18th and the

three

posts on the 19th were chock full of contenty goodness. Hence you "only really started talking" towards the end of day one.

HOWEVER - I do realize that day one ended abruptly and that we will never know how much you would have talked in subsequent days.

[ThAdmiral]

First of all, I really don't think there's anything substantial in the 'who's been posting the least war' between opie and admiral. To me, it seems distracting and unhelpful.

I agree, however I will just respond to one last pedantic point:

As I mentioned that was posted Tue Oct 23 2007 6:06 am. I read that to mean you had internet difficulty Sat, Sun and Mon, possibly Fri. Day One

ended

Fri Oct 19 2007. So I don't think your "absence day one has already been covered."

. Are you now saying that you had internet difficulties for a week?

Yes but day 2

started

on what I think would be your sun oct 21 (i live in australia). My first post after that was essentially the next day if you take time zone differences in.
My internet had been down for the 18th, 19th and 20th of your days, I think. Possibly some of the 17th as well.

[ThAdmiral]

hasdgfas:

What do you think of the possibility that ThAdmiral and Zakarum are scumbuddies? I'm somewhat leaning in that direction at the moment.

Do you think there is a link between us, or are we simply the two most suspicious in your eyes right now?

[ThAdmiral]

I think people are starting to go a bit over the top with the whole "lets jump on zakarum because he hasn't been able to defend himself" thing.

[ThAdmiral]

How precisely was anyone to know that Zakarum "hasn't been able to defend himself"? I think most of the arguments against him occurred well before anyone knew he had sought replacement, as he did not ask to be replaced within the thread.

It seemed that the longer zakarum was absent the more people were growing suspicious of him. And while it's true that you and hasdfags had mentioned your suspicions earlier people like opie and the hermit seemed to be just jumping on the overall sentiment, or at least were swayed by it.

It's easy to grow more suspicious of someone when they don't reply for a long time, but it's unwise to use someone's absence as a further sign of guilt, as people sometimes do have legitimate reasons why they haven't posted. And sometimes a sentiment can build up to a point where the person comes back and attempts to respond to the case against them but by that stage everyone is just hungry for a lynch.

[ThAdmiral]

Well I think adel is the best thing that has happened in the game so far.

Her analysis, and interpretation of the results, is simply not a scumtell. The fact is she does the same thing as scum or town. It's interesting to see a lot of people not knowing how to deal with what she has brought forth, responding with omgus. These people seem almost frightened at something that is new and different, and, in my opinion, are reacting out of fear.

[ThAdmiral]

Admiral - I'd like to see you elaborate on who you're pointing your finger at. Why have you been so cautious?

Opie would be my number one choice at the moment. I am also suspicious of the hermit, and zakarum was looking suss before adel took over (but I certainly don't want to vote adel out).

I've been cautious for two reasons - first of all I started off on shaky ground with the whole day 1 absence thing, and also while I am suspicious of opie I don't feel like I have a watertight case.

[ThAdmiral]

Well I think adel is the best thing that has happened in the game so far.

Her analysis, and interpretation of the results, is simply not a scumtell. The fact is she does the same thing as scum or town. It's interesting to see a lot of people not knowing how to deal with what she has brought forth, responding with omgus. These people seem almost frightened at something that is new and different, and, in my opinion, are reacting out of fear.

What is your basis for saying that Adel runs this algorithm every game and then votes based entirely off of it, besides what she has told you?

When I say she does the same thing I mean use mathematics + some form of a graph to help her decide who she should vote for. I was in a game with her and also heard tell of other games in which she did this.

[ThAdmiral]

I will post extensively later today.

[ThAdmiral]

I'll just quickly add this about ThAdmiral, in Post 387 he also said he was suspicious of TheHermit without explaining why!

I asked him to explan his suspicions in Post 400 and he has yet to respond.

It hardly matters now but he constantly seemed to come to his conclusions after other people already had.

[ThAdmiral]

Firstly I would like to say I think the scum have either been very clever or very lucky in this game. Most likely both.

Secondly I would also like to say that while I have been playing mafia on this board and others for a decent amount of time I don't feel like I am particularly good at finding and catching scum.

To expand on the first point we can see that this is the case simply by looking at where we find ourselves now. Two days in we have lost four townies and have hit no mafia in reply. With 8 players left another town lynch will most likely result in a mafia victory (assuming 3 scum). The first town death was handed to them; first by boggzie with his assertion that due to a suspicious pm ryan was scum, then by the town who supported his assertion (and condemned ryan's defensiveness), and then by ryan himself who essentially committed suicide. The second, too, was handed to them in a way; adel was a townie with such a different, and perhaps flawed, style of thinking that it was all too easy for opinion to be turned against her.
Most harmful to town, however, is the fact that now, staring down the barrel, we find ourselves without much real information, and without any solid leads. Looking at the situation subjectively, I understand that the best case is me.

An accusation that has been leveled at me a few times now is that I haven't followed through on any solid cases on anyone. Sadly I have to admit that this is true. Once again I reiterate that having missed day one (and I stress it was indeed for reasons out of my control) I felt like I was on the back foot from the start. I will also reiterate my second point: that I am not greatly confident of my scum-catching abilities. In past games I have been inconsistent in my methods, have relied on my gut, and have been often wrong. In this game I feel even further handicapped due to the aforementioned lack of any real information.
However, perhaps rather than simply being bad at catching mafiates I could instead just be called more cautious than most (in this game at least, a bit more caution may have been a useful thing as on both days the strongest cases proved to be incorrect. Furthermore, to clear up another point, I didn't necessarily think adel wasn't scum, I simply said that her style, which was consistent with other games, couldn't be used as an argument that she was - that it couldn't reveal her alignment either way). My cautiousness has sometimes helped me to stay alive longer into games than I would have if I had attacked people harder. True, this behavior does not seem as helpful to town (as mcpaltp pointed out), but on the flip side a surviving townie is better than a dead one.

I have mentioned before on a number of occasions that I feel that opie is my number one suspect. I could build a case against him, and maybe it would be strong, and maybe it would lead to his lynch and, maybe he would even turn out scum. But that's a lot of maybes.

As I have said the mafia have played the game very smart, and have also been lucky. However one piece of luck, at least, that has not gone their way is that they have not hit any power roles yet.

At this stage of the game if there is a cop or anyone that has any extra information I would say you have to reveal it now.

If not I don't think we will make it to the next day.

[ThAdmiral]

Having just reread over adel's posts I hardly think she put any strong suspicion on either myself or neko. We were only mentioned in passing in one of her posts (a run down of what had happened so far) and it was more musing than a serious accusation of us being scumbuddies.

[ThAdmiral]

Fifth Vote Count - Day 1

ryan

- 3 (Boggzie,

mcpaltp, opie

)
Bookitty - 3 (Elias_the_thief,

TheHermit

,

Zakarum

)
Boggzie - 2 (ryan, hasdgfas)

Not voting: ThAdmiral, neko2086,

Spider Jerusalem

, Bookitty

12 alive. 7 votes to lynch.

Final Vote Count - Day 2

Adel

- 6 (

opie, mcpaltp

, Bookitty, neko2086,

Adel

, Boggzie)
Bookitty – 1 (Elias_the_thief)
neko2086 - 1 (

TheHermit

)

Not voting: ThAdmiral, hasdgfas

Third Vote Count - Day 3

ThAdmiral - 2 (

mcpaltp, opie

)
mcpaltp – 2 (neko2086, Bookitty)
Boggzie – 1 (Elias_the_thief)

Not voting: Boggzie, ThAdmiral, hasdgfas

8 alive. 5 votes to lynch.

I have highlighted towns in green and also opie and mcpalpt votes.
I stopped short of greening myself.

I have already expressed how well I think the mafia are going. As such I believe it is highly unlikely that they would not have been involved in the two town lynches we have witnessed so far.
Also consider the nature of the lynches - ryan was first put under pressure when "evidence" was brought up against him, and then again when he flipped out because of the pressure. In the end he wasn't lynched, but he may as well have been with focus centred basically entirely on him for day 1.
Day 2 also had one focus of attention - adel, and before that zakarum. Adel says a few, admittedly, weird things, riles a few people up etc, but instead of really getting discussion going just gets votes.
Day 3 starts. Things start to go a similar way with the focus put mainly on one person - thadmiral. At this point the scum must be quite optimistic about their chances and, as in the other days, opie and mcpaltp put votes on the same person

right after one another

.
Now I could ignore someone that voted for the lynch of a few townies; that might just be bad judgement. I could also ignore two people voting the same person a few times during a game; that could just be coincidence. But for two people to vote for the lynch of two townies, and going for the lynch of a third,

right after each other

is something I just can't swallow.

I will reiterate: considering how well the mafia are going they have surely been active in the lynches. As such there is clearly scum amongst these two, and in fact most likely both are scum (while on day 1 and 3 opie followed mcplapt, day 2 mcpaltp followed opie which decreases the chances of one of the two being scum following a town).
If I was to go after one, however, it would be opie.

Opie has consistently gone after soft targets, and when he chooses that a person is scum he will accuse them no matter what happens.
Day 1 opie goes after ryan after being told of boggzies "evidence", which is a convenient enough reason to vote for someone. Then, when the validity of boggzies "evidence" had been called in to question later keeps his vote on ryan because of his reaction, which was essentially the general sentiment at the time.
Day 2 opie goes after zakarum, mainly because he hasn't posted much. He even goes as far as to vote him after he is absent for a number of days, i.e. can't defend himself. When zakarum became adel opie reverts back to his old standby of agreeing with what everyone else is saying and keeps his vote on adel for reasons which are part omgus and part "i don't understand what you are saying/I disagree with you so I am going to vote you" (note: not a real quote).
Day 3 opie picks another target because they hadn't posted very often (i.e. me). When that person does post he votes him anyway. In his vote post he says: "this defeatist attitude is not helping any of us, except the scum" (note: an actual quote), which in my opinion is rather cheeky as he is essentially saying "thank you for being a soft target, it's going to be so much easier for us to lynch you" (note: not a real quote).

vote: opie

[ThAdmiral]

I'm not sure what you mean that I go after soft targets, could you please explain that a bit more?

Ryan was the easiest target day 1, adel the easiest day 2 and I think I was probably the easiest today.

[ThAdmiral]

ThAdmiral: While I'm thankful that you protected me, I would like to know why you thought I was the most pro-town? It's hard to see these things yourself when you're the one playing, so for my future reference I want to know what you saw.

Nothing in particular. You weren't so quick to jump on people most of the time which I thought seemed non-scummy. Funnily enough my next choice for town would have been elias!