Mini 570, A Small Town in Italy Mafia, Over

[avinashv]

I'm suspicious of sky firstly for the amount of analysis he tried to do on rations two mighty posts secondly for the amount of bother he went to try and get 2 votes of him and third for having suspicions about Lalmtreasteek (given he might not have read the whole thread but even if he did I have to assume he thinks he might be a godfather).

avinashv: so you think that the other two names given by occult are a scum team?

As for all those that wish to think that there is a great deal of scumminess in these two great posts:

avinashv, you are correct in your thinking of me not posting yet, I will post more when we have more to talk about.

Erratus Apathos, no.

please outline it for me or else I am in support of this

Let's just write him off, and focus solely on Sky's actions.

He was asked direct questions and refused to answer them. It's not just that; I just find (for already highlighted reasons) sky's defense to be a little fishy.

[sykedoc]

How else am i supposed to defend myself? You are voting for me based on previous posts which i did not write!

How else do i address the votes based on said posts?

[Prof. Guppy]

Wow. I haven't seen an accusation that myopic since the last mafia game I was in. In that game, Mr. Nearsighted turned out to be the jester. I doubt there's a jester in this game, but it's still worth a vote.

Vote: avinshav

[Lalmtreasteek]

This idea about forgetting about the gone player Ration is funny business. I guess Guppy think that his posts were no useful interest at all.

I don't understand why Guppy voted that just now.

Anyway syke post 154:

To be honest, i just think he was being a bad player. He didn't really have any reason to make himself look like a jerk.

To say "to be honest" set off an alarm for me. It's like "if I stop being scum for a moment". I don't understand why this would be something to say.

Also strange, it seems like syke has considered other explanations, other than "he was being a bad player." I wonder what this could be if it wasn't "he was being a bad player" or "he was a scum"

[Niv]

Back,

This is the I find jesters atrocitiesof fourm mafia an would never include one in any of my games votecount

sykedoc - Lalmtreasteek, avinashv
mikeydaman - Erratus Apathos
No Lynch - thevampireofdusseldorf
avinashv - Prof. Guppy

[Erratus Apathos]

Mod canyou please replace mikeydamian asap please?

thanks and wlcome back

[MightyFireball]

Wow. I haven't seen an accusation that myopic since the last mafia game I was in. In that game, Mr. Nearsighted turned out to be the jester. I doubt there's a jester in this game, but it's still worth a vote.

Vote: avinshav

If he was the jester, why would you vote for him?

[sykedoc]

That happens to be the way I talk Llama Streak.

[Prof. Guppy]

Wow. I haven't seen an accusation that myopic since the last mafia game I was in. In that game, Mr. Nearsighted turned out to be the jester. I doubt there's a jester in this game, but it's still worth a vote.

Vote: avinshav

If he was the jester, why would you vote for him?

That's a silly question. Of course I wouldn't vote for him if I thought he was jesting. But as the mod has made clear, there is no jester in this game, so he needs the vote. If nothing else, it will get him to shift his mindset.

[Niv]

Mod canyou please replace mikeydamian asap please?

thanks and wlcome back

Getting right on that

[Lalmtreasteek]

That happens to be the way I talk Llama Streak.

I am not sure how to ask the question exactly that I want to. But I want to be in your brain for a moment and understand, why "to be honest" was your way to start that sentence.

[sykedoc]

I dont really know, if theres a more specific way you can say that i'll answer.

to the best of my knowledge i use that phrase alot.

[killa seven]

sorry i forgot i was in this game. will read a few pages then post thougts

[sykedoc]

LOL

[Niv]

Prods going out after easter weekend.

still ooking for the rep

Edit:

xXfoxXx replaces mikeydaman effective now

[xXFoxXx]

I'm of course the replacement for Mikeydaman, and I've read through the game so far and have drawn some own thoughts.

I claim Mafia Roleblocker.

My scum buddies are Ration and Steek.

This Messege is for Prof. Guppy only:

Don't worry, I didn't name you.

followed by Occult bragging about the WIFOM of it.

What I think has happened, is that Occult has likely named one of his scum buddies, and selected the rest as town. If he selected which scum to name carefully, and was able to choose who was most likely going to be lynched first out of the group, then Scum gets a strong position.




Assuming we didn't consider that, if we lynched NamedPersonA and they turn out to be scum, there's a very strong possibility we would lynch another of the people he named, and if I'm correct, they would turn out to be town.

Then we're left with the situations where we have 2 more named people, 1 we lynched was scum, another we lynched was town. We fall more clearly into the deep game of WIFOM Occult has set for us, one that we cannot ignore.



I think that the contents of his post are indeed WIFOM, and not the fact that he posted it. So how do we determine who of those is scum?
Well, I do not believe the game started with more than 3 scum for such a small game, Occult named 3 people, plus himself, that means he's definitely lied about 1 of them. This gives us at least a 1 in 3 chance of accidentally hitting a town player, and I do not believe that he'd of named all the scum.

Notice how he singled out Prof. Guppy, I think this is more to try and ensure that Guppy does NOT get lynched instead of the scum buddy he intends to, as is going with the game of WIFOM Occult has created.




We have a cop who hasn't been counterclaimed, I personally am without reasonable doubt they are in fact truth-telling and sane.

I think the person Occult wants us to lynch and find scum is Sykedoc (Ration), and that's what I'm going to do. I think if we lynch Syke, Vamp inspects Steek, and we go from there.

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

Man both replacements seem to have not read through the game thread too well, but this is not too big an issue. I investigated Steek day 1 and he came back town.

But anywyas welcome to the game.

[Erratus Apathos]

confirm vote: xxfoxx

for this wifom post

fos: awesome pants

for resons that will explian later

[Awesome Pants]

So basically Fox, your plan is to lynch two of the people named by Occult in the hope that one is scum? As vamp already said, steek has been proved innocent.. does this mean that you believe Guppy and Ration are scum purely based on Occult's post?

My thoughts on it are that he could be right, but it's probably not worth lynching people based on that post alone. I think that if he is scum, his plan could possibly be to lynch one of them today, NK someone else in the hope that they're the doc, be surprised when the lynchee turns up town the next day and claim that the other person left *must* be scum, and advocate their lynch. Then, if he somehow managed to convince everyone to lynch that person he'd have another shot at hitting the doc (if the doc wasn't killed the night before, in which case he did he'd have a free shot at vamp.) and we'd be at day 4 with four less townies.

vote:xXFoxXx

[xXFoxXx]

Pants, we don't need to lynch two people. I think it's very probable that Occult added in one scum buddy into his list, which gives us a highly probably list of 3 people to select from. Mafia can only get as good as highly probable.

We can lynch who we decide is the most scummy from that list, and have Vamp inspect the other.

It gives us a probable 1 in 3 chance of a quick scum lynch, and a 2 in 3 chance of identifying/lynching a scummy.

[Awesome Pants]

As has been said in two of the three posts above yours, Steek has already had a innocent verdict from vamp, which according to your theory means that there's a 'highly probably' chance that both skyedoc and guppy are scum? Do you still think that they're both likely to be scum, just one of them or neither? If just one, who do you think is the most likely?

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

This theory sounds interesting no doubt, but it is possible prof guppy means nothing and his other two listed people were his doctor suspects.
I wouldn't push for a lynch just on the possible notion behind occults WIFOM post.

[xXFoxXx]

As has been said in two of the three posts above yours, Steek has already had a innocent verdict from vamp, which according to your theory means that there's a 'highly probably' chance that both skyedoc and guppy are scum? Do you still think that they're both likely to be scum, just one of them or neither? If just one, who do you think is the most likely?

Incorrect, that's not what I believe. I said there is a high probability of one of the 3 being scum, which means if 1 is already an innocent verdict, we are 50-50 to get scum on the first lynch, and theoretically 100% to find scum if we lynch one and inspect the other, THAT IS if I happen to be correct.

[Awesome Pants]

Oh, ok. This quote of yours through me off:

It gives us a probable 1 in 3 chance of a quick scum lynch, and a 2 in 3 chance of identifying/lynching a scummy.

For what it's worth, I still don't think it's the best plan but it does have a small amount of credit. I'll

unvote

for now.

Fox: Out of Guppy and Skedoc who would you rather lynch today? If we decided to follow your theory, do you think it would be better to no lynch today, get vamp's investigation on guppy/skyedoc and lynch whoever turned up guilty or whoever didn't get a innocent result? Or if we got an innocent result the first night, no lynch again and investigate the other so we don't lynch any townies?

[xXFoxXx]

Fox: Out of Guppy and Skedoc who would you rather lynch today? If we decided to follow your theory, do you think it would be better to no lynch today, get vamp's investigation on guppy/skyedoc and lynch whoever turned up guilty or whoever didn't get a innocent result? Or if we got an innocent result the first night, no lynch again and investigate the other so we don't lynch any townies?

No-Lynching could be a very valid option if we can be sure to have our cop protected, I don't want to No-Lynch twice in a row however, because by doing so we are guaranteed to lose two townies before we can move forward, whereas if we no-lynch only one day, we lose a townie tonight, and then have a reasonably sure guess that the remaining is scum.

So we have this decision;

Lynching: Acceptable reason to believe 50% chance of getting scum on the lynch, 50% lynching town.
Most Likely Result: 1 town dead, 1 scum dead. Either "sure" vote for next day due to cop, or a jump start on afterwards
Worst Case: 3 townies dead, with very low risk of not identifying scum.

No-Lynching Once: 50% chance of identifying scum for sure, and extremely high probability of 100% identifying for a scum lynch on the day after, due to elimination.

Most likely Result: 1 Town dead, 1 Scum dead, and more information on our cops credibility as well as a jump start for the day after the lynch.
Worst Case: 3 Townies dead ,very low risk of not identifying scum.

No-Lynching Twice: Same as No-Lynching once, except guaranteed to lose at least 2 townies. (Not reasonable)

No lynching once looks good to me, and I'd like to see skyedoc investigated first.