Mafia The Game III: Kinder and Gentler

[nesta]

...OK, I guess I gotta read the whole monster second thread so I can get a better feel for you. But you're sneaky. Oh yes you are. And I mean that in a good way.
You won't have to read very far into that thread. dnooman was voted out the first night, and that happened before the first day, so he didn't get to participate in the game at all. He was a civilian though.

[dnooman]

Hey, I got voted against because I have a striped tail!

I was gonna FOS that guy right back, but voting against a random voter seemed pointless and not likely to gain anything. OK, I guess I gotta read the whole monster second thread so I can get a better feel for you. But you're sneaky. Oh yes you are. And I mean that in a good way. That's good for us if you're town, bad for us if you're in the waste management business.
You don't have to even read past the first page of actual game play. The game started out at night, I was killed before I could even really post strategy. I was a vanilla townie.

[NAF1138]

(and I'm sorry I mischaracterized your argument there, NAF)



S'ok, that sort of mischaracterization is easy to do accidentally, but is also a potential scum tell and this early in the game it is all I have to go on.

I am likely to get a bit less prolific as thing get heated back in the other game, so I am trying to get as much out there as I can now while I still have the time.

I am going to let my vote for you stand for now though, because I'm still not sure if you were being intentionally misleading or not (though I am leaning towards not.) When the lurkers start talking (or not talking as the case may be) I will take another look at it.

[Lemur866]

OK, no real track record in the other thread. I'll probably be caught up with that one in a few days.

Yeah, back to nesta's point, high early activity in this thread doesn't mean anything, since it could be aggressive townies, people who want to have fun, or WIFOM behavior from mafia. But the reverse isn't true. Both scum and town have good reasons to post a lot at first, but only scum have good reason to post little. There are also millions of personal reasons townfolk might post little, but no good in-game reasons. Townfolk benefit from information being revealed, mafia from information being concealed.

I'll start with saying that prolific SDMB posters that clam up in this thread are suspects. If they're arguing over in Cafe Society but don't bother to show up here, that's not good. It's not exactly a scum tell, but it's evidence that they aren't taking the game seriously and/or don't want to give away information. And while low post count players that don't contribute aren't as suspicious, they still aren't contributing. Which means for both that whatever the reason for low activity they aren't assets to game as a game, that is, they don't make the game more fun to play.

In that spirit, I'll unvote dnooman.

Because as I said above, he was an experienced and active player in the werewolf game and therefore we don't want to drunkenly lynch him for no reason and lose him as an asset to this game, whatever side he turns out to be on. So new strategy...talk smack with the active players, and at the end pick a lurker, although keeping in mind that people's schedules differ and this is an international board. I know that's not a particularly good in-game reason to pick someone, but it's a good meta-game reason. So therefore I don't have a candidate yet, since the day is young.

[SnakesCatLady]

I've thought about that, too, Lemur866 - why would someone sign up for the game and not post? It might have been different in the first game, because they might not have known what they were getting into, but with this being the third game everyone should know what is going on. So I'm starting to get itchy about Omi No Kami and Achren, unless they have posted and I missed it.

[Idle Thoughts]

Interesting. I'm reading all these posts (in some cases twice) and reasoning things out in my own head yet the people I was initially suspicious of just keep on growing more and more suspicious.

I might be way off but based on the four pages of actual game I've read so far, I'm going to cast a vote for Millit the Frail. I may change this, however, in the hours to come pending new info and posts.

Again, just the initial post of thinking a no-lynch the first day would be good, along with the next couple of posts made where s/he seems to revert on this opinion saying s/he's all for lynching someone (and "FOSing" someone in the same beat).

The jury for me is still out on fluiddruid as well.



I second (third?) that the Detective and Night Watchman should keep mum at at first. The Detective sounds like the type of person who should, possibly, follow the suggestions of others in here. The Night Watchman, on the other hand, is probably best going off on his/her own choice.

[NAF1138]

Gad: Could we get a vote count? I am curious how things are starting to shake out.


Also, I remember in WW1 someone saying that there was an easy way to see how many times people posted. How do we do that?

[Idle Thoughts]

Click on the number of replies that the topic has on the topic index/list.

[Omi no Kami]

Gad: Could we get a vote count? I am curious how things are starting to shake out.


Also, I remember in WW1 someone saying that there was an easy way to see how many times people posted. How do we do that?

Goodness gracious, I just got back from an exam and find that we're already in the swing of things.

Well... I know voting no kill is useless, but I personally don't have enough information to make a good vote yet. I'm suspicious of voting for NAF1138, since it seems like someone almost managed to motivate a bandwagon against him, but since this is the first day it seems like lynch mobs are just as likely to be started by innocents as they are to be started by scum.

So I'm going to keep my eyes open and see how the day progresses.

[threnodyangelfire]

Okay, here's the deal. I want to get this started as much as the rest of you do, but since we're only one confirmation shy of a full complement and it's only been a little over a day since percussion last checked in here, I'm going to give this until 9:00 a.m. EST tomorrow morning. Is there anyone on the current sub list (this includes you, threnodyangelfire) who'll be online and available by PM at that time to take over for percussion in the event that he or she doesn't show? That way, we can begin by then at the latest regardless. Sound good?

I'm here from 830 am australian time for 10 hours every week day, and also on the weekends. Yes I have no life... :p

[Projammer]

Hey, I got voted against because I have a striped tail!

Not entirely random, but there was no defensible reason behind it either. Your post about making a list put you on my radar before roles were assigned so I decided my first vote would be for you barring the unlikely chance that someone really stepped in it and ran way up the scum meter.

Do I really think you're mafia? Not really any more than I suspect anyone else right now. Ring tail and nocturnal habits just fit conveniently to colorize a decision already made. Maybe half a step above random.org.

[Rachm Qoch]

Okay, this may get me killed off early by the Mafia or may even put the FOS on me by the citizens, but I'm going to say what I said a bit early on in here. Mainly that this is my first time playing this game as a participant, however I have hosted this game many, many times. It's interesting insight getting to see what both sides do when you know who is who and from a neutral POV.
<clip>
I have to say, this post just doesn't sit right.

In the first "Werewolf" game the wolves munched on JSexton early on since they knew that such a well-seasoned player would be much more likely to find out their true status. There's no greater threat than an experienced townie.

If you are truly town, you know that your experience with the game makes you a tremendous asset. But then if, as you say, you've "hosted this game many, many times", you wouldn't be so foolish as to expose yourself out as such an obvious mark for an early mafia hit.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, supposing that you're town, you just opened yourself up to a mafia hit. But given your stated experience with the game, I can't imagine that you're that clumsy.

FOS Idle Thoughts

[Omi no Kami]

I've thought about that, too, Lemur866 - why would someone sign up for the game and not post? It might have been different in the first game, because they might not have known what they were getting into, but with this being the third game everyone should know what is going on. So I'm starting to get itchy about Omi No Kami and Achren, unless they have posted and I missed it.

On that note I'm definitely going to participate during each day, but I don't have as much free time as some of the more skilled players, so I won't be able to be on-the-spot responding to each query; if I can, I'll try to make one or two big posts each time I come on, responding to whatever's been said in my absence. ^^

[Idle Thoughts]

<snip>

If you are truly town, you know that your experience with the game makes you a tremendous asset. But then if, as you say, you've "hosted this game many, many times", you wouldn't be so foolish as to expose yourself out as such an obvious mark for an early mafia hit.

Or I just wanted people to know that I've seen both sides and have a good idea of what sort of person would say what. So if "[I] just opened [my]self up to a mafia hit." and it happens, well, I'd think it'd be safe to say I was getting too close with my suspicions maybe?

At least getting killed off first is flattering in the regard that the scum probably see you as a threat. :p

[fluiddruid]

I've thought about that, too, Lemur866 - why would someone sign up for the game and not post? It might have been different in the first game, because they might not have known what they were getting into, but with this being the third game everyone should know what is going on. So I'm starting to get itchy about Omi No Kami and Achren, unless they have posted and I missed it.Still haven't heard from Achren.

[dnooman]

Vote count per dnooman

fluiddruid 1 (NAF1138)

NAF1138 1 (Hal Briston)

CometotheDarkSidewehaveCookies 2 (nesta, DiggitCamara)

SnakesCatLady 1 (Blaster Master)

Lemur866 1 (Projammer)

Millet the Frail 1 (Idle Thoughts)

DiggitCamara 1 (percypercy)

Please correct me if I missed anything.

[dnooman]

Still haven't heard from Achren.
At what point do we ask for a sub?

[nesta]

At what point do we ask for a sub?

I think we should give him/her at least 24 hours. If they haven't put in a couple of posts by tomorrow afternoon, though, I'd vote for a sub.

[SnakesCatLady]

Unfortunately it will be tomorrow afternoon before I can get back to post; I hate it when life interferes with the Dope! So I'll read ya'll tomorrow!

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

It will be interesting to see how the different sides of the various debates pan out down the road (as far as role revelation goes) about what is and isn't valuable to the town or worthy of town suspicion as far as the first day goes.

That being said, I'm inclined now to throw a vote out toward the person who's reasoning seems the most opposite of mine, which by my calculation means a vote for nesta.

[nesta]

It will be interesting to see how the different sides of the various debates pan out down the road (as far as role revelation goes) about what is and isn't valuable to the town or worthy of town suspicion as far as the first day goes.

That being said, I'm inclined now to throw a vote out toward the person who's reasoning seems the most opposite of mine, which by my calculation means a vote for nesta.
(color removed)

That feels like a retaliatory vote more than anything. It's OK; at least it's not random.

Please tell me (and us) how my reasoning is opposite from yours? I think you're talking about my disliking completely random votes. Are you saying that you advocate completely random votes?

[Blaster Master]

This I can agree with.At least we learned something from that fiasco. ;)
Also, I think that we townies should keep a united front in regards to roles. We should only refer to ourselves as town, never anything more specific unless absolutely necessary. We don't need to narrow down the possible pool of power roles for the Mafia.
This is an obvious bit of advice, and seems to be either a mafia or power-role saying "look at me I'm a townie" cry. As, in my estimation, it's equally likely that that could be a tell for either role, I'll simply FOS dnooman, and keep an eye on him.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt, supposing that you're town, you just opened yourself up to a mafia hit. But given your stated experience with the game, I can't imagine that you're that clumsy.

FOS Idle Thoughts{Bolding removed to reduce confusion}

Didn't we learn in the last game that FOSing people for stated or implied experience is counter-productive (observe the early sturmhauke accusations and the near lynching of JSexton). I admit, Idle Thoughts looks a little suspicious, but it's nothing more than gut for me and this point. So, FOS RQ.

[Idle Thoughts]

Well hopefully a night of good rest will bring more insight tomorrow.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

Are you saying that you advocate completely random votes?

On the first day, they absolutely have their place.

[Millit the Frail]

On the first day, they absolutely have their place.

Random votes have their place, but I hate to see people hiding behind a website telling them to do something. It just smacks of not taking responsibility for their votes. I don't like that. It seems like something a Mafia would do so that later in the game he/she could go back and say "Hey, I didn't really vote to kill that townie, a randomizer website told me to!"

And after all, in the Werewolf game, the first person to use random.org to cast a vote ended up being scum.

Most of us are voting essentially randomly, and that's necessary at this point. But even though your vote is random, coming out and saying that you let an independent entity do it for you is pretty darn suspicious to me right now.

I noticed that I have a vote, and I think it's based on a misunderstanding, if not a deliberate misrepresentation of my first daytime post. I was NOT advocating a no-lynch day, I was just saying that it had seemed obvious at first glance, but then it had lost its appeal. My changing my mind happened before the day even technically started. I was only trying to express how humorously frustrating it feels to post something, trying to second guess (and third and fourth guess) everything based on how someone might think it's a scum tell!

[dnooman]

This is an obvious bit of advice, and seems to be either a mafia or power-role saying "look at me I'm a townie" cry. As, in my estimation, it's equally likely that that could be a tell for either role, I'll simply FOS dnooman, and keep an eye on him.
{Bolding removed to reduce confusion}

What? It wasn't so obvious to Hal Briston it seems. Sorry Hal, but the idea that your claiming "vanilla town" was a bad idea does have some credence. That's why I posted it.

I was not, nor am I, trying to say "look at me I'm a townie". I'm saying that unnecessary claims of "vanilla town" can in fact be detrimental to the town and helpful to the Mafia.

As evidenced by Blaster Master's statement, he agrees that this is a sound strategy. Anyone that thinks I was trying to make an "I'm a townie "cry is being overly paranoid.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

Random selection has a place in the first day. We are still in the first day. I FOS's, not voted, randomly on the first day.

Statistically speaking (ymmv) a random selection on the first day is a valid technique to try and hit scum and miss town.

Take an analogy from the world in which I marinate in my profession. Just because there are botnet-infecting, phishing, social engineering, fraudulent criminals opperating online, you still see more and more folks migrating legitimately online for such matters.

Random votes have their place, but I hate to see people hiding behind a website telling them to do something. It just smacks of not taking responsibility for their votes. I don't like that. It seems like something a Mafia would do so that later in the game he/she could go back and say "Hey, I didn't really vote to kill that townie, a randomizer website told me to!"

And after all, in the Werewolf game, the first person to use random.org to cast a vote ended up being scum.

Most of us are voting essentially randomly, and that's necessary at this point. But even though your vote is random, coming out and saying that you let an independent entity do it for you is pretty darn suspicious to me right now.

I noticed that I have a vote, and I think it's based on a misunderstanding, if not a deliberate misrepresentation of my first daytime post. I was NOT advocating a no-lynch day, I was just saying that it had seemed obvious at first glance, but then it had lost its appeal. My changing my mind happened before the day even technically started. I was only trying to express how humorously frustrating it feels to post something, trying to second guess (and third and fourth guess) everything based on how someone might think it's a scum tell!

[fluiddruid]

In my opinion, saying "I used random.org!" for voting is pretty useless and at, at worst, perhaps a scum tell. On Day 1, faulty reasoning is likely, but NO reasoning is worse as it really gives us nothing to go on.

A short history of random.org votes:

Blaster Master random votes SnakesCatLady in post 187 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8483648&postcount=187) "in the interest of getting the ball rolling". He later defends himself for his practice in post 218 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=417106&page=5&pp=50).

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies points a random FOS Kyrie Eleison in post 201 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8484039&postcount=201).

If I missed anyone, please let me know. In my opinion, ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies is slightly more suspicious than Blaster Master, given was done later when there was more reason to cast a vote based on cause -- and BM did at least seem to have a reason. Mild FOS ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies.

There were some early votes based on pretty weak reasoning but these were the stated "random" ones.

[fluiddruid]

Ergh, how did I miss the immediate post above me? So ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies does have a defense. I do have to take issue with this though:

Statistically speaking (ymmv) a random selection on the first day is a valid technique to try and hit scum and miss town.How is it valid? There are less scum than town. Tells are far more reliable.

[Omi no Kami]

Hmm. I'm almost sure the scum were behind the mini-wagon that almost rolled over NAF. The problem is nailing down exactly who was being honestly suspicious, and who wanted to kill the poor chap. I'm waffling between Kyrie Eleison and Fluiddruid. I really, really want fluiddruid to be town, because he seems to be pretty observant and he's obviously an experienced player, but I don't trust all of his probing. Offering your takes on strategy is valid, and asking people to back up what they're saying is equally valid, but despite his obvious knowledge of the game it seems like he's insisting on questioning every little thing.

My guess is that he's feeling for power roles based on how people defend themselves. Since nobody else bothers me quite as much yet, Vote fluiddruid

[Gadarene]

Vote count coming up.

[CaerieD]

Hmm. I'm almost sure the scum were behind the mini-wagon that almost rolled over NAF. The problem is nailing down exactly who was being honestly suspicious, and who wanted to kill the poor chap. I'm waffling between Kyrie Eleison and Fluiddruid. I really, really want fluiddruid to be town, because he seems to be pretty observant and he's obviously an experienced player, but I don't trust all of his probing. Offering your takes on strategy is valid, and asking people to back up what they're saying is equally valid, but despite his obvious knowledge of the game it seems like he's insisting on questioning every little thing.

My guess is that he's feeling for power roles based on how people defend themselves. Since nobody else bothers me quite as much yet, Vote fluiddruid

[Color removed]

The questioning is actually what made me less inclined to think that fluiddruid was scum. It was the townies in the last game who were the most suspicious of others and the ones who essentially led to all of the role claims. While it's easy enough for scum to emulate the tactics of town, those tactics didn't go very well for the town. Any scum who was smart enough to notice that the townies did that and try to copy it would also know that it wasn't a very good tactic and resulted in lynchings and role claims. And then we're back at the "wine in front of me" situation there, aren't we? Argh.

We've still got plenty of time. No one is jumping out at me as a very good prospect just yet, and my suspicions of fluiddruid are fading. All of you are potential scum as far as I'm concerned, but I don't think offing the experienced players right off the bat is going to help us. There's a good chance some of them (most of them?) are going to be Vanilla Citizens.

[Gadarene]

Vote Count

(dnooman had it correct in post #266; this here's the updated count)

2 -- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (DiggitCamara, nesta)
2 -- fluiddruid (NAF1138, Omi No Kami)
1 -- SnakesCatLady (Blaster Master)
1 -- NAF1138 (Hal Briston)
1 -- DiggitCamara (percypercy)
1 -- Lemur866 (Projammer)
1 -- Millit the Frail (Idle Thoughts)
1 -- nesta (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

[Omi no Kami]

I'm also in favor of a slow game, but at this point I honestly don't have any good leads. Every townie who isn't actively eliciting responses, however, might as well be helping the scum, so when the vote count is so low that it doesn't matter, I'd rather make an incorrect accusation and learn from the target's defense than stay quiet.

[Achren]

Quick post to say sorry about that, had a real-life situation that popped up yesterday. Time now to read the thread and see what I see.

[Blaster Master]

Random votes have their place, but I hate to see people hiding behind a website telling them to do something. It just smacks of not taking responsibility for their votes. I don't like that. It seems like something a Mafia would do so that later in the game he/she could go back and say "Hey, I didn't really vote to kill that townie, a randomizer website told me to!"

And saying "he's a lemur" or "his name says 'darkside'" in it are better reasons to vote/FOS someone? All the votes now are random, or might as well be, and thus it doesn't matter whether you use some faux reasoning, or a truly random vote. The point of the votes isn't to try to lynch someone now, it's to put pressure on people and see how they react. If someone gets lucky and random votes scum, then we might see some scum tells; if someone votes townie, we might see some townie tells. The votes and FOSs are more than a way to get someone lynched, they're a way to obtain information.

That said, I will unvote SnakesCatLady, because I think I got I'm going to get out of it for now. I will re-evaluate and decide if I have enough information for a non-random vote before I re-vote.

And after all, in the Werewolf game, the first person to use random.org to cast a vote ended up being scum.

Most of us are voting essentially randomly, and that's necessary at this point. But even though your vote is random, coming out and saying that you let an independent entity do it for you is pretty darn suspicious to me right now.

Wait, are you insinuating that admitting they're random as opposed to giving a made up reason is somehow more of a scum tell? Would you feel better if someone reached in their D&D kit and rolled a 1d20? What exactly is a suspicious form of a random vote and what isn't?

There's already been discussion about how important information is at this stage of the game, and casting suspicion on people for what seems to be SOP looks like you're trying to snub information. I'm not prepared to revote quite yet, but I WILL point a strong FOS on Millit the Frail with a possible vote to follow depending on your response.

[NAF1138]

[Color removed]

The questioning is actually what made me less inclined to think that fluiddruid was scum. It was the townies in the last game who were the most suspicious of others and the ones who essentially led to all of the role claims. While it's easy enough for scum to emulate the tactics of town, those tactics didn't go very well for the town. Any scum who was smart enough to notice that the townies did that and try to copy it would also know that it wasn't a very good tactic and resulted in lynchings and role claims. And then we're back at the "wine in front of me" situation there, aren't we? Argh.

We've still got plenty of time. No one is jumping out at me as a very good prospect just yet, and my suspicions of fluiddruid are fading. All of you are potential scum as far as I'm concerned, but I don't think offing the experienced players right off the bat is going to help us. There's a good chance some of them (most of them?) are going to be Vanilla Citizens.

You make a fairly good point here. I have been thinking about my vote for fluiddruid all night, and I think that I should unvote for now at least.

As to the random voting, there is enough info out there that I don't think all the votes have to be random anymore. A nice mini bandwagon formed against me, why aren't we looking at the people involved in that? (Both people voting and people commenting.) Lots of discussion of strategy has taken place, why aren't we taking a closer look at what dnooman , cookies , et all have had to say on that subject?

We are past the point of needing to vote at random because there is legitimate information that we can examine now. So at this point anyone who is still making a totally random vote is going on my scum list.

I have to do a bit of actuall work, but I am going to try to put together a mini analysis of the first IRL day of posting for later today.

[Millit the Frail]

And saying "he's a lemur" or "his name says 'darkside'" in it are better reasons to vote/FOS someone? All the votes now are random, or might as well be, and thus it doesn't matter whether you use some faux reasoning, or a truly random vote. The point of the votes isn't to try to lynch someone now, it's to put pressure on people and see how they react. If someone gets lucky and random votes scum, then we might see some scum tells; if someone votes townie, we might see some townie tells. The votes and FOSs are more than a way to get someone lynched, they're a way to obtain information.

*snip*

Wait, are you insinuating that admitting they're random as opposed to giving a made up reason is somehow more of a scum tell? Would you feel better if someone reached in their D&D kit and rolled a 1d20? What exactly is a suspicious form of a random vote and what isn't?

There's already been discussion about how important information is at this stage of the game, and casting suspicion on people for what seems to be SOP looks like you're trying to snub information. I'm not prepared to revote quite yet, but I WILL point a strong FOS on Millit the Frail with a possible vote to follow depending on your response.

I guess I see where you're coming from, we just have different strategies, that's all. I feel very strongly about people claiming that they used a random number generator of some sort (D20s included) because it looks like they're trying to establish plausible deniability. That looks scummy to me. Maybe you disagree. But you agree with me that watching people vote is a way to obtain information, right? I just want to hear some sort of reasoning, especially now that votes have started flying around. Fluiddruid said it better than I can say it--faulty reasoning helps us more than no reasoning at all.

But if you must, keep poking me with a stick, but you'll always get the same response: "Ow, quit it!" :p

[fluiddruid]

H I'm waffling between Kyrie Eleison and Fluiddruid. I really, really want fluiddruid to be town, because he seems to be pretty observant and he's obviously an experienced player, but I don't trust all of his probing. Offering your takes on strategy is valid, and asking people to back up what they're saying is equally valid, but despite his obvious knowledge of the game it seems like he's insisting on questioning every little thing.Kyrie Eleison has been pinging my scumdar a little bit too, but that's just a gut feeling. I'm going to go through some of the less active posters' posts today before I really start pointing more FOS, as a few of us (including myself) have been putting out some feelers.

Just for the record, though:

- I'm female :)

and

- I'm not an experienced player, in that I've never played Mafia before, but I did keep up with the previous games (particularly game 2, which I read avidly). I'm also a pretty competitive person and I have played many other strategy games, so I'm pretty comfortable being assertive. As others have mentioned, we *need* to get people out in the open regarding their strategies now. This will make the lynching and night kills tell us a lot more and the more we pin people down now, the easier it will be to see vote patterns later.

[nesta]

Random selection has a place in the first day. We are still in the first day. I FOS's, not voted, randomly on the first day.

Statistically speaking (ymmv) a random selection on the first day is a valid technique to try and hit scum and miss town.
I don't like this defense. A random vote is more likely to hit a townie than scum.


Take an analogy from the world in which I marinate in my profession. Just because there are botnet-infecting, phishing, social engineering, fraudulent criminals opperating online, you still see more and more folks migrating legitimately online for such matters.
I don't understand your analogy. It does sound like we have similar professions, though.


And saying "he's a lemur" or "his name says 'darkside'" in it are better reasons to vote/FOS someone? All the votes now are random, or might as well be, and thus it doesn't matter whether you use some faux reasoning, or a truly random vote. The point of the votes isn't to try to lynch someone now, it's to put pressure on people and see how they react. If someone gets lucky and random votes scum, then we might see some scum tells; if someone votes townie, we might see some townie tells. The votes and FOSs are more than a way to get someone lynched, they're a way to obtain information.

I like this defense of random voting better. I still disagree, but I can see where townies would legitimately throw out random votes, especially at the very beginning hoping to hit scum. I still think there should be a reason for it, even if it's as simple as them not posting anything of substance yet.

I originally voted for ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies because I dislike completely random votes, but also because it just seemed odd to FOS someone completely randomly. To me a formal FOS means you really do have suspicion about someone, and that seems to contradict a completely random FOS. I suppose a general dislike of early voting could explain this, though. I can't say his/her posts since my vote have made me less suspicious, but I had very little real suspicion of him/her in the first place. I'm going to leave an FOS ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies, but unvote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies for now.

[Lemur866]

But if you must, keep poking me with a stick, but you'll always get the same response: "Ow, quit it!" :p
Hey, you kids! Don't make me turn this car around!

[Millit the Frail]

Hey, you kids! Don't make me turn this car around!

I'm going to have to curb it for a while, actually! I'll be posting less frequently for about a week because I'm in a wedding. Just in case you wonder why my posting level drops off. I'm not usually a prolific poster, but this has me on the edge of my seat. So until I get back (that is, if the Mafia hasn't decided that my good looks and razor wit make me too much of a liability), I'll be posting maybe once a day. And I'll be keeping up with all of the votes and I'll make sure to get a vote in before the deadline.

I guess I should mention that I'm a little less suspicious of Blaster Master now. But something Cookies is still rubbing me the wrong way....I don't follow that analogy in her last post.

[Lemur866]

Did someone ask about post counts? Here's the stats as of 2 minutes ago:

Who Posted?
Total Posts: 292
User Name Posts
Gadarene 42
NAF1138 30
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 18
Lemur866 17
Omi no Kami 17
fluiddruid 15
nesta 14
Idle Thoughts 14
dnooman 12
Millit the Frail 11
Projammer 11
SnakesCatLady 10
glee 10
Blaster Master 9
Hal Briston 9
DiggitCamara 9
Achren 5
Kyrie Eleison 5
CaerieD 4
Malacandra 4
percypercy 4
Lightnin' 3
MadTheSwine 3
threnodyangelfire 2
Queuing 2
ArizonaTeach 2
tirial 2
Rachm Qoch 2
Kat 1
Rysto 1
percussion 1
Nava 1
zuma 1
Suburban Plankton 1
Show Thread & Close Window

[Gadarene]

I'm suspicious of Show Thread & Close Window. Bastard hasn't posted at all.

...Carry on.

[DiggitCamara]

Did someone ask about post counts? Here's the stats as of 2 minutes ago:

Who Posted?
(...)
Two questions: is there a way to see how many times someone posted after the game really began? (To eliminate "fluff" posts)
How do you view thread post counts?

And a third one:

What happens when the day ends and two or more people have the same lynch counts?

[Gadarene]

What happens when the day ends and two or more people have the same lynch counts?

That's a damn good question. Does anyone with more experience than me know how this usually plays out?

[NAF1138]

That's a damn good question. Does anyone with more experience than me know how this usually plays out?


Random choice between the tied players is what usually happens

[Gadarene]

Random choice between the tied players is what usually happens.

Sounds good to me.

[NAF1138]

Hmm. I'm almost sure the scum were behind the mini-wagon that almost rolled over NAF. The problem is nailing down exactly who was being honestly suspicious, and who wanted to kill the poor chap. I'm waffling between Kyrie Eleison and Fluiddruid. I really, really want fluiddruid to be town, because he seems to be pretty observant and he's obviously an experienced player, but I don't trust all of his probing. Offering your takes on strategy is valid, and asking people to back up what they're saying is equally valid, but despite his obvious knowledge of the game it seems like he's insisting on questioning every little thing.

My guess is that he's feeling for power roles based on how people defend themselves. Since nobody else bothers me quite as much yet, Vote fluiddruid
color removed, bolding mine

I don't follow the logic of this post at all. Shouldn't we be trying to feel out who the other players are? How else do we find mafia?

FOS Omi no Kami

[Lemur866]

Two questions: is there a way to see how many times someone posted after the game really began? (To eliminate "fluff" posts)
How do you view thread post counts?

To view thread post counts, just go to the MPSIMS page and look for this thread. There is a column labeled "Replies". Click the replies and a table of the thread post counts will appear.

I can't see any way to get "real" post counts other than manually...take the table, count up fluff posts for each poster and subtract.

[Gadarene]

Top of the Page Vote Count


1 -- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (DiggitCamara)
1 -- fluiddruid (Omi No Kami)
1 -- NAF1138 (Hal Briston)
1 -- DiggitCamara (percypercy)
1 -- Lemur866 (Projammer)
1 -- Millit the Frail (Idle Thoughts)
1 -- nesta (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

[DiggitCamara]

In the WereWolf II thread, the first vote was cast by Pleonast.

Immediately afterwards, FlyingCowofDoom questioned (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8405317&postcount=240) that move... turns out FlyingCowofDoom was mafia

Does history repeat itself?

(FOS->NAF1138)

[Gadarene]

Okay, it looks like we need a sub for Achren. Can I get a PM from glee, Malacandra, tirial, threnodyangelfire, or MadTheSwine taking his place?

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

The point I was trying to make with the analogy was that even though scum can hide behind a vote that they allegedly determined at random, that doesn't mean a truly random vote/FOS is a bad idea for someone who uses it on the first day, when information is lacking for a more informed decision.

Just because there are people online who are quite skilled at pretending to be a bank or eBay, doesn't mean one can't legitimately benefit/profit using the internet as a medium for transactions involving money, you just have to be vigilant.

My Mom was visiting last night, so my posting was a bit distracted...

Quite possibly to my detriment, I've now posted copiously my rationalizations for some approaches that apply to a very specific (and shortlived) portion of the game. There have been a few interesting interpretations of those approaches.

In no particular order...

A random FOS seems even more pointless than a random vote.
...
Please tell me (and us) how my reasoning is opposite from yours? I think you're talking about my disliking completely random votes. Are you saying that you advocate completely random votes?
...
I don't like this defense. A random vote is more likely to hit a townie than scum.
...


I agree with this. Too much voting too fast can have BAD results (look at game 2's first day), but the FOS will do about the same as a vote for now. We can start voting once some real conversations happen, but nothing has really been said yet.
...
Totally random voting is bad too though, because it will just muddy up the waters later. I am watching the results of this type of thoughless random action right now in the other game. When you vote you have to be able to back it up with something, because you WILL get called on it eventually. And I think that saying, "well it was just a wild guess" isn't a great defense.

Come on, people. Random.org? That's like saying "Hey, I don't want to be responsible for my vote!" What are you trying to do, leave no trail? The only reason anyone doesn't want to leave a trail (even if it's a crappy trail) is that they're Mafia. A townie has nothing to hide.
...
Since I just FOS'ed you (Grrrr.....you all are making me verb-ize nouns!) for the same reason, I just want to explain: Own it! Own up to your vote, if you've got nothing to be afraid of. If you die, then at least we can see who you did or didn't think was suspicious at any given time. It could come in really handy if you're a Mason or the Detective.
...
Random votes have their place, but I hate to see people hiding behind a website telling them to do something. It just smacks of not taking responsibility for their votes. I don't like that. It seems like something a Mafia would do so that later in the game he/she could go back and say "Hey, I didn't really vote to kill that townie, a randomizer website told me to!"

And after all, in the Werewolf game, the first person to use random.org to cast a vote ended up being scum.

I'm kind of in the "the first vote is pretty much random" boat. Everyone is doing their best to give off I'm-a-townie vibes, so unless someone does slip up badly, there's no real hard data to go on. Whomever get's the vote this time is pretty much guaranteed to try some sort of role claim. About the only thing they're NOT going to claim is scum.

In my opinion, saying "I used random.org!" for voting is pretty useless and at, at worst, perhaps a scum tell. On Day 1, faulty reasoning is likely, but NO reasoning is worse as it really gives us nothing to go on.

So here is my take on the above quotes...

While they have all had some sort of perspective that differs from my "First Day" approach, only one of them voices that difference of perspective without spinning what I said into something that could be used as fuel against me, either today or later in the game.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

:smack: Must...resist...the desire...to use...words...like..."all"...

So as quoted above, Projammer agrees with me more than disagrees. So I should have said:

"While most of them had some sort of perspective that differs from my "First Day" approach..."

[Rachm Qoch]

In the WereWolf II thread, the first vote was cast by Pleonast.

Immediately afterwards, FlyingCowofDoom questioned (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8405317&postcount=240) that move... turns out FlyingCowofDoom was mafia

Does history repeat itself?

(FOS->NAF1138)
To be fair, NAF1138 never even FOS'd you over that. Just a little gentle prodding, nothing out of the norm.

[Idle Thoughts]

<snip snip>

I noticed that I have a vote, and I think it's based on a misunderstanding, if not a deliberate misrepresentation of my first daytime post. I was NOT advocating a no-lynch day, I was just saying that it had seemed obvious at first glance, but then it had lost its appeal. My changing my mind happened before the day even technically started. I was only trying to express how humorously frustrating it feels to post something, trying to second guess (and third and fourth guess) everything based on how someone might think it's a scum tell!

I dunno, from what I posted as reason for voting for you it seems reasonable enough to me and makes sense. It's not completely out of the blue or even hostile and if nobody casts a vote, the game goes nowhere. I casted my vote for you (and even said I may change it later, which, again, I may still do) but your defense at my voting and implying I may be scum just makes me all the more suspicious.

If someone voted for me, I wouldn't automatically assume they were scum. I'd say "Okay, they COULD be scum, but then again they also could be a normal citizen just under false pretenses or suspicion. I wouldn't be so fast to say "Hmm, you voted for me, that's a VERY shady thing to do."

The voting right now seems random as nobody is in the lead currently with any votes. So unless three or four people start voting for you and piling up on you, I wouldn't really start assuming every one of them is a scummy player.

Again, my vote isn't set in stone and I'm constantly reading this topic. I'll continue to do so all of today (since I just got on and tend to be online until night), and if I see anything that trips my buzzer (I am suspicious of others too), I'll vote accordingly.

[Lemur866]

As for Projammer's comment about role claims this early, ONLY people with real roles should claim to get out of lynchings. It's counterproductive to the team for townsfolk to claim non-vanilla status. Anyone lying about their role should be treated as scum. If you're a vanilla townie going to the noose, argue as hard as you can against your lynching, but do NOT lie. Because once you're dead, and your town status is revealed, then the rest of us can comb over your earlier posts knowing that you were innocent all along. If you've lied about all sorts of stuff, that means you might as well be a scum, we have no new information.

So. Anyone who is proven to lie should get a date with the hangman. Maybe they're not an automatic lynch if there are more important fish to fry, but you're going down with all deliberate speed.

[Idle Thoughts]

In the WereWolf II thread, the first vote was cast by Pleonast.

Immediately afterwards, FlyingCowofDoom questioned (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8405317&postcount=240) that move... turns out FlyingCowofDoom was mafia

Does history repeat itself?

(FOS->NAF1138)


This is interesting. I wonder if past games/experience doesn't play a huge part in how people could behave?

I've always noticed this as well. That the ones, when voted for, who say "Why are you voting for me? That's random. Don't vote randomly. Random is bad" always are or turn out to be scum. At least, that's what I've noticed in other games before. It's like a number one defense.


The first round IS always random (well, if you're a townie/citizen that is, and even if you're not, you'll probably be trying to claim and acting like it's random anyway), so that just leaves us with everyone looking suspicious in some ways.. That's just the way of the game. There's not really anything anyone can do unless they over-analyze every post made and even then they could be creating ghosts in their own minds where there aren't any.

Best is to just vote based on little things you've noticed, find out who was what when day is over, and gain further insight based on that info.

[NAF1138]

In the WereWolf II thread, the first vote was cast by Pleonast.

Immediately afterwards, FlyingCowofDoom questioned (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8405317&postcount=240) that move... turns out FlyingCowofDoom was mafia

Does history repeat itself?

(FOS->NAF1138)

Ok now that is just silly.

[NAF1138]

The first round IS always random (well, if you're a townie/citizen that is, and even if you're not, you'll probably be trying to claim and acting like it's random anyway), so that just leaves us with everyone looking suspicious in some ways.. That's just the way of the game. There's not really anything anyone can do unless they over-analyze every post made and even then they could be creating ghosts in their own minds where there aren't any.

Best is to just vote based on little things you've noticed, find out who was what when day is over, and gain further insight based on that info.

Bolding mine

Which is it? Is it random, or are votes deliberate?

Do you not see the difference?

Random is bad. Voting based on little things that may or may not be correct is good. I don't see what the problem is here.

[NAF1138]

I really need to think out my enitire post in advance rather than tripple posting. Oh well.

Anyone else wondering where percypercy & Lightnin' have gone off to?

[dnooman]

Anyone else wondering where percypercy & Lightnin' have gone off to?
Yes, especially because they were the two to jump on DiggitCamara which is something that needs to be discussed further IMO. It's one of several leads we can work on that might produce some results.

[Idle Thoughts]

Bolding mine

Which is it? Is it random, or are votes deliberate?

Do you not see the difference?

Random is bad. Voting based on little things that may or may not be correct is good. I don't see what the problem is here.

Random, which is what I said throughout that whole post.

Since it's so random, the only thing one can do is find things that make sense to THEM, and thus, place their random vote (unless, of course, they know who is who and already know how the ground lies).

[Blaster Master]

In the WereWolf II thread, the first vote was cast by Pleonast.

Immediately afterwards, FlyingCowofDoom questioned (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8405317&postcount=240) that move... turns out FlyingCowofDoom was mafia

Does history repeat itself?

(FOS->NAF1138)

I don't think so. In the other game, FCOD was playing completely differently and had a relatively low post count and a very different post style. In this game, NAF is among the leaders in posts among players and, while I haven't agreed with everything she's said, none of it pings my scum-dar.

[NAF1138]

I don't think so. In the other game, FCOD was playing completely differently and had a relatively low post count and a very different post style. In this game, NAF is among the leaders in posts among players and, while I haven't agreed with everything she's said, none of it pings my scum-dar.

UM...he. I'm a he.

[tirial]

Hi Gadarene, I am online and have PM'd you about replacing Achren, if no one else has beaten me to it.

[Omi no Kami]

color removed, bolding mine

I don't follow the logic of this post at all. Shouldn't we be trying to feel out who the other players are? How else do we find mafia?

FOS Omi no Kami

Of course we should, but for some reason challenging the way someone approaches basic gameplay strikes me as more likely to review a power role (because someone with extra abilities is going to play in an entirely different manner than one without) than scum at this point.

Plus, fluid seemed to be coming on really, really strong. She claims that she's an agressive player, which I'm willing to accept for now, but since nobody's in danger of being lynched I'm going to preserve my right to be suspicious. :)

[Gadarene]

tirial:
Hi Gadarene, I am online and have PM'd you about replacing Achren, if no one else has beaten me to it.

Nope; you're the first!

[Gadarene]

Updated player list:

1. fluiddruid
2. NAF1138
3. CaerieD
4. ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
5. Hal Briston
6. nesta
7. Projammer
8. percypercy
9. SnakesCatLady
10. Lightnin'
11. Lemur866
12. tirial
13. Blaster Master
14. Millit the Frail
15. Rachm Qoch
16. DiggitCamara
17. dnooman
18. Kyrie Eleison
19. Omi No Kami
20. Idle Thoughts

And here's our list of reserves, to be subbed in as needed. I'll be instituting a similar "no lurking" rule as NAF did last time, so we may need you folk.

1. glee
2. MadTheSwine
3. Malacandra
4. threnodyangelfire

If anyone else wants to be put on the reserve list, let me know.

[Rachm Qoch]

Anyone else wondering where percypercy & Lightnin' have gone off to?Yes, especially because they were the two to jump on DiggitCamara which is something that needs to be discussed further IMO. It's one of several leads we can work on that might produce some results.
I thought Lightnin's quick draw on DiggitCamara for basically frivolous reasons was a bit odd too.

But how he immediately backed down and unvoted DiggitCamara once you called him on it was a bit odder. He seemed just a little too defensive.

[NAF1138]

I thought Lightnin's quick draw on DiggitCamara for basically frivolous reasons was a bit odd too.

But how he immediately backed down and unvoted DiggitCamara once you called him on it was a bit odder. He seemed just a little too defensive.


I am going to go ahead and vote lightnin' until he gets in here and says something.

Scummy behavior and a low post count. Can't have that.

[Lightnin']

I thought Lightnin's quick draw on DiggitCamara for basically frivolous reasons was a bit odd too.

But how he immediately backed down and unvoted DiggitCamara once you called him on it was a bit odder. He seemed just a little too defensive.

Is it defensive to reconsider? Heck, if you want, go ahead and count me a revote for DiggitCamara. I had originally voted to lynch him because I thought he jumped on Cookies awful fast and for no reason, and I thought THAT was a bit suspicious. Further conversation among everyone else seemed to indicate that the first day's basically random, anyway, so I withdrew my vote.

But if it makes you feel better, let's lynch Digg.

Of course, at this point, EVERYTHING is a reason to be suspicious. Should I be suspicious of everyone who's suspicious of ME? :rolleyes:

[Blaster Master]

UM...he. I'm a he.
Well damnit... I could have sworn I saw you explicitly say otherwise, cause you didn't strike me as female, but... oh well. I'll add it to my little gender spreadsheet.

[Gadarene]

Hey, Lightnin': Don't edit your posts.

This is your first and last warning. Next time you do, you'll be removed from the game.

Thanks.

[Blaster Master]

Of course, at this point, EVERYTHING is a reason to be suspicious. Should I be suspicious of everyone who's suspicious of ME? :rolleyes:
Depends, do they have a point? I think NAF pointed out some good reasons to be suspicious of you... editting your post doesn't help your cause either. :eek:

[NAF1138]

Is it defensive to reconsider? Heck, if you want, go ahead and count me a revote for DiggitCamara. I had originally voted to lynch him because I thought he jumped on Cookies awful fast and for no reason, and I thought THAT was a bit suspicious. Further conversation among everyone else seemed to indicate that the first day's basically random, anyway, so I withdrew my vote.

But if it makes you feel better, let's lynch Digg.

Of course, at this point, EVERYTHING is a reason to be suspicious. Should I be suspicious of everyone who's suspicious of ME? :rolleyes:

hmm...yup, I am happy with my vote.

[Lightnin']

Hey, Lightnin': Don't edit your posts.

This is your first and last warning. Next time you do, you'll be removed from the game.

Thanks.

Oh, fer cryin' out loud. I added "awful fast and for no reason" to that post, *and* I did it before anyone else posted. Nothing material was added, or subtracted, and I only did it because apparently doing ANYTHING without spelling everything out is suspicious.

I won't do it again. But I would like to point out that those who are pointing out just how suspicious everything is might just be doing it to try to deflect suspicion from themselves. I think the people who act most normal are the ones least likely to benefit from fomenting chaos.

By the way, I'm at work, which is why I've been kinda quiet lately. And now I head to lunch.

[Gadarene]

Oh, fer cryin' out loud. I added "awful fast and for no reason" to that post, *and* I did it before anyone else posted. Nothing material was added, or subtracted, and I only did it because apparently doing ANYTHING without spelling everything out is suspicious.

I don't doubt any of that. Plus I like ya because you're from Oregon, like me. But the "no editing" rule is a matter of strict liability; no editing is allowed, period. Feel free to double- and triple-post, however. I know I did, back in the halcyon days when Mafia II was still in its first two dozen or so pages.

[Lemur866]

Editing your posts? That's a paddling.

[Kyrie Eleison]

I'd be interested in knowing what everyone thinks of the masons in our midst. Since they can either win with the town, or win at the expense of the remainder of the town by outnumbering non-mason townies at the end, do they really have any motivation to go for the latter sort of win? Would the expected mason strategy be to play to reduce the number of townies, and then go for mafia elimination? Or would it simply be to play to eliminate the mob as quickly as possible?

I would think it would be the latter -- either way, they win, so why take the more risky course? So what's the point of the mason win rule then? To set a sort of time limit for the town? To encourage the town to go on a mason hunt near the end of the game?

Does anyone have any idea how many mafia there are? (Well, okay, there are a few of us who know exactly how many there are -- fess up, scum!) I don't really have much experience with this game, so I don't know what ratio of mob to town would make for a balanced game with the roles in our particular setup. The first werewolf game had roughly the same number of players, and had five werewolves. Is it likely that we similarly have five mob members?

I suppose I can't really ask for opinions about the number of masons, without forcing them either to lie or to risk revealing themselves, so I won't ask.

[tirial]

"Hi Guys, I'm new in town. My car's broken down. Know a good place to stay? What's this town noticeboard? Mafia? Masons? Lynchings? Oh my!
<faints>
Anyone know a good mechanic?"

I'm reading through the thread again and I'll post some analysis when I finish.

[Blaster Master]

I'd be interested in knowing what everyone thinks of the masons in our midst. Since they can either win with the town, or win at the expense of the remainder of the town by outnumbering non-mason townies at the end, do they really have any motivation to go for the latter sort of win? Would the expected mason strategy be to play to reduce the number of townies, and then go for mafia elimination? Or would it simply be to play to eliminate the mob as quickly as possible?

There is no advantage for the masons to go after townies, as you point out. However, if it is late game, and the non-masons are close to being out-numbered, it may then become necessary for non-masons to lynch at least one mason to get a victory.

However, the probability that enough masons will be left near the end to out number the non-mason townies is so low, that I don't think it's worth worrying about. That is, it will only be an issue near end game when it is likely that the masons have been revealed AND it's to the advantage of the mafia to kill any confirmed townie; thus, I suspect if it is even a possibility, it will likely be self correcting.

[Lemur866]

Hmmm. I believe this is Gadarene's first time hosting one of these games, so he's likely to stay fairly close to the other games. This game we're in seems much more like the werewolf game than the complex mafia game. So...5 mafia seems like a reasonable guess, plus or minus N. But it can't be much more than 5, or else the mafia can very quickly start railroading citizens during the day.

Plus remember the mafia get to make one recruitment. This is actually better for them than having a member from the start, because since they get to pick from surviving members they're guaranteed not to have that one guy lynched at random, because he's obviously still alive. Plus they screw up the paper trail.

[Idle Thoughts]

I thought Lightnin's quick draw on DiggitCamara for basically frivolous reasons was a bit odd too.

But how he immediately backed down and unvoted DiggitCamara once you called him on it was a bit odder. He seemed just a little too defensive.

This pinged my meter too, but not enough to change my vote yet. (on preview, though, I do notice more what you're talking about, though, in his post).

And, for the record, I'm still pretty suspicious of fluiddriud. (on preview I see I'm not the only one).

[Idle Thoughts]

I think I used one too many "though's" in the last post. :smack:

[Blaster Master]

Plus remember the mafia get to make one recruitment. This is actually better for them than having a member from the start, because since they get to pick from surviving members they're guaranteed not to have that one guy lynched at random, because he's obviously still alive. Plus they screw up the paper trail.

Good point, and something I'm worried about. Say an important power role gets revealed in a near lynch in the next couple of days, or someone gets confirmed townie status (say, claims mason to save his neck with no counter-claim). If he's then recruited, we could be in for a world of hurt. Obviously, it's not something to be concerned about until there is no night kill, but... could it be the doctor protected? could it be the night watchman? or could it be a recuritment?

Anyway, SOP for mafia games is about 25% of the population to be scum, thus anything outside of 4-6 mafia would be unbalanced one way or the other. How is that affected by recruitment...? I imagine that means 6 would be too unfair, thus there's probably 4-5 out there now.

OTOH, I'm not sure how much supposing about the number of mafia helps. That is, we could think there's so many mafia, and have that many suspects, but we can still only lynch one at a time, and how that lynchee turns out will give us information about the other suspects. Certainly keep a list of suspects, but don't artificially expand or truncate it with unverifiable quantities.

[Lemur866]

When does the first day's voting deadline end?

[Gadarene]

If my addition skills haven't failed me, Day One ends on Monday at 10:35 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.

[Blaster Master]

If my addition skills haven't failed me, Day One ends on Monday at 10:35 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.
I think it's Sunday... 96 hour days, right?

[Blaster Master]

Agh... NM, I'm a doofus, it started yesterday, not Wednesday; you're right.

[tirial]

On a re-reading I'm not sure if there is enough for me to be comfortable voting for someone. There are a few things that stick out though.

It is noticeable that Idle Thoughts played up his experience with the game. In the first game, the player who did that was killed fairly quickly. Saying it would be "flattering" to be killed first (post264), doesn't really help the town much, as the analysis from an experienced player would be more useful when there was more to go on. If he was mafia he could be certain that he wouldn't be killed, but then again the mafia might not kill him if he was a townie and leave us to waste a lynch on a valuable resource.

Projammer in post 223 suggests forcing roleclaims, which is a bad thing for the town. He also suggested voting for Lemur for reasons like "Ringtail" (Post 207), which ignores the two dodgy actions Lemur had already taken. (Lemur's mafia post early on about numbers, and his suggestion of "shooting the breeze" post 202 which is less likely to produce information than voting patterns which can be checked.)

Lemur866 for the two reasons above.

DarksideCookies looks suspicious for a few comments - kicking off the game by mentioning going fishing (Post 170)? What for, something to wrap in newspaper and leave in a citizen's bed? More importantly, using random.org (post 201) when 8 votes were already in play - there should have been something to go on better than random.org by the point that post was made.

On the other hand, when Lightnin' accused someone else of having an itchy trigger finger, and immediately votes for them it is funny, but I'm not sure what it signifies for his allegiences.

FOS Idle Thought and Lemur866

[Rachm Qoch]

If my addition skills haven't failed me, Day One ends on Monday at 10:35 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.
If you're referencing to post #161, that's 8:35 AM Eastern, right?

[Gadarene]

Rachm Qoch:
If you're referencing to post #161, that's 8:35 AM Eastern, right?

I don't think so. I made that post at 10:35 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (I had to wait until at least 9:00 to see if percussion had responded, and then it took a little while after that to get the ducks in a row), and game days are four real-time days long.

Right?

*quick division* Ninety-six divided by four, carry the one... Yeah.

Day One ends at 10:35 a.m. Eastern Standard Time on Monday.

[Kyrie Eleison]

Day One ends at 10:35 a.m. Eastern Standard Time on Monday.
Please have mercy on me, oh mighty and powerful moderator, but don't you really mean 10:35 A.M Eastern Daylight Time? 10:35 EST would be 11:35 EDT at the moment.

[Lightnin']

hmm...yup, I am happy with my vote.

You know something? Screw it. unvote DiggitCamara, vote NAF1138. I don't really care how suspicious it might appear to change my vote, but I've been noticing how free Naf seems to be with the suspicion himself. Is it defensive? Most likely- and what's wrong with that? It seems to me that offense is a lot more suspicious than defense, and Naf has been fairly offensive. Uh, so to speak.

I'm also more than a little suspicious of people who say that someone's being too defensive when he defends himself. It seems to me that's just looking for an excuse for a hangin'.

Is there a way we can get a thread archive hosted offline somewhere? With the hamsters as crotchety as they are, it kinda makes it hard to look up someone's posting record.

[fluiddruid]

On a re-reading I'm not sure if there is enough for me to be comfortable voting for someone. There are a few things that stick out though.

It is noticeable that Idle Thoughts played up his experience with the game. In the first game, the player who did that was killed fairly quickly. Saying it would be "flattering" to be killed first (post264), doesn't really help the town much, as the analysis from an experienced player would be more useful when there was more to go on. If he was mafia he could be certain that he wouldn't be killed, but then again the mafia might not kill him if he was a townie and leave us to waste a lynch on a valuable resource.

Projammer in post 223 suggests forcing roleclaims, which is a bad thing for the town. He also suggested voting for Lemur for reasons like "Ringtail" (Post 207), which ignores the two dodgy actions Lemur had already taken. (Lemur's mafia post early on about numbers, and his suggestion of "shooting the breeze" post 202 which is less likely to produce information than voting patterns which can be checked.)

Lemur866 for the two reasons above.

DarksideCookies looks suspicious for a few comments - kicking off the game by mentioning going fishing (Post 170)? What for, something to wrap in newspaper and leave in a citizen's bed? More importantly, using random.org (post 201) when 8 votes were already in play - there should have been something to go on better than random.org by the point that post was made.

On the other hand, when Lightnin' accused someone else of having an itchy trigger finger, and immediately votes for them it is funny, but I'm not sure what it signifies for his allegiences.

FOS Idle Thought and Lemur866tirial,

I'm impressed by your first post. I agree with most of what you have to say, and, did mild FOS DarkSide for the same issue - but not seeing anything else at this point. You have some good scum candidates there though.

Since it's a slow day at work, I took the opportunity to reread the entire thread and take some notes. My thoughts:

I have to agree with NAF on Lightnin. He voted for NAF in post 189, was FOS'd over it in post 227 by dnooman (who hasn't pinged my scumdar yet) and then promptly retracted it in post 232. I've found his posts on this page to lack any real value - I don't expect him to explain away his actions more, but he has done little to root out scum or to give us any real leads.

Second on my list was Kyrie Eleison. He too voted for NAF and there is something about this post (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489010&postcount=331) that really rings wrong for me. I truly don't see why he's trying to bring up Mason strategy here - is he trying to lay the groundwork for a future role claim? Omi no Kami said he suspected Kyrie prior to that, but didn't give a reason - Omi, if you have more, please share.

I'm not ready to vote yet but feedback on the above would be much obliged.

Also on my list, but only barely, are nesta, who has not really posted too much about posters, just mostly about strategy, as well as Rachm Qoch, and SnakeCatLady (without looking at the player list) for simply not posting that much. I'd very much like to hear their thoughts at this point.

[Gadarene]

Really? Huh. I never knew there was a difference, but you're right (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Eastern_Time_Zone).

Learn something new every day!

Yes, the day ends on Monday at 10:35 a.m. my time. :)

[Idle Thoughts]

All right, based on a few recent posts (in the last hour) that I probably don't have to explain, I'm going to unvote Millit the Frail and vote Lightnin'

Explaination anyway: He seems like he's sweating bullets just being under observation and having a vote against him and has continually changed his colors accordingly just to get the heat off. Too shaky and far too defensive. Plus he's been on my radar a bit from the start but I had him at a low level. But yeah, based on his posts of today, I'm going to vote him and probably stand by it unless someone all of 'fesses they're scum or posts something illrefutable.

[Projammer]

Hey, Lightnin': Don't edit your posts.

Another newbie question.

What's the problem with editing posts?

Not going to argue about it. Just curious.

[Gadarene]

Top of the Page Vote Count

2 -- Lightnin' (NAF1138, Idle Thoughts)
2 -- NAF1138 (Hal Briston, Lightnin')
1 -- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (DiggitCamara)
1 -- fluiddruid (Omi No Kami)
1 -- DiggitCamara (percypercy)
1 -- Lemur866 (Projammer)
1 -- nesta (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

[Lemur866]

Hmmm. Anyone notice fluiddruid seems a liiiitle bit too obsequious there? Trying to curry favor? What's up with that?

And Lightnin' seems too angry responding to NAF1138. I know it's a tossup whether to respond to an accusation or not, but there's no point in getting upset over an accusation. And then there's the whole defensiveness over being called to defensive meta thing.

On my "clean" list is NAF1138. Aggressive early play is likely to get you killed from both sides, but after you're dead your actions become posthumously validated. Townsfolk can win by sacrificing their lives for the greater good, scum can't. Going balls-out like he's doing is too risky for a mafiosi for no benefit.

[Gadarene]

Projammer:
Another newbie question. What's the problem with editing posts? Not going to argue about it. Just curious.

It gives people an opportunity to craft their posts to appear less (or more) suspicious after the fact. Players have to look for clues however they can, and particular phrasings or verbal slip-ups are often very helpful (ask nesta how she (?) got outed as Mafia last game). Editing allows people to cover their tracks.

[Lightnin']

I have to agree with NAF on Lightnin. He voted for NAF in post 189, was FOS'd over it in post 227 by dnooman (who hasn't pinged my scumdar yet) and then promptly retracted it in post 232. I've found his posts on this page to lack any real value - I don't expect him to explain away his actions more, but he has done little to root out scum or to give us any real leads.

Um, no I didn't. Post #189 was a post by Kyrie Eleison voting for Naf. My first post was #193, in reaction to DiggitCamara's vote to lynch ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies.
and I retracted it in #232 after reading the reasons for why the first day's so darn random.

Of course, between my initial vote and my retraction thereof, NAF1138 used my post as a reason to FOS me. It seems to me that if anyone's been flinging around the accusations, it's Naf- check his history. That's why I voted for Naf in #346, and I stand by that vote.

[Projammer]

I'd be interested in knowing what everyone thinks of the masons in our midst. Since they can either win with the town, or win at the expense of the remainder of the town by outnumbering non-mason townies at the end, do they really have any motivation to go for the latter sort of win? Would the expected mason strategy be to play to reduce the number of townies, and then go for mafia elimination? Or would it simply be to play to eliminate the mob as quickly as possible?

I would imagine the mason strategy would be to try to identify the roles of non-masons and then attempt to manipulate the vote to reduce the townies and mafia at about the same rate until they outnumbered the remaining townies and then focus on mafia.

[Projammer]

Projammer in post 223 suggests forcing roleclaims, which is a bad thing for the town. He also suggested voting for Lemur for reasons like "Ringtail" (Post 207), which ignores the two dodgy actions Lemur had already taken. (Lemur's mafia post early on about numbers, and his suggestion of "shooting the breeze" post 202 which is less likely to produce information than voting patterns which can be checked.)

That wasn't me advocating role claims. It was an observation of actions from the other two games. Early in the games when people were making their final posts a lot of them were claiming roles. I agree that roles should be kept secret as long as possible. Outting the watchman, detective, or doc early in the game would be devastating. Outting the do-gooders render them to nothing more than townies with fancy names. The mafia would know not to try to recruit them.

Voting Lemur for having a striped tail was to have something a bit less bland than random.org

[Idle Thoughts]

Top of the Page Vote Count

2 -- Lightnin' (NAF1138, Idle Thoughts)
2 -- NAF1138 (Hal Briston, Lightnin')
1 -- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (DiggitCamara)
1 -- fluiddruid (Omi No Kami)
1 -- DiggitCamara (percypercy)
1 -- Lemur866 (Projammer)
1 -- nesta (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

Simple question. What does Top of the Page mean? It's not on the top of my page. I think it only applies if the user has the posts per page settings on "Default".

[Lemur866]

Of course, between my initial vote and my retraction thereof, NAF1138 used my post as a reason to FOS me. It seems to me that if anyone's been flinging around the accusations, it's Naf- check his history. That's why I voted for Naf in #346, and I stand by that vote.
But here's the thing. Flinging accusations isn't suspicious. Yeah, like I said before, it's liable to get you killed. And once you're dead, all your secrets are revealed. If NAF is scum, he's being really dumb, because he's likely to end up dead and revealed as mafia pretty soon, and that benefits the mafia not at all. But if he's flinging crap and calling attention to himself and is town, his death can still benefit the honest citizens.

Note that this doesn't mean I think his early accusation of you is neccesarily correct, it's very likely to be incorrect, only (5+/-N)/20 likely to be correct. Just that he himself is probably clean.

[fluiddruid]

Um, no I didn't. Post #189 was a post by Kyrie Eleison voting for Naf. My first post was #193, in reaction to DiggitCamara's vote to lynch ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies.
and I retracted it in #232 after reading the reasons for why the first day's so darn random.

Of course, between my initial vote and my retraction thereof, NAF1138 used my post as a reason to FOS me. It seems to me that if anyone's been flinging around the accusations, it's Naf- check his history. That's why I voted for Naf in #346, and I stand by that vote.Ack, you are correct, it looks like I had columns mixed up slightly with Kyrie in my notes. In any case it was your backing down almost immediately when FOS that I found odd, and your recent posts. (Beginning to see why spreadsheets are a good idea...)

NAF has been pushing a lot of buttons - that's true. So have I. I never said flinging accusations was necessarily a bad thing and I stand by that. I would rather get things out in the open. Making few accusations and having no suspicions is the sign of a weak townie or scum. Either a small loss or a gain to lynch. He's on a lot of trust lists and I tend to agree. I would assume scum attempts to lynch wouldn't be so scattershot.

[Gadarene]

Simple question. What does Top of the Page mean? It's not on the top of my page. I think it only applies if the user has the posts per page settings on "Default".

The two greatest words in the English language! De Fault! De Fault!

[/Homer]

And here I thought I was being all clever with the vote counts at the top of my (unfashionably) defaulted pages. :(

[Lightnin']

But here's the thing. Flinging accusations isn't suspicious. Yeah, like I said before, it's liable to get you killed. And once you're dead, all your secrets are revealed. If NAF is scum, he's being really dumb, because he's likely to end up dead and revealed as mafia pretty soon, and that benefits the mafia not at all. But if he's flinging crap and calling attention to himself and is town, his death can still benefit the honest citizens.

Note that this doesn't mean I think his early accusation of you is neccesarily correct, it's very likely to be incorrect, only (5+/-N)/20 likely to be correct. Just that he himself is probably clean.

Good explanation- and I think that was why I got so irritated at his nomination of me. As near as I could tell, I hadn't done anything that I felt warranted any suspicion, especially since I retracted my first (admittedly random) vote- he seemed to be going out of his way to find something, anything, suspicious. And then he seemed self-congratulatory on his suspicion of me after I "confirmed" that suspicion by defending my actions.

It just seemed really random, and I can't see any real use in doing it.

It's also annoying in that I now feel frozen in indecision. If we defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we don't defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we just keep quiet, we're suspicious. If that's the way this is played, why bother?

[percypercy]

I was at my niece's birthday party. I just spent the last three hours helping a group of 5 year olds paint tea cups. I'm back now. I voted for diggitcamera because he seemed to be stressing the 'I'm a townie' bit a little too much, but like I said, I'm willing to be convinced I'm wrong.

[Lemur866]

But the "everything is suspicious" problem only applies for the first day or two. After that we'll have a paper trail of who voted for who and who ended up dead and what their role was. Then we start to see who advocated for the death of the innocent, who voted for the guilty, who the mafia wanted to silence and who they let live.

[NAF1138]

Um, no I didn't. Post #189 was a post by Kyrie Eleison voting for Naf. My first post was #193, in reaction to DiggitCamara's vote to lynch ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies.
and I retracted it in #232 after reading the reasons for why the first day's so darn random.

Of course, between my initial vote and my retraction thereof, NAF1138 used my post as a reason to FOS me. It seems to me that if anyone's been flinging around the accusations, it's Naf- check his history. That's why I voted for Naf in #346, and I stand by that vote.


I wouldn't say I have been flinging accusations. I have actually accused, I think, only 2 people. I have stated publiclly that I am suspicious of a couple more, but out of 20 people, that is hardly a lot.

Words have meaning, be careful what you say.


Good explanation- and I think that was why I got so irritated at his nomination of me. As near as I could tell, I hadn't done anything that I felt warranted any suspicion, especially since I retracted my first (admittedly random) vote- he seemed to be going out of his way to find something, anything, suspicious. And then he seemed self-congratulatory on his suspicion of me after I "confirmed" that suspicion by defending my actions.

Your right, I was being a dick. You voted in my favor and I voted against you. I get why you would be angry/frustrated. But that doesn't mean you aren't scum.

It's also annoying in that I now feel frozen in indecision. If we defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we don't defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we just keep quiet, we're suspicious. If that's the way this is played, why bother?

Just calm down and tell the truth. (I am not saying you haven't been, but you sure haven't been calm about it) If you are town and stick with the truth, the worst that can happen is that you die, and you become a usufull dead guy.

The only people that should be afraid of getting killed at this stage are mob members.

Play the game like you are going to get killed tonight. You will be fine.

[NAF1138]

huh? is my last post blank?

[NAF1138]

[QUOTE=Lightnin']Um, no I didn't. Post #189 was a post by Kyrie Eleison voting for Naf. My first post was #193, in reaction to DiggitCamara's vote to lynch ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies.
and I retracted it in #232 after reading the reasons for why the first day's so darn random.

Of course, between my initial vote and my retraction thereof, NAF1138 used my post as a reason to FOS me. It seems to me that if anyone's been flinging around the accusations, it's Naf- check his history. That's why I voted for Naf in #346, and I stand by that vote.[/QUOUTE]


I wouldn't say I have been flinging accusations. I have actually accused, I think, only 2 people. I have stated publicly that I am suspicious of a couple more, but out of 20 people, that is hardly a lot.

[NAF1138]

Good explanation- and I think that was why I got so irritated at his nomination of me. As near as I could tell, I hadn't done anything that I felt warranted any suspicion, especially since I retracted my first (admittedly random) vote- he seemed to be going out of his way to find something, anything, suspicious. And then he seemed self-congratulatory on his suspicion of me after I "confirmed" that suspicion by defending my actions.

Your right, I was being a dick. You voted in my favor and I voted against you. I get why you would be angry/frustrated. But that doesn't mean you aren't scum.

It's also annoying in that I now feel frozen in indecision. If we defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we don't defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we just keep quiet, we're suspicious. If that's the way this is played, why bother?

Just calm down and tell the truth. (I am not saying you haven't been, but you sure haven't been calm about it) If you are town and stick with the truth, the worst that can happen is that you die, and you become a useful dead guy.

The only people that should be afraid of getting killed at this stage are mob members.

Play the game like you are going to get killed tonight. You will be fine.

[fluiddruid]

Mod Hat On
huh? is my last post blank?There was a "QUOUTE" tag in there that caused the whole thing to bug out. In the interest of fairness, could you please confirm that your content was not changed?
Mod Hat Off

[NAF1138]

Thanks fluiddruid nice to have a mod in the game.

What was that?

[DiggitCamara]

I've been browsing through the thread to see if I can find patterns that conform to my initial ideas.

One thing I've concluded is that I have to un-FOS NAF1138. His participates often and reasonably (at least in my mind). So, my "silly post" has been reconsidered.

Second: until he(she) was voted in, Lightnin' had scance participation. Since then, though there have been a few more posts, Lightnin' has mainly defended him/herself. So I'll go right ahead and FOS LIGHTNIN'

And, finally, percypercy has been almost completely absent from this thread, and for that reason alone I'll unvote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies and vote percypercy

[Lightnin']

Your right, I was being a dick. You voted in my favor and I voted against you. I get why you would be angry/frustrated. But that doesn't mean you aren't scum.


Well now I'm really confused. I never voted for you, or even pointed the finger at you, until you accused me. I have only voted or pointed the finger at Diggit. Right?

If I'm wrong, I blame my blood sugar and/or Rush Limbaugh.

[NAF1138]

Well now I'm really confused. I never voted for you, or even pointed the finger at you, until you accused me. I have only voted or pointed the finger at Diggit. Right?

If I'm wrong, I blame my blood sugar and/or Rush Limbaugh.
Sorry I was being unclear. I meant you sided with me (against Diggit, which may have had nothing to do with my involvment, but we were on the same side of that argument more or less) and then I sided against you (first FOSing you then voting for you)

Then I was smug, I admit it. Bad trait of mine, I will try harder to keep it in check.

[Kyrie Eleison]

Second on my list was Kyrie Eleison. He too voted for NAF and there is something about this post (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489010&postcount=331) that really rings wrong for me. I truly don't see why he's trying to bring up Mason strategy here - is he trying to lay the groundwork for a future role claim? Omi no Kami said he suspected Kyrie prior to that, but didn't give a reason - Omi, if you have more, please share.
Yes, I voted for NAF. I was the first to do so, and I didn't try to persuade anyone or make any further case against NAF after the message containing and explaining my vote. Many people have cast first votes against others. As has been discussed, that's pretty much how the first day works. Would those votes also retroactively become scummy if others were to add their weight to them? IIRC, he garnered three whole votes, yours among them, before I unvoted -- again, the first to do so -- and the generously-named "mini-wagon" started to unwind. I'd love to know exactly how this is suspicious behavior -- it's not like I could have known you and Hal Briston would also vote for him.

No, not laying groundwork, sorry. I brought up the topic mainly because I couldn't really see any reason that the masons would make an attempt at a mason-only win, but if they weren't expected to, I wasn't sure I understood the purpose of including the rule. However, if I was mistaken about what the masons were likely to do, it would mean that masons were possibly behaving in ways indistinguishable from scum, as both masons and the mafia would be pushing for townie kills. I sought some reassurance, and I received it (on preview, though, I see that Projammer now disagrees with my assessment.) I also brought it up to provoke discussion, because, in general, discussion is good for the town, and bad for its opponents.

[percypercy]

I've been browsing through the thread to see if I can find patterns that conform to my initial ideas.

One thing I've concluded is that I have to un-FOS NAF1138. His participates often and reasonably (at least in my mind). So, my "silly post" has been reconsidered.

Second: until he(she) was voted in, Lightnin' had scance participation. Since then, though there have been a few more posts, Lightnin' has mainly defended him/herself. So I'll go right ahead and FOS LIGHTNIN'

And, finally, percypercy has been almost completely absent from this thread, and for that reason alone I'll unvote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies and vote percypercy


I can only conclude this is a retaliatory vote as I have certainly not been absent. My vote for Diggitcamera stands.

[DiggitCamara]

I can only conclude this is a retaliatory vote as I have certainly not been absent. My vote for Diggitcamera stands.
You can of course take it any way you like to.

However, my reason to vote for it is simple: you haven't participated enough in this thread. This may be (as you said) because real Life (RL) has interfered with your SD "duties".

However, in my mind low participation in this thread is a strong scum tell.

[Rachm Qoch]

tirial,

I'm impressed by your first post. I agree with most of what you have to say, and, did mild FOS DarkSide for the same issue - but not seeing anything else at this point. You have some good scum candidates there though.

Since it's a slow day at work, I took the opportunity to reread the entire thread and take some notes. My thoughts:

I have to agree with NAF on Lightnin. He voted for NAF in post 189, was FOS'd over it in post 227 by dnooman (who hasn't pinged my scumdar yet) and then promptly retracted it in post 232. I've found his posts on this page to lack any real value - I don't expect him to explain away his actions more, but he has done little to root out scum or to give us any real leads.

Second on my list was Kyrie Eleison. He too voted for NAF and there is something about this post (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489010&postcount=331) that really rings wrong for me. I truly don't see why he's trying to bring up Mason strategy here - is he trying to lay the groundwork for a future role claim? Omi no Kami said he suspected Kyrie prior to that, but didn't give a reason - Omi, if you have more, please share.

I'm not ready to vote yet but feedback on the above would be much obliged.

Also on my list, but only barely, are nesta, who has not really posted too much about posters, just mostly about strategy, as well as Rachm Qoch, and SnakeCatLady (without looking at the player list) for simply not posting that much. I'd very much like to hear their thoughts at this point.
Might I gently remind you that you also voted for NAF? In what a couple villagers regarded as somewhat of a "Me Too!" pile-on manner? What makes Kyrie Eleison's or Lightnin's votes for NAF any more nefarious than your own?

Regarding SnakeCatLady, according to post #269 she should be back with us tomorrow.

[SnakesCatLady]

As I posted last night, real life has kept me away from the computer - but I'm back! I shouldn't have a major absence until next Friday. Ya'll should see the really cool soft-sculpture dragon I got at the yard sale!

I've been doing a bit of catch up reading, and I think my shaky finger of shame wants to point at Lightnin'. I'm not sure I can articulate why, but something seems kinda fishy.

[dnooman]

After I FOS'd Lightnin' and he reversed his position completely, I thought it was suspicious. I didn't say anything because that would have brought up the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario that Lightnin' himself brought up later. I wanted to see how he explained himself after others noticed this behavior. He has done that, and I still think he's acting more like someone who has been found out, rather than someone who has been wrongly accused.

The reason for his initial vote was that DiggitCamara had "an itchy trigger finger" and could not be trusted. Now Lightnin' is the person who has placed the most votes. I find the vote,unvote,revote behavior to be suspect, as well as his apparent reversal on being "trigger happy". These reasons plus the general tone of some of his posts leads me to vote Lightnin'. Also he seems to have forgotten that he voted for NAF1138

You know something? Screw it. unvote DiggitCamara, vote NAF1138. I don't really care how suspicious it might appear to change my vote, but I've been noticing how free Naf seems to be with the suspicion himself. Is it defensive? Most likely- and what's wrong with that? It seems to me that offense is a lot more suspicious than defense, and Naf has been fairly offensive. Uh, so to speak.

By my count this is the third vote for him, he is still far from being lynched. If the momentum to lynch him seems to be gaining mafia backing, I will of course unvote to hopefully slow things down.
We definitely need to take our time with our discussions using the full day if necessary. However we need to try to avoid last minute speed lynchings, those can be very dangerous to the town and can be easily manipulated by Mafia in order to hammer a townie.

[fluiddruid]

Might I gently remind you that you also voted for NAF? In what a couple villagers regarded as somewhat of a "Me Too!" pile-on manner? What makes Kyrie Eleison's or Lightnin's votes for NAF any more nefarious than your own?I haven't forgotten and don't believe anyone has; I simply have gotten a lot of flak for it (while the others' votes had gone previously unexamined), and I believe I've explained my reasoning thoroughly.

[Omi no Kami]

Hmm, you know something? I've been watching everyone, and while Fluid seems quite reasonable when she explained away my accusations, it looks like Kyrie Eleison is much less comfortable being challenged. She (or he) is quiet, and she (or he) just seems a bit too eager to please.

unvote fluiddruid
vote Kyrie Eleison

[dnooman]

Well now I'm really confused. I never voted for you, or even pointed the finger at you, until you accused me. I have only voted or pointed the finger at Diggit. Right?

Ok, I see what he meant to say here. Replace the "have" with "had" and it makes more sense.

[Lightnin']

Ok, I see what he meant to say here. Replace the "have" with "had" and it makes more sense.

Ah, yeah. My bad. "Had", not "have".

[Hal Briston]

Ok, time to catch up a bit.

I'm really torn here -- play suspicions close to the vest, or point out every word someone says that tweaks you the wrong way? Pointing things out seems have the effect of putting a bull’s-eye on one's chest, but NAF's advice is sound: "Play the game like you are going to get killed tonight". And has been pointed out several times -- information helps the town, while silence helps the scum. Time to open my yap again.

NAF -- Others have put out good arguments for him. I'm wavering, but the vote still stands.

percypercy -- I'm suspicious, but that stems from his suspicions of DiggitCamara and DC's mentions of being a townie. Perhaps I'm being a sucker, but I buy DC's claims. Keeping my eye on percy.

A couple of quick, unquantifiable notes before I have to leave work:

dnooman -- pinging heavily townie to me.
Projammer -- I've got unfounded scum suspicions there.
Rachm Qoch I don't really trust, but that just stems from his near-freakish ability to determine who is going to die.

[Lightnin']

The reason for his initial vote was that DiggitCamara had "an itchy trigger finger" and could not be trusted. Now Lightnin' is the person who has placed the most votes. I find the vote,unvote,revote behavior to be suspect, as well as his apparent reversal on being "trigger happy". These reasons plus the general tone of some of his posts leads me to vote Lightnin'. Also he seems to have forgotten that he voted for NAF1138

But as I pointed out, the only reason I voted Diggit, then unvoted him and voted Naf was that I suddenly found myself on the hangin' end of a rope for what I thought was no good reason.

I'd also like to point out that my reason, right from the beginning, for unvoting Diggit was because I'd been convinced that the first day is pretty much random, and therefore an FOS is probably more likely to give us results with minimal bloodshed. At this point, the only thing we can possibly have is suspicion- nobody's died at all, yet.

And, as someone (can't really remember who, at this point) pointed out, killing someone at this point doesn't really help anyone, right?

Why am I being defensive? It was my understanding that if a villager is under suspicion, he should try to defend himself. If that's not the case, I'll just shut up and let you guys kill off an innocent man.

[Rachm Qoch]

I haven't forgotten and don't believe anyone has; I simply have gotten a lot of flak for it (while the others' votes had gone previously unexamined), and I believe I've explained my reasoning thoroughly.
From my perspective Kyrie Eleison also reasonably explained his/her vote in post #373. I'm just saying, I'm not sure why you're singling him/her out in this regard.

Hmm, you know something? I've been watching everyone, and while Fluid seems quite reasonable when she explained away my accusations, it looks like Kyrie Eleison is much less comfortable being challenged. She (or he) is quiet, and she (or he) just seems a bit too eager to please.
In the same vein, Kyrie isn't pinging my radar. Care to elaborate?

[Blaster Master]

Why am I being defensive? It was my understanding that if a villager is under suspicion, he should try to defend himself. If that's not the case, I'll just shut up and let you guys kill off an innocent man.

There is a difference between defending oneself and being defensive. Defensive posts look suspicious. As someone else said (not in as many words) you look more like you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar than you got sprinkled with crumbs while you were sleeping. I'm growing mighty suspicious of you, but I will say I'm also hesitant because your behavior reminds me eerily of the whole Enfant Terrible debacle from the previous game. So I'm left wondering, are you making the same mistake, or is this a clever ruse? That said, and because there's still a few others quite high on my suspici-o-meter, like fluiddruid in particular seems a little capricious with her FOSs. I'm still hesitant to give this wagon my endorsement with an official vote, but you are definitely deserving of an FOS.

[Idle Thoughts]

<snip>

I'm really torn here -- play suspicions close to the vest, or point out every word someone says that tweaks you the wrong way?.

<snip>

Same here. I've posted here and there my suspicions but nothing really blunt or in-depth. I've considered it for a long time, though, and I've finally broken down.

So here is who I'm getting scum reads from, in order of suspicion:

fluiddruid tops my list, although I haven't voted for her yet. This is for many, many, many reasons, not all of which apply to the actions or posts in the game (which is a main reason I haven't voted for her yet). If that's not a good way to play the game or to base assumptions on, then I'm sorry, but she has raised my suspicions in this game considerably and, added to the things I thought about last night (the things in question that are not game-based), it really raised her to a high scum level in my mind. However I don't see why reasonable, common sense estimates wouldn't also be valid in voting, even if it wasn't all based on what kind of behavior they portrayed.

Anyway, in-game stuff first (which is what I noticed first). First, I know she wasn't saying that we should have a no kill the first day. She actually said otherwise, that she thought it wasn't a good idea. Yet she still volunteered that she CONSIDERED it in her first post in here after Day one started. Again, for reasons stated in my first post in here after Day one started, I found this odd.

Secondly, she seemed, as many others pointed out, to jump on the voting for NAF bandwagon to which she quickly took back when being called on it.

Third, most of her posts in here haven't been all out accustory or strong. They seem to be little and small, like she's taking pains to remain careful and walking on eggshells. And this leads me to...

..four, that she says she's experienced (which doesn't say much cause I did too) yet (unlike me) she hasn't really been quick to tell her thoughts or keep a vote yet.


That's in game. I took all this in and noticed it yesterday.

Now, overnight, that's when other things (non-gamewise) crept into my brain that seemed to give more support to my convictions. Keep in mind, these things only came to mind after I became initially suspicious of her yesterday anyway.


Okay, first and foremost, and this may seem VERY, VERY unfair and a bad way to think someone is scum, but I think her status counts some. She's a mod, and for some reason I don't see her getting a dainty, "vanilla citizen" role. While I can't begin to guess the actions of the host when handing out teams and power roles, I'd think that, for the first moderator playing, she'd probably get a pretty good role. So that makes me think she's either got a power role....or she's scum.

Added to this (and secondly), she was one of only two players who was a shoe-in before the topic was even made (the other being NAF). Again, this alone shouldn't be used to put a strong FOS on anyone, however combined with all the other things, this further makes me me think that she wouldn't just be given a role that would make it easy for her to be killed off in the first day or night.

So all in all, with it all combined, it makes sense and I have to think that fluiddruid either has a power role....or is scum.


Next on my list we have who I'm voting for currently, Lightnin'. This guy has not only flew off the handle a bit at anyone proposing he's giving scum tells but has also voted for the person voting for him, right off a post to someone else how people shouldn't be too quick to judge. It just really looks shady to me. I even went back and read all of his posts again before voting and just mentioning to DiggitCamara about being too triggerhappy but then turning around and voting for him/her looks weird. Then, when called on it, he took back the vote and then REVOTED when people said he was further looking suspicious.

And to top it off, he then changed his vote entirely to someone who voted for him because of all the shady actions.

All in all, it just looks really odd to me and is pinging my "scum meter" pretty hard.

I'm still a little suspicious of Millit the Frail, but it's fading little by little.

Lemur866 is growing on it, however.

And lastly, I have to admit I'm just a teeny bit iffy on ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies, but it's not really based on anything but just vibes based on reading his/her posts in here. Same with Lemur866 above (only a bit harder in his case).

[Omi no Kami]

From my perspective Kyrie Eleison also reasonably explained his/her vote in post #373. I'm just saying, I'm not sure why you're singling him/her out in this regard.

In the same vein, Kyrie isn't pinging my radar. Care to elaborate?

Well it's nothing big but I've noticed a lot of small things that come together. He's quiet, which isn't a big tell, but it certainly doesn't help. Like you already mentioned, it seems like he was fishing for mason strategies early on, and that seems like a really silly thing for town to do for a couple of reasons:

a) If he was a mason it would be in his best interest to let the group go unmentioned; masons get exponentially more valuable as townies drop off the map, and it would be suicidal for them to draw attention to themselves this early in the game.

b) If he was a townie, at least until late midgame and early endgame the masons are his friends. Assuming we manage to nail about half of the mafia by the time midgame rolls around it's going to get extremely hard to find the remaining mobsters, and it's at that point that having some confirmed masons would be a real bonus. (I GUESS. I admit to not having seen this particular rule set before, where the masons are apparently set to lose if townwins.)

c) If he were scum, he needs to find and kill the masons ASAP. Trustworthy townies are a lot less dependable than confirmed masons, and it'll make it much easier to start and maintain bandwagons against innocents if the only "confirmed" townies are only confirmed insofar as they've been helpful in finding scum. (I should note that this isn't even a very safe measure any more; since the mafia are allowed to turn one of our own against us, it's pretty obvious that they're going to recruit the first townie that our cops confirm. So I'm honestly not sure how to handle this when midgame rolls around. Ideally we'll never find our cops, but if it comes to the point where they roleclaim I can't imagine how we'll be able to use their inveistigations without second-guessing ourselves.)

So that's the mason angle. Third, I don't know what it is, but the tone of his answer to people's accusations strikes me as a little fishy:


Yes, I voted for NAF. I was the first to do so, and I didn't try to persuade anyone or make any further case against NAF after the message containing and explaining my vote. Many people have cast first votes against others. As has been discussed, that's pretty much how the first day works. Would those votes also retroactively become scummy if others were to add their weight to them? IIRC, he garnered three whole votes, yours among them, before I unvoted -- again, the first to do so -- and the generously-named "mini-wagon" started to unwind. I'd love to know exactly how this is suspicious behavior -- it's not like I could have known you and Hal Briston would also vote for him.

He notes that discussion is bad for the scum and good for town, which I wholeheartedly agree with... but he somehow strikes me as being too eager-to-please in general. Fluid calmly refuted my suspicions and waited to see if I had anything else to add, which makes me want to trust er. Kyrie, on the other hand, seems to want suspicion taken off himself as soon as possible. This could mean that he's either a) scum who got hit with the corner of the spotlight and really wants to get back out of it or b) a nervous townie who doesn't want to get randomly lynched on the first day.

I honestly don't know which it is, but my gut tells me that he stinks of old warehouses and instant cement, so until I see something more convincing that's what I'm going to follow.

[Hal Briston]

She's a mod, and for some reason I don't see her getting a dainty, "vanilla citizen" role. While I can't begin to guess the actions of the host when handing out teams and power roles, I'd think that, for the first moderator playing, she'd probably get a pretty good role.Ok, this is bringing up a question that has jumped out at me before.

Gadarene -- how did you assign roles? We're they completely random, or did you pick and choose who became what?

[Omi no Kami]

Oh! And now that everyone seems to be in the mood to talk about their suspicions, lemme fork over a quick list:

Trust: Nobody.
Sort-of trust: NAF, just because bandwagonees on the first day turn out to be town pretty frequently. Idle, because it seems like he's honestly looking for scum with his votes.

Distrust: Kyrie, Fluid ( I said I trust you more than Kyrie, but that doesn't take you off of my radar! Especially since other people are starting to suspect you, which reassures me that I'm not being overly paranoid.)

Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she's flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she's scum, and trying to confuse us by "helpfully" providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn't feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it'll be much more obvious what the deal is.

[Lightnin']

There is a difference between defending oneself and being defensive. Defensive posts look suspicious. As someone else said (not in as many words) you look more like you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar than you got sprinkled with crumbs while you were sleeping.

But you see, that's what's so irritating about all of this. I've tried, repeatedly, to explain my actions. Every time, someone else sees it as "being defensive", and says that it makes me look suspicious. And once someone sees you as suspicious, that just leads someone else to see you as suspicious.

The logical thing to do, then, would be just shut up- but, as someone else said, "silence is suspicious."

So I can't defend myself, and I can't NOT defend myself. I can't accuse anyone else, should new evidence appear. I can't defend anyone else if I think they're innocent. There's not a damn thing I can do. Heck, even just trying to make small talk just to show that I'm paying attention can make me look guilty. *shrug*

This is all I can do, as near as I can tell-

I'm not one of 'em. I'm exactly as I am trying to portray myself as. The ones you should look out for, at least from my point of view, are the ones who keep maintaining my guilt either through "me toos" or through silence.

I'm not entirely certain I'm enjoying this game. :rolleyes:

[Blaster Master]

Okay, first and foremost, and this may seem VERY, VERY unfair and a bad way to think someone is scum, but I think her status counts some. She's a mod, and for some reason I don't see her getting a dainty, "vanilla citizen" role. While I can't begin to guess the actions of the host when handing out teams and power roles, I'd think that, for the first moderator playing, she'd probably get a pretty good role. So that makes me think she's either got a power role....or she's scum.

Added to this (and secondly), she was one of only two players who was a shoe-in before the topic was even made (the other being NAF). Again, this alone shouldn't be used to put a strong FOS on anyone, however combined with all the other things, this further makes me me think that she wouldn't just be given a role that would make it easy for her to be killed off in the first day or night.

So all in all, with it all combined, it makes sense and I have to think that fluiddruid either has a power role....or is scum.

Yes, she's a mod, but I'm under the impression roles were given out randomly (probably using our friend random.org, I imagine Gadarene can clear this up). This sort of reasoning looks suspiciously like the whole voting for sturmhauke on the first day in the previous game. Yes, fluiddruid is high on my scum list too but, just like I'm hesitant to vote for Lightnin' because of Enfant Terrible, I'm hesitant to vote for fluiddruid because of sturmhauke.

Similarly, say we were to lynch fluiddruid tonight and she comes up scum, what does that mean for NAF? If we are to believe your logic, then if fluiddruid is scum, then NAF must also be scum or a power role and thus, if NAF isn't scum, and would thus probably die tonight.

Basically, assuming roles were assigned randomly, making any kind of judgment about someone's role based on information outside the game is specious at best. Thus, this post seems deliberately designed to throw in noise... and, because I'm hesitant to vote for either fluiddruid or Lightnin' for the reasons above, I'll be bold and go ahead and vote Idle Thoughts instead. I'll be prepared to unvote if Gadarene says roles were assigned anyway but completely at random.

[Blaster Master]

I'll be prepared to unvote if Gadarene says roles were assigned anyway but completely at random.
That should say "assigned any way but completely at random".

[Blaster Master]

Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she's flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she's scum, and trying to confuse us by "helpfully" providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn't feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it'll be much more obvious what the deal is.

Good point, and I'd noticed that as well; but don't forget she was also the detective last game and the instinct with that kind of power role is to play safely. That said, while the chance that she's a cop again is low, I'm still inclined to trust her because she appears to have learned from that mistake. In fact, i'd be more suspicious if she was playing the same way, given how it turned out last time.

[fluiddruid]

Well, Idle Thoughts, I'm glad you finally laid it out on the table. I had noticed you kept posting your suspicion of me, but had very little about why.

fluiddruid tops my list, although I haven't voted for her yet. This is for many, many, many reasons, not all of which apply to the actions or posts in the game (which is a main reason I haven't voted for her yet).What does this mean?

Anyway, in-game stuff first (which is what I noticed first). First, I know she wasn't saying that we should have a no kill the first day. She actually said otherwise, that she thought it wasn't a good idea. Yet she still volunteered that she CONSIDERED it in her first post in here after Day one started. Considering and rejecting a point is bad? This was in response to someone else posting about it, and I reinforced that it was a bad idea.

Secondly, she seemed, as many others pointed out, to jump on the voting for NAF bandwagon to which she quickly took back when being called on it.I feel I've explained this pretty well, so I won't hash it out here, but I think it's only fair to point this out if you're giving a laundry list against me.

Third, most of her posts in here haven't been all out accustory or strong. They seem to be little and small, like she's taking pains to remain careful and walking on eggshells. I'm a little curious as to where this is coming from, frankly, as I've had suspicions thrown at me several times for being too aggressive and too accusatory.

..four, that she says she's experienced (which doesn't say much cause I did too)

I'll quote myself in response from this post (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8487829&highlight=experienced#post8487829):
I'm not an experienced player, in that I've never played Mafia before, but I did keep up with the previous games (particularly game 2, which I read avidly). I'm also a pretty competitive person and I have played many other strategy games, so I'm pretty comfortable being assertive.

yet (unlike me) she hasn't really been quick to tell her thoughts or keep a vote yet.I don't think the rest of the people in the game would agree that I'm keeping my thoughts a secret. As I've stated, Lightnin' and Kyrie are my main contenders at this stage of the game. The only person next on my list, except for lurker reasons (which still concern me) is, frankly, you.

I really think your post muddies the waters of my posting record in a way that just doesn't ring true. I'm not going to say that you blantantly misrepresented me, but you did misrepresent me at the very least on the fourth point and I'd argue on every point except my voting record. Painting me as "walking on eggshells" and that I haven't "been quick to share my thoughts" is demonstrably not the case.

[Idle Thoughts]

Similarly, say we were to lynch fluiddruid tonight and she comes up scum, what does that mean for NAF? If we are to believe your logic, then if fluiddruid is scum, then NAF must also be scum or a power role and thus, if NAF isn't scum, and would thus probably die tonight.

Well to me, NAF hasn't set off any alarms. Similiar to what other's have said about him, he seems to be really putting himself out there and playing hard. This doesn't strike me as something a mafia member would do. I'm thinking back to the first Werewolf game that RT held and I seem to remember a rule was "Werewolves may talk and vote when it's day but cannot lead the town in any overly way". I'm assuming that's a rule for the game usually.

And those two things alone don't make NAF suspicious in my eyes. Like I had said, I was already suspicious of fluiddruid for four reasons and then thinking about the other, non-game facts, it made the seed of doubt grow.

So no, I don't think NAF is scum. At least not yet. No vibes from him yet, however he could be fooling us both (and others) very easily. But combined with other suspicions, I do think fluiddruid gives off the impression one (or having a power role).

[fluiddruid]

Yes, she's a mod, but I'm under the impression roles were given out randomly (probably using our friend random.org, I imagine Gadarene can clear this up). I will state unequivocally and for the record that no particular role was asked for nor given based on moderator status.

I am sure Gadarene will confirm this.

[Idle Thoughts]

Gah! I will learn to preview sometime, heh. I have before but reading my last post over, I realize I put in a pointless apostrophe.

[Omi no Kami]

Good point, and I'd noticed that as well; but don't forget she was also the detective last game and the instinct with that kind of power role is to play safely. That said, while the chance that she's a cop again is low, I'm still inclined to trust her because she appears to have learned from that mistake. In fact, i'd be more suspicious if she was playing the same way, given how it turned out last time.

Well it's true that the instinct with power roles is to play safely, but this seems like a 180% turnaround from sly, shadow-lurking sleuth to smack-you-with-a-phonebook obvious vagrant. (Not that that's a bad thing, necessarily!)

[DiggitCamara]

Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she's flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she's scum, and trying to confuse us by "helpfully" providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn't feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it'll be much more obvious what the deal is.

Good point, and I'd noticed that as well; but don't forget she was also the detective last game and the instinct with that kind of power role is to play safely. That said, while the chance that she's a cop again is low, I'm still inclined to trust her because she appears to have learned from that mistake. In fact, i'd be more suspicious if she was playing the same way, given how it turned out last time.

... these two posts ring my scum-o-meter.

CaerieD only has two (count them (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8487264&postcount=282) two! (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8484516&postcount=214) !) posts after daybreak!

[dnooman]

But you see, that's what's so irritating about all of this. I've tried, repeatedly, to explain my actions. Every time, someone else sees it as "being defensive", and says that it makes me look suspicious. And once someone sees you as suspicious, that just leads someone else to see you as suspicious.

The logical thing to do, then, would be just shut up- but, as someone else said, "silence is suspicious."

So I can't defend myself, and I can't NOT defend myself. I can't accuse anyone else, should new evidence appear. I can't defend anyone else if I think they're innocent. There's not a damn thing I can do. Heck, even just trying to make small talk just to show that I'm paying attention can make me look guilty. *shrug*

This is all I can do, as near as I can tell-

I'm not one of 'em. I'm exactly as I am trying to portray myself as. The ones you should look out for, at least from my point of view, are the ones who keep maintaining my guilt either through "me toos" or through silence.

I'm not entirely certain I'm enjoying this game. :rolleyes:

Ok, first of all acting suspicious does not always equal being scum, but it does create suspicion which is all we have to go on at this point.

Let me tell you about the one and only game I played on mafiascum.net. There were only 7 people in the game (which sucked incredibly), I was the cop. There were 2 mafia, me the cop, a doctor, and three townies. Day one I threw out a "lurker vote" just to get things started. The guy was only away from the game for about a day (24 hours) and one of the other players really sunk his teeth into me. Everything I said in my defense he questioned, and I was telling the truth. That was quite frustrating.

Day one we lynched a townie, worst part about that was it was my vote that decided it. Night one they killed the Doc, and I investigated the guy that had been riding me. Turned out he was scum. With two of us down already we were at "lynch or lose" meaning if we didn't kill a mafia that day town would lose. So, I had to role claim and reveal that I had found a scum. Much posting ensued and I started really not having fun in the game, it sucked being called a liar when I wasn't and it sucked that I couldn't convince the town that I had in fact found a scum, and that I was in fact a Cop.

Long story short, my appeals to emotion and frustration led one of the townies to decide to lynch me and we lost. So believe me, if you're town I know exactly how you feel. I have an obligation to vote for the person that I feel is most likely mafia, or is at least generating the most suspicion. IMO, you have done the latter.

Remember if town wins and you're dead, you still win. If you are town, don't be worried about getting lynched. Be worried that if you are killed or lynched that your posts might not provide us with insight. Clear the slate, reread the thread and post some insight. It's the best thing you can do right now. Don't focus too much on defending yourself if it doesn't seem to be working. You will regain trust much faster by helping us find the mafia than you will by just proclaiming your innocence.

Heh, funny thing...guess what my player name was in that mafia game.























Whitelightning. I'm serious, you can even look it up.

[Kyrie Eleison]

If he was a townie, at least until late midgame and early endgame the masons are his friends.
You assume that, but I submit that if Projammer were a mason, he would currently be working against the town's best interest:I would imagine the mason strategy would be to try to identify the roles of non-masons and then attempt to manipulate the vote to reduce the townies and mafia at about the same rate until they outnumbered the remaining townies and then focus on mafia.I have no reason to believe that he is a mason, but nonetheless, I don't think it's a bad idea to point out to the masons that they win if the town does, and that they don't have to shoot for the mason-only win. Even you seem somewhat confused on that point:(I GUESS. I admit to not having seen this particular rule set before, where the masons are apparently set to lose if townwins.)
The masons don't lose if the town wins. They only stand to exclude the remainder of the town from also winning if they outnumber them when the mob is eliminated.Kyrie, on the other hand, seems to want suspicion taken off himself as soon as possible. This could mean that he's either a) scum who got hit with the corner of the spotlight and really wants to get back out of it or b) a nervous townie who doesn't want to get randomly lynched on the first day.Maybe it's because I'm a noob, but it's neither of those two. I know that I am town; I would prefer to see the town lynch scum. I feel like I have an obligation to try to turn the town's attention away from me so that that can happen. I realize I can die and still win with the town.

[DiggitCamara]

Maybe it's because I'm a noob, but it's neither of those two. I know that I am town; I would prefer to see the town lynch scum. I feel like I have an obligation to try to turn the town's attention away from me so that that can happen. I realize I can die and still win with the town.
Good job! Now go and tell Lightnin' that, so he can enjoy the game.

[Idle Thoughts]

Well, Idle Thoughts, I'm glad you finally laid it out on the table. I had noticed you kept posting your suspicion of me, but had very little about why.

What does this mean?

I just means that I have many reasons (I think) to be suspicious of you, but haven't voted for you yet beause some reasons aren't game/behavior/post based. I hesitate on letting those reasons be factors at all.


Considering and rejecting a point is bad? This was in response to someone else posting about it, and I reinforced that it was a bad idea.

Not in itself but saying you were contemplating that does give me a suspicion vibe (as did all the others who said they were thinking of doing that). And as I said before, how great would it be to use the excuse "Maybe we should have a no lynching day in case we accidently vote out a citizen" if one was scum? Pretty genius, I'd think. Like one was trying to throw people off yet, at the same time, hope most might read it and agree and thus give up their chance to get a mafia member.

Again, I know you weren't agreeing with it and you were saying you didn't think it was wise anymore, but just the one line saying that you were, at first, considering it is what caught my eye. Like planting the little seed in the minds of others. That made me only a little suspicious of you, however.


Third, most of her posts in here haven't been all out accustory or strong. They seem to be little and small, like she's taking pains to remain careful and walking on eggshells.I'm a little curious as to where this is coming from, frankly, as I've had suspicions thrown at me several times for being too aggressive and too accusatory.

Haha, maybe I'm more of an aggressive player than you in that case because mostly the posts I've been seeing from you have been vague and saying things that could go either this way or that (not really making up your mind and trying to go both ways on things).
For example, here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8483890&postcount=194) you say that you're supicious of DiggitCamara, but also NAF.
Here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8485559&postcount=248) you unvote NAF after coming up on some players radars and you state he's either a townie or scum.
Here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8487122&postcount=278) you list two players who have voted randomly, when really, that's what the first round is. It's just random votes (well, if one is a citizen). And yeah, some people use small kinks here and there that they see to make their choice for them and some actually let something take the decision out of their hands or just goes with anyone cause they really have no idea who to vote for. Seems to me just waiting for someone to slip up during the first round does nothing cause everyone is already so suspicious of everyone else. It's of my opinion, then, that random (be it with any reason you may have or no reason) is the way to go if one is really on the good side. You seem to go against that in your post there and place suspicion on others for it.

I don't know about anyone else but to me you just seem like you can't really make up your mind so you say what something or someone could be in both cases, like you're trying not to really say anything concrete so you stay below the radar. And yeah, other people have done this too but the way you do it, just the way I feel when I read it tells me something is off.

Maybe it's just me and this is your style of playing but it just rubs me the wrong way a little and gives me vibes that not all is as it seems.

I'll quote myself in response from this post (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8487829&highlight=experienced#post8487829)

You're right. I misread the post and didn't see the word "not". I take back my point of that then and apoligize for mislabling you as an experienced player.

I don't think the rest of the people in the game would agree that I'm keeping my thoughts a secret. As I've stated, Lightnin' and Kyrie are my main contenders at this stage of the game. The only person next on my list, except for lurker reasons (which still concern me) is, frankly, you.

And this is a slight other reason. You say you're suspicious of Kyrie and Lightnin' here. Yet in all of the other posts I've linked to (above) you have placed suspicion on completely different people. Just seems you've been, again, changing your mind a lot and making it seem like you don't want to really make a concrete decision. Maybe to avoid having the FOS pointed at you? Being too gung-ho on someone is a tell, I think. At least to me. So is being overly cautious.

I really think your post muddies the waters of my posting record in a way that just doesn't ring true. I'm not going to say that you blantantly misrepresented me, but you did misrepresent me at the very least on the fourth point and I'd argue on every point except my voting record. Painting me as "walking on eggshells" and that I haven't "been quick to share my thoughts" is demonstrably not the case.

Well, I apoligize then if I'm reading you wrong. But it's just the vibes I've been getting reading your posts.

[Idle Thoughts]

I will state unequivocally and for the record that no particular role was asked for nor given based on moderator status.

I am sure Gadarene will confirm this.

I never thought anything was asked for. All I was saying is, it seems to me to make sense to give someone who not only had a reserved spot but also a board status better chances to stay in the game if they showed interest in playing. If, in fact, he chose who gets what at his own discretion. If it's random, though, well, that shoots my theory and suspicion to hell.

So add me to the list that's awaiting clarification of team/role hand outs.

[dnooman]

I'll be pretty surprised if Gadarene chose roles tailored to people specifically. Actually I'll be shocked, because that would be a huge factor in determining how the game goes. I think Gadarene knows better than to do something like that.

[Omi no Kami]

... these two posts ring my scum-o-meter.

CaerieD only has two (count them (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8487264&postcount=282) two! (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8484516&postcount=214) !) posts after daybreak!

Yes, but that's still enough to notice the change in demeanor. I'm trying to pay attention to the players who post less, and she's one of the few people who I've noticed a change in.

[Gadarene]

Hal Briston:
Gadarene -- how did you assign roles? We're they completely random, or did you pick and choose who became what?

I'm kinda surprised people are even asking this, but I guess it's a fair question. Roles were chosen absolutely at random, using random.org. I listed everyone's name and had them generated in a random order. First x players listed were citizens; next y players listed were scum; next z players listed were masons, et cetera.

And I can, of course, confirm that fluiddruid neither requested nor was given any sort of special role based on her moderator status. Nor was NAF given special treatment, other than a seat being saved for him because he'd PMed me about it specifically before the thread was started.

I'm happy to answer any other questions about the role selection process, but I think it's fairly clearcut.

[Projammer]

Kyrie You're overthinking my post. Someone had asked about what masons were likely to do and I just posted what I thought they might do in order to devise a win for themselves rather than the whole town.

And after catching up on posts, it's appearing to me that Lightnin and NAF are way too antagonistic towards each other leading me to believe that one is likely mob and the other to be townie. Leaning more towards Lightnin due to the excesive defensiveness of his posts so...

unrandomvote Lemur
vote Lightnin

And should lightnin turn out to be townie, FOS NAL.

[Idle Thoughts]

All right, then it appears both my non-game suspicions are unfounded. They won't play any factors in how I vote and my suspicion of fluiddruid has slackened somewhat.

[Blaster Master]

Well to me, NAF hasn't set off any alarms. Similiar to what other's have said about him, he seems to be really putting himself out there and playing hard. This doesn't strike me as something a mafia member would do. I'm thinking back to the first Werewolf game that RT held and I seem to remember a rule was "Werewolves may talk and vote when it's day but cannot lead the town in any overly way". I'm assuming that's a rule for the game usually.

And those two things alone don't make NAF suspicious in my eyes. Like I had said, I was already suspicious of fluiddruid for four reasons and then thinking about the other, non-game facts, it made the seed of doubt grow.

So no, I don't think NAF is scum. At least not yet. No vibes from him yet, however he could be fooling us both (and others) very easily. But combined with other suspicions, I do think fluiddruid gives off the impression one (or having a power role).

You're absolutely right, and that's what concerns me about the logic you've been using. NAF is pinging me the strongest town of anyone here, thus, if there was any truth to your logic and either fluiddruid or NAF are not mafia, you can say bye-bye to a power role. As expected, Gadarene, confirmed that not to be true.

You've aleved some of my suspicion, but not enough for me to unvote yet.

[SnakesCatLady]

I don't have enough suspicions of anyone to vote yet. I guess I'll just hang around, pet the cats, and hope someone trips up enough to give me some evidence.

[CaerieD]

Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she's flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she's scum, and trying to confuse us by "helpfully" providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn't feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it'll be much more obvious what the deal is.

I've made two posts since daybreak. In both of them, I expressed some mild suspicion of fluiddruid, though it was considerably milder the second time around. Considering that I got myself offed for making the Vigilante think I was scum last time around, I'm being far more cautious this time about what I post and what suspicions I air. No way am I going to repeat my strategy from last time, considering how it ended.

You've definitely come up on my scumdar now, though.

[Rachm Qoch]

Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she's flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she's scum, and trying to confuse us by "helpfully" providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn't feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it'll be much more obvious what the deal is.
I've made two posts since daybreak. In both of them, I expressed some mild suspicion of fluiddruid, though it was considerably milder the second time around. Considering that I got myself offed for making the Vigilante think I was scum last time around, I'm being far more cautious this time about what I post and what suspicions I air. No way am I going to repeat my strategy from last time, considering how it ended.

You've definitely come up on my scumdar now, though.
Me too.

Going back and reading the two posts in question, post #214 presented a qualified suspicion, and post #282 presented a further qualification of this suspicion.

Omi No Kami, you mischaracterize CaerieD's posts.
You say you "think" she flip-flopped once or twice? In these two posts? How much flip-flopping can you do in two posts?
You say she's too agressive and confrontational. Where? I don't see it.
You say she's providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary? In these two lonely posts? Where?

Scummy.
Vote Omi No Kami

[dnooman]

Kyrie You're overthinking my post. Someone had asked about what masons were likely to do and I just posted what I thought they might do in order to devise a win for themselves rather than the whole town.

And after catching up on posts, it's appearing to me that Lightnin and NAF are way too antagonistic towards each other leading me to believe that one is likely mob and the other to be townie. Leaning more towards Lightnin due to the excesive defensiveness of his posts so...

unrandomvote Lemur
vote Lightnin

And should lightnin turn out to be townie, FOS NAL.
This really pings my scumdar. You've targeted both of the people that are garnering the most attention, and you've posited that if one isn't scum then the other is. Is it so unthinkable that two townies could be fighting? Townies don't know who anyone else is, yet the Mafia are free to cause infighting because it can only benefit them.

I think you chose the two highest targets, and went with the highest vote getter for your "lean". You seem to be swooping down on this situation, and you seem to be trying to manipulate it.

Huge FOS towards Projammer. I had a null opinion about you until now, you're painting targets on peoples backs now.

I have several other suspicions, but I feel it best for those people to keep digging their own graves rather than let them know that they are acting inappropriately.

[tirial]

Well I currently feel like Hal Briston - post 383 play suspicions close to the vest, or point out every word someone says that tweaks you the wrong way?
I have got a few ideas about who is town, but I'm not going to bring them up now, as there isn't enough to go on to be sure. I still think Idle Thoughts should have stayed under the radar early on, rather than waving past experience around and making himself a target before he could be really useful.

Percypercy hasn't said much recently. However DiggitCamera could you clarify post 370
And, finally, percypercy has been almost completely absent from this thread, and for that reason alone I'll unvote ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies and vote percypercy
Is that because you suspect lurkers and think he's scum, or as a prod to get him to post more?

[Omi no Kami]

Me too.

Going back and reading the two posts in question, post #214 presented a qualified suspicion, and post #282 presented a further qualification of this suspicion.

Omi No Kami, you mischaracterize CaerieD's posts.
You say you "think" she flip-flopped once or twice? In these two posts? How much flip-flopping can you do in two posts?
You say she's too agressive and confrontational. Where? I don't see it.
You say she's providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary? In these two lonely posts? Where?

Scummy.
Vote Omi No Kami

Gah, this is going completely wrong. I'll admit that I didn't read CaerieD's posts carefully before making an accusation, which is wrong no matter what you say. But I concede the flip-flopping bit, I think you'll agree that the sum of my argument was "CaerieD seems to be acting differently this time. Huh, that's strange. Let's keep an eye on her". And I stand by that. ^^

[Omi no Kami]

Oops, that should've read "But IF I concede..."

And I have to say, FOSes by the two people I'm currently most suspicious of don't hold a lot of water with me. ;)

I want to welcome accusations though; it's early on, and careful scrutiny of everything that everyone says is essential.

[Kyrie Eleison]

And I have to say, FOSes by the two people I'm currently most suspicious of don't hold a lot of water with me. ;)Really? I don't recall FOSing you in any way. Vote: Omi no Kami for being most suspicious of two people other than the one he is currently voting for. Get your story straight, bubba, or get lynched.

[Omi no Kami]

Really? I don't recall FOSing you in any way. Vote: Omi no Kami for being most suspicious of two people other than the one he is currently voting for. Get your story straight, bubba, or get lynched.

Last time I'm repeating this. I don't have any good leads. Silence only helps the scum, so I'm stating my suspicions to see if anyone agrees.

Kyrie: strikes an odd chord with me in general. No better evidence than the mason thing I mentioned earlier.

CaerieD: not a suspect, but I'm watching her because her behavior is significantly different from the last game.

Disagree all you want, but I'm not letting you railroad me for having a different opinion than you do.

I think much more discussion on this topic is going to lead towards an obsession that isn't helping anyone. Be as suspicious as you want, but don't make up a reason to dislike me.

Hmm... now that I think about it, you are being awfully defensive. Ah well... off to find someone else who looks more suspicious than Kyrie, so I can stop taking his shit for being paranoid. ^_^

[Lemur866]

This really pings my scumdar. You've targeted both of the people that are garnering the most attention, and you've posited that if one isn't scum then the other is. Is it so unthinkable that two townies could be fighting? Townies don't know who anyone else is, yet the Mafia are free to cause infighting because it can only benefit them.

I think you chose the two highest targets, and went with the highest vote getter for your "lean". You seem to be swooping down on this situation, and you seem to be trying to manipulate it.

Huge FOS towards Projammer. I had a null opinion about you until now, you're painting targets on peoples backs now.

I have several other suspicions, but I feel it best for those people to keep digging their own graves rather than let them know that they are acting inappropriately.

The main point against Projammer is this pile-on vote. That doesn't look good. I agree with your suspicion here.

One more thing, I want to try to defend Lightning a bit. Not that he's neccesarily innocent, but that he's been piled on massively. Of course, that's on obvious scum play, but too obvious. The real scum aren't going to go nuts on one player this early, that's a dead giveaway once they lynched Lightning and reveal he's a citizen. Plus, he's been an active participant, and I want to steer suspicion back to the players who are providing no information. No information isn't a scum tell, but it's still providing no information. Players who provide no information are either scum or dead weight.

So. Let's look at our post count list again, listing only players. Note that this list includes signup, rules questions, banter from before the game started and before role assignments were given out, and content-free posts.

NAF1138 44
Idle Thoughts 27
Lemur866 26
Omi no Kami 26
Blaster Master (Replaces percussion with 1 post) 21
fluiddruid 21
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 20
dnooman 18
Projammer 15
DiggitCamara 15
nesta 14
SnakesCatLady 12
Lightnin' 12
Millit the Frail 11
Hal Briston 11
Kyrie Eleison 10
Rachm Qoch 8
tirial (replaces Achren with 5 posts) 6
percypercy 6
CaerieD 5

I'm inclined NOT to vote for people in the top half of the list, more inclined to vote for the people in the bottom half of the list. Tirial gets half an out for being a sub...but only half.

This means the lurkingest posters are CaerieD, percypercy, and Rachm Qoch. FOS upon them! I say, FOS! These are the people we should be prodding with sharp sticks until they say, "Ow! Quit it!"

In that spirit, I vote CaerieD.

Not only the lowest count poster, but all her posts were vague musings. I'll unvote her if she provides some content we can sink our teeth into.

[Gadarene]

I'm gonna be gone for most of the rest of the day, so here's an updated Vote Count.

4 -- Lightnin' (NAF1138, Idle Thoughts, dnooman, Projammer)
2 -- NAF1138 (Hal Briston, Lightnin')
2 -- Omi No Kami (Rachm Qoch, Kyrie Eleison)
1 -- Idle Thoughts (Blaster Master)
1 -- percypercy (DiggitCamara)
1 -- CaerieD (Lemur866)
1 -- Kyrie Eleison (Omi No Kami)
1 -- DiggitCamara (percypercy)
1 -- nesta (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

That was slightly rushed because I'm out the door, but I'm 99 percent sure it's completely accurate. Feel free to check my math, however.

[CaerieD]

This means the lurkingest posters are CaerieD, percypercy, and Rachm Qoch. FOS upon them! I say, FOS! These are the people we should be prodding with sharp sticks until they say, "Ow! Quit it!"

In that spirit, I vote CaerieD.

Not only the lowest count poster, but all her posts were vague musings. I'll unvote her if she provides some content we can sink our teeth into.



There's nothing to sink our teeth into in the first round, though. Other than to comment on the suspicious nature of those around us, which I have done. I haven't filled the thread with a bunch of chatter on the random vote versus slightly less random vote debate, which is where the majority of "content" has been coming from. :dubious: If you'll look at my post count and how many posts I've been making on the board in general, you'll note that I don't post very much anyway. The majority of my posts in the last game were trying to post vote summaries, which I did repeatedly because I lacked an edit function. It was embarrassing, but without that I probably would have had about four posts in that game, too.

Seeing as how not only were my number of posts exaggerated, but the nature of them as well, I'm going to [COLOR=Blue]vote Omi No Kami. While I'm still suspicious of fluiddruid and Idle Thoughts, the mischaracterization really makes me wonder. Which was what made me suspicious of Idle Thoughts to begin with, as well.

[Projammer]

This really pings my scumdar. You've targeted both of the people that are garnering the most attention, and you've posited that if one isn't scum then the other is. Is it so unthinkable that two townies could be fighting? Townies don't know who anyone else is, yet the Mafia are free to cause infighting because it can only benefit them.

I think you chose the two highest targets, and went with the highest vote getter for your "lean". You seem to be swooping down on this situation, and you seem to be trying to manipulate it.

Huge FOS towards Projammer. I had a null opinion about you until now, you're painting targets on peoples backs now.

I had missed your vote for Lightnin and was thinking mine was the majick number three vote that is supposed to be one of the big tells.

Unthinkable that two townies are going at each other? Hardly. Also a possibility that it's two scum doing a stage play to move out of the lurker field. And sacrificing one would put the other in a prominant anti-scum light. Though I really doubt that's the case. I don't think they'd have the numbers to just throw one away like that. Not to mention that they haven't had a night strategy session yet.

Correct me if I'm wrong though. They can only discuss strategy at night?

No targets, just verbalizing my thoughts. Subtlety was never my strong point.

[percypercy]

Okay, I'm afraid we're having a lot of infighting among the townies(carefully avoiding 'us townies' since that's what got me to vote for diggit in the first place)

Could we each explain why we're voting why we're voting the way we are, just once again so it'll be in one spot? As for me, I think I'm going to reduce my vote to a FOS.
so...

Unvote DiggitCamera

And FOS DiggitCamera, for his comments in post 176 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8483512&postcount=176)

I'm also concerned about some of the things that Lightnin' has done, but I'm not prepared to cast a vote for him.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

For me, the most interesting thing said in the past 24 RL hours has been. Idle Thoughts' idle thoughts about the technique used for role assignments and assuming that fluiddruid had been given a creamy chocolate vs vanilla center in post #387.

I would have assumed that everyone would know that roles would be assigned at random by any GM with a soul. Which leads me to Hal, who's follow up question to Gadrene in the same vein I also found interesting. My gut reaction is that neither of them would legitimately ponder in this manner, so their behavior is raising a flag for me.

As for my vote for nesta, I'm perfectly comfortable if people want to consider that vote as retalitory, and here is why. Another of my first day strategy goes like this. This early in the game, I'm confident in one thing. Myself. So it is a valid strategy, this early in the game, to target anyone who targets me, either directly or indirectly, which nesta has done both. Nesta has voted for me and we disagree strategically. I could have picked others yes, but Nesta has also not participated as much on the back half of the day, and does not seem to be at risk of a bandwagon to further complicate my vote, for the moment at least.

[Lightnin']

I can't remember, and the hamsters aren't cooperating right now so I can't go and look, but is a player's affiliation revealed when he/she is lynched (or whatever) out of the game?

[tirial]

Idle Thoughts' idle thoughts about the technique used for role assignments and assuming that fluiddruid had been given a creamy chocolate vs vanilla center in post #387.

I will admit to thinking along the same lines, especially since Idle Thoughts is an experienced ref.

Idle Thoughts when you run this game do you manually cast the roles, or do it randomly?

I'm staying out of NAF v. Lightnin. With 3 factions, if two players are going at each other there are a whole set of options (town v town, mason v. town, mafia v. town, mason v. mafia) even excluding a setup by a faction to draw people out. I'm not sure that a confrontation like Lighnin and NAF's actually tells us much about the other player even when one dies and their status is revealed. On the other hand it provides clues about other people's status from how they acted.

I'm not voting for either, because the longer it goes on the more information we get, and frankly we need as much as we can get.

Lemur866, thanks for the (partial) pass (post 421) on lurking, but I'm not going to post unless I've got something to say. On the other hand I have been in the game less than 24 hours - there are players who've made less posts than me during that period - and I've posted more in this thread than my monthly average.

[Hal Briston]

I would have assumed that everyone would know that roles would be assigned at random by any GM with a soul. Which leads me to Hal, who's follow up question to Gadrene in the same vein I also found interesting. My gut reaction is that neither of them would legitimately ponder in this manner, so their behavior is raising a flag for me.(bolding mine)

Maybe I'm not paying close enough attention, but that has to be one of the single most absurd statements I've seen in here so far. A first-time player asking the ref a perfectly legit question is flag-raising behavior? Of course I figured he assigned roles randomly, and now we all know for sure.

If there's one thing I've gleaned from reading through the other threads, it's that calling patently non-suspicious behavior suspicious is pretty damn suspicious in itself.

[Idle Thoughts]

Idle Thoughts when you run this game do you manually cast the roles, or do it randomly?


[rest of the post snipped]

That's just it, I assign them myself to sort of try to make things equal, which is why I assumed RT, NAF,[b] and [b]Gadarene did so too. I didn't even know there was a site that helps one make random choices until this game.

My whole thing about choosing who I make what and what teams they're on stems, though, from the board I'm a mod on, which is a board of teenagers in the age gap anywhere from 12 to 21. So I try to make teams equal so both sides would have a good chance. I also have many kids constantly PMing me asking to be certain things (like scum--dunno why but everyone always wants to be scum), so I try to rotate people and give everyone a chance at certain things, while not always changing things or people just so players can't guess what I'd do.

Even now that I know random.org exists, I probably won't use it. If I ever ran a game on HERE I probably would, but only because the maturity level and attention span and overall personality here is different from that of a, say, fourteen year old.

Anyway, that all had nothing to do with THIS game, but that explains why I assumed Gadarene might have picked them.



--------------------


Notes now on the posts since I've last been here.

I have no suspicions at all of Omi No Kami OR CaerieD so I don't know what they're seeing. I think that the minor lurking and posting style of CaerieD may have tripped OiNK's (sorry, I couldn't resist :p) meter but I think s/he jumping the gun a bit. This doesn't make me any more weary though. And in turn, CaerieD finds this (with good reason) suspicious since she only had made two posts up until that time. So I think it's just a case of two citizens misunderstanding where each other is coming from.


I'm also not getting any readings from Hal Briston or Blaster Master (despite him voting for me). I don't officially trust either, however, yet, but I don't see anything that raises my hackles.

[Idle Thoughts]

I can't remember, and the hamsters aren't cooperating right now so I can't go and look, but is a player's affiliation revealed when he/she is lynched (or whatever) out of the game?

Yeah, team and power role (if any).

[NAF1138]

I haven't gotten a chance to read the posts from today yet. I just wanted to say that I am not going to be around until tomorrow night. But I will catch up then and make a post sunday night.

[DiggitCamara]

Percypercy hasn't said much recently. However DiggitCamera could you clarify post 370

Is that because you suspect lurkers and think he's scum, or as a prod to get him to post more?
Both, actually.

Like I said in one of my first posts, lurking benefits the mob the most (lessens information, allows town people to start infighting, etc.) Pointing that out makes that strategy less viable.

And in percypercy's case there only have been 4 or 5 posts since daybreak. The first one in response to my first post since daybreak, the second one reaffirming his/her vote due to his/her cat's suspicions (psychic cat, anyone? :dubious: ) The third one confirming his/her vote due to post 370.

I may have missed one, or several of his/her posts but they are undeniably:

1. scarce
and
2. uninformative ("fluff" posts)

[DiggitCamara]

Yes, but that's still enough to notice the change in demeanor. I'm trying to pay attention to the players who post less, and she's one of the few people who I've noticed a change in.

Gah, this is going completely wrong. I'll admit that I didn't read CaerieD's posts carefully before making an accusation, which is wrong no matter what you say. But I concede the flip-flopping bit, I think you'll agree that the sum of my argument was "CaerieD seems to be acting differently this time. Huh, that's strange. Let's keep an eye on her". And I stand by that. ^^

... weeellll.... (bolding mine) (First response to my comment, second response to Rachm Qoch.



Are you paying attention? Or aren't you paying attention? Your defense needs to be refined somewhat. (FOS->Omi no Kami)

(BTW, I'm signing off as well for today. I hope I'll be able to tune in tomorrow. Ta)

[SnakesCatLady]

Both, actually.

Like I said in one of my first posts, lurking benefits the mob the most (lessens information, allows town people to start infighting, etc.) Pointing that out makes that strategy less viable.

And in percypercy's case there only have been 4 or 5 posts since daybreak. The first one in response to my first post since daybreak, the second one reaffirming his/her vote due to his/her cat's suspicions (psychic cat, anyone? :dubious: ) The third one confirming his/her vote due to post 370.

I may have missed one, or several of his/her posts but they are undeniably:

1. scarce
and
2. uninformative ("fluff" posts)

I think you could say the same of my posts. I really don't have much information to go on about any of the players as of yet, so my posts are pretty uninformative. I try to post often enough to not be seen as a lurker, but I don't want to just run up a post count without having something worthwile to say.

And don't knock psychic cats. I'm not sure how much help mine will be in the game, but IRL if my cats don't like someone they usually have a reason. I have found that out on several occasions.

[Idle Thoughts]

Man, is it just me or is the game kind of slow today? I guess, being Saturday, people are out enjoying days off.

[Hal Briston]

Our area is enjoying a Saturday with temps in the 70's after two weeks of utter shit weather. A quick check of the weather map doesn't show a single cloud east of the Rockies. I don't think there'll be too many eastern Dopers on this afternoon.

Of course, I'm stuck inside painting the dining room, with the occasional pop in here between coats.

[percypercy]

Both, actually.
And in percypercy's case there only have been 4 or 5 posts since daybreak. The first one in response to my first post since daybreak, the second one reaffirming his/her vote due to his/her cat's suspicions (psychic cat, anyone? :dubious: ) The third one confirming his/her vote due to post 370.

I may have missed one, or several of his/her posts but they are undeniably:

1. scarce
and
2. uninformative ("fluff" posts)

I'm posting when I have something to contribute. I'm not going to add another post rehashing the same old stuff. It clogs the thread up and wastes all of our time. I'll say this, whether it casts a cloud of suspicion over me or not because I think it should be said: IMHO, the wisest course for the mafia is to blend in as fully as possible. At this point, for me, anyone could be Mafia. I'd argue that frequent posting could be a cover-up. A careful Mafia could easily escape suspicion for days in that manner. Laying low as SnakesCatLady and I have done so far is not always a scum tell. It certainly isn't in my case. Oh, and I'd trust the cat before quite a few people I know. He's an excellent judge of character.
-Lil
The female PercyPercy

[CaerieD]

Our area is enjoying a Saturday with temps in the 70's after two weeks of utter shit weather. A quick check of the weather map doesn't show a single cloud east of the Rockies. I don't think there'll be too many eastern Dopers on this afternoon.

Of course, I'm stuck inside painting the dining room, with the occasional pop in here between coats.

Yeah, we're having gorgeous weather here and I've been spending most of the day split between being outside and preparing for my niece's birthday party tomorrow. Without any prompting from me, she decided she wanted her sixteenth birthday to have a 1920s mobster theme. There's even going to be a murder mystery game and we all have to dress up and try to figure out whodunnit.

So if I'm not around much tomorrow it'll be because I've managed to get away from the computer, only to be stuck in another Mafia game. :smack:

[Omi no Kami]

... weeellll.... (bolding mine) (First response to my comment, second response to Rachm Qoch.



Are you paying attention? Or aren't you paying attention? Your defense needs to be refined somewhat. (FOS->Omi no Kami)

(BTW, I'm signing off as well for today. I hope I'll be able to tune in tomorrow. Ta)

I'm trying to pay attention and not succeding. ^^ I tend to only be on the internet for 10-12 minute spurts between assignments, so I tend to speed-read in the hope of being of some use. It looks like it's gotten me into more trouble than it's worth, but I'm worried that if I keep overanalyzing I'm going to end up jumping at shadows. I figure I voted for someone suspicious enough to catch my notice, so I'm going to sit back and watch what the rest of the day brings.

[Lemur866]

Well, of course there's not much to go on. Yet. This first day is about establishing a paper trail. The only people who know anything are the mafiosi and the masons. So we really can't do much with today's ramblings...until people start turning up dead.

[dnooman]

Apparently I misplaced an unvote in my spread sheet, but I think I have it fixed now.

Tell me if there are any errors please.

NAF1138 2 (Hal Briston, Lightnin')

CaerieD 1 (Lemur866)

nesta 1 (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

percypercy 1 (DiggitCamara)

Lightnin' 4 (NAF1138, Projammer, dnooman, IdleThoughts)

Kyrie Eleison 1 (Omi No Kami)

Omi No Kami 3 (CaerieD, Rachm Qoch, Kyrie Eleison)

Idle Thoughts 1 (Blaster Master)

People who have yet to place a vote: SnakesCatLady, tirial, Millet the Frail.

People who have never been voted for: HalBriston, Projammer, tirial, Blaster Master, Rachm Qoch)

Highest vote getters: NAF1138 (4), Lightnin' (4), DiggitCamara (3), Omi No Kami (3)

That's what I have at the moment.

[nesta]

I finally had a chance to review the thread. I’m glad we only have 20 this time around; it makes it a lot easier to keep track of who has said what.

First, I need to un-FOS ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies. On review his posts have struck me as more pro-town than I’d previously thought. I think I had a little tunnel-vision after calling him out for the random FOS.

The two people jumping out to me as scum are Lightnin’ and Projammer.

Lightnin’ because he seems very over-defensive, and almost every post of his has pinged my scumdar. Post 193 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8483843&postcount=193) hit my scumdar at the very beginning, and since then he’s been very defensive every time he’s called out. His votes and unvotes seem cagey. It seems to me that he’s reacting more to the suspicion than trying to out scum.

Projammer has also hit my scumdar on almost every post. In post 223 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8484938&postcount=223) he says anyone who is about to be lynched will role claim. That struck me as an odd thing to say, since only scum would think that false claiming is a good idea. In that post he also pushes people to vote, and an early lynching is in the scum’s best interest. In post 237 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8485413&postcount=237) he responds to me pointing out that pro-town won’t false claim. He says he forgot about the Winston Smith debacle, and also that pro-town wins if the town wins. I’m not sure what to make of this, but this struck me as odd. In post 355 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489336&postcount=355) he posits that the masons will target townies before mafia. I’m not sure how you would come to this conclusion. It would be foolish for the masons to not try to play it as a straight-up town role and if they really want to go for a mason win then wait until close to the end-game to actually do anything proactive to facilitate it.

The post that moved him from suspicion to suspect was post 409 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8490221&postcount=409), where he says that either Lightnin’ or NAF1138 is scum since they’ve been going at it. He advocates lynching Lightnin’ and if he turns out to be town, then lynching NAF1138. If there’s one thing I learned from last game, it’s that scum love setting up two town lynches in a row. He seems a little too eager to do so here.

Post 424 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8491243&postcount=424) hits my scumdar. It seems he has given the scum position a lot of thought, and he also points out that scum might vote for other scum to make themselves look better. This has me looking at his Lightnin’ in a different light.

I’m going to vote Projammer, but heavy FOS Lightnin’.

[nesta]

(ask nesta how she (?) got outed as Mafia last game).
FTR, I'm a he.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

FTR, I'm a he.

And I'm a she. :)

[NAF1138]

Ok, I got a little more time at home than I thought I would today and have a couple of minutes to make a post.

First off, I am going to unvote Lightnin'.
He seems scummy as all get out, and this might really be a mistake on my part, but the last couple of posts he made sound more like a frustrated noob than a defensive mafioso. Yes, he could be both, and there is still a BIG ol' FOS on Lightnin' in my book. But for now I am going to take my vote off.

Right now it is this post:
I had missed your vote for Lightnin and was thinking mine was the majick number three vote that is supposed to be one of the big tells.

Unthinkable that two townies are going at each other? Hardly. Also a possibility that it's two scum doing a stage play to move out of the lurker field. And sacrificing one would put the other in a prominant anti-scum light. Though I really doubt that's the case. I don't think they'd have the numbers to just throw one away like that. Not to mention that they haven't had a night strategy session yet.

Correct me if I'm wrong though. They can only discuss strategy at night?

No targets, just verbalizing my thoughts. Subtlety was never my strong point.

that is really pinging my scumdar. Projammer is talking about the mob in a way that I have noticed scum in my current game talk about the mob. It's just a little too "gee shucks, I don't really know what is going on" for my taste. And feels like Projammer is trying to subtlely say "hey I am just a townie, I don't know WHAT the mafia are up to"

I don't like it.

Projammer was feeling kind of scummy to me anyway, before this post. He REALLY feels like scum now.

Omi No Kami also feels like scum to me, and it's for the same misrepresention of posts that I called out Fluid on earlier. BUT it could be a simple mistake. I don't know and I am less sure about it than I am Projammer, so...

vote Projammer
FOS Omi No Kami

[NAF1138]

Well, I spend all that time working up a post and nesta beats me to the punch with a better one.

Oh well.

[percypercy]

Okay, here's where I stand now. There is definitely something going on with Lightnin', but I'm not at all ready to call him scum. He got corrected by Gadarene for editting a post, got defensive, and things snowballed from there. So I'm watching him, but no fingerpointing yet.

Projammer is another story. The arguments against him are compelling. He's trying to be slick, but it's not working for me. So let's make that...

Vote Projammer
-Lil

[Idle Thoughts]

This sudden (seeming) bandwagon on Projammer is opening up new suspicions to me.

I, personally, haven't seen anything weird with him (her?). I've read over all the past posts that people linked too but I just don't see the intentions that some seem to be attributing to them. Granted people said the same thing about things I found off with fluidruid, so maybe it's just what one interprets from one's own POV.

The only odd thing I saw him make was the whole masons will be against townies post that nesta pointed out. Other then that though, nothing hits me.

I'm going to start keeping my eye on his posts more, that's for sure...but for right now I'm a bit more leery of those suddenly rushing in to vote for him then him himself.

[Idle Thoughts]

*sighs* I can't win. One misspelling and a wrong form of "to" in that last post..and I even previewed this time. :o

[nesta]

And I'm a she. :)
Noted. Sorry about that.

[CaerieD]

Oh...dear. I'm not really sure what I think about the rush against Projammer. It seems a bit out of left field, which makes me think scum, but NAF1138's points seem solid. The vote just seems so sudden.

I'm hoping there's going to be some defense from Projammer and more explanation from those casting votes in that direction. After that, I'm a bit suspicious of those three.

[percypercy]

I would like to hear Projammer's side of things because clearly, words can easily be taken out of context. What I've seen so far leads me to believe my vote is solid, but I want to hear his defense.
-Lil

[Projammer]

Seems I'm putting my foot in every time I say something, but let me try again.

First off, people keep trying to read my observations as me advocating one thing or another. I'm not.

Forcing a role claim is a bad thing. Claiming a false role is a VERY bad thing. Just ask Winston. I said that I had observed there were quite a few role claims in the first two games. Go back and reread my posts. I have never advocated forcing claims.

Masons. Yes, they win if the town wins. But one of their assigned goals is to win for themselves. So if it looks to them like they can eliminate the mob and enough townies for them to score a win they will. And while the masons win if the town wins, that works the other way as well. The town wins if the masons win. Small consolation to the townies that had to be sacrificed to make that happen.

The only firm stance I have made so far is that Lightnin and NAF are both pinging high.

I am keeping an eye on people that continue to misrepresent my posts though.

BTW: I am a he. Just to avoid gender confusion for those who will refer to me in future posts.

[NAF1138]

posting from my phone while I am working on a play. so forgive me for not coding anything. (its a slow show and I have been reading the dope to pass the time)

I just want to make it clear that my vote for projammer is based entierly on the quoted post.

Sure the other stuff is suspicious, and I won't pretend it didn't factor in. But he wasn't being any more suspicious than anyone else in my eyes until that post.

To me that post was a clear exhibition of scum behavior based on what I have seen other scum do in other games.

[Rachm Qoch]

Gah, this is going completely wrong. I'll admit that I didn't read CaerieD's posts carefully before making an accusation, which is wrong no matter what you say. But I concede the flip-flopping bit, I think you'll agree that the sum of my argument was "CaerieD seems to be acting differently this time. Huh, that's strange. Let's keep an eye on her". And I stand by that. ^^

I don't want to belabor the point, so I'll just make my say on this and move on.

Recapping, you took issue with CaerieD in post #390:
Undecided CaerieD. She seems to be much more agressive and confrontational in this game than the last one, and anything out of the ordinary is worth examining. Her suspicions seem well-founded, but she also changes them a lot. (I think she's flip-flopped on fluid at least once or twice). It may be that she's scum, and trying to confuse us by "helpfully" providing lots and lots of conflicting commentary in the hopes of hiding bad advice inside of good advice, or it may just be that she doesn't feel the need to lay low like she did when she was the detective in our last round. Honestly, I think the latter is more likely, but I get the feeling that if we watch her for another day or two it'll be much more obvious what the deal is.(All bolding mine)


Here's the two posts by CaerieD (#214 & #282) you supposedly gleaned all this from (posted in their entirety):
I'm highly suspicious of fluiddruid right now for being the third person to vote for NAF1138 in post #199. But, then Idle Thoughts misrepresents fluiddruid's position on voting, by lumping fluiddruid, Millit the Frail and Lemur866 all together as advocates of not voting, which isn't what fluiddruid had been suggesting here at all.

I'm not ready to cast a vote yet, but I'm quite curious.The questioning is actually what made me less inclined to think that fluiddruid was scum. It was the townies in the last game who were the most suspicious of others and the ones who essentially led to all of the role claims. While it's easy enough for scum to emulate the tactics of town, those tactics didn't go very well for the town. Any scum who was smart enough to notice that the townies did that and try to copy it would also know that it wasn't a very good tactic and resulted in lynchings and role claims. And then we're back at the "wine in front of me" situation there, aren't we? Argh.
We've still got plenty of time. No one is jumping out at me as a very good prospect just yet, and my suspicions of fluiddruid are fading. All of you are potential scum as far as I'm concerned, but I don't think offing the experienced players right off the bat is going to help us. There's a good chance some of them (most of them?) are going to be Vanilla Citizens.
See the disconnect?

But things only get worse. To directly respond to your post at top, the crux of your argument wasn't that "CaerieD seem[ed] to be acting differently this time," but that (s)he was acting suspiciously in this game. Which clearly isn't the case, as the bolded excerpts from your own posts attest. You only brought up CaerieD's participation in the previous game three quarters of the way into your post. How can you stand by the statement that that was the crux of your argument? Not only do you mischaracterize CaerieD's posts -- you mischaracterize your own.

Though I do see what you're saying concerning CaerieD's posting in the two games, even if it doesn't especially concern me at the moment (maybe he is just trying to surrvive this time?). If I were to give you the benefit of the doubt (though at this point I'm not), and assume you really meant to stress CaerieD's role in the previous game, I'd give you this advice: 1) you should have simply made your point without all the extraneous accusations; and 2) you should have explained exactly what you're talkinig about WRT the previous game, especially since not all of us made our way past the first few pages of that thread. At this point, cagey posts are the quickest way to the gallows.

[Rachm Qoch]

For that matter, how about if we all keep vague references to the two previous WW/Mafia games to a relative minimum? For the benefit of those who didn't follow either/both of them. If you have some insight vis-a-vis a prior game, spell it out, OK?

It doesn't serve any of us if the point you're trying to make is lost on half the town.

[Rachm Qoch]

Apparently I misplaced an unvote in my spread sheet, but I think I have it fixed now.

Tell me if there are any errors please.
The one thing I'm noticing is I don't see fluiddruid or Lemur866 tallied.

[Millit the Frail]

Huh. I've only had time to skim the new stuff, but it looks like we're having a hard time getting anything going because people are afraid of jumping on a bandwagon. That's not a bad thing, necessarily. I'm still holding off on a vote because I feel that there's no need to rush things, and I'm getting plenty to work with already. (And because I've got limited time.) In a few days, I'll try to read the whole thread again, catch up on everything, and read more closely.

In the meantime, I'll say I agree with the reasons some of you all have for suspecting Projammer. And in his latest post, he says that "forcing a role claim is a bad thing." This is true. However, how is anyone supposed to know that they're forcing a role claim ahead of time? How can it be avoided? You see what I mean? If we had some way of already knowing that our target had a special role, then there wouldn't be anything left to claim. It would be common knowledge. Forcing a role claim is more of a mistake then a "bad thing." That's what makes this game so difficult. Am I making any sense?

Also, it's Millit. With TWO i's!

[Lightnin']

For that matter, how about if we all keep vague references to the two previous WW/Mafia games to a relative minimum? For the benefit of those who didn't follow either/both of them. If you have some insight vis-a-vis a prior game, spell it out, OK?

It doesn't serve any of us if the point you're trying to make is lost on half the town.

I'd like to second this. It's hard enough having to keep track of everyone in here- having to keep track of their previous performances is much harder.

[dnooman]

percypercy has only voted for people that other people have voted for, plus there is next to nothing in his/her posts.

The Projammerwagon needs to stop and be inspected IMO.

[dnooman]

The one thing I'm noticing is I don't see fluiddruid or Lemur866 tallied.
Reread the post. Votes that are unvoted are not accounted here.

[Omi no Kami]

I don't want to belabor the point, so I'll just make my say on this and move on.

Good. I'm the first to admit that not being careful was my fault, and I don't have enough evidence to make any further claims at this point, but I will say that you three all seem to be coming down on me pretty hard; if I recall correctly, I essentially said "Gee, I'm having trouble finding any good leads, so I'll just talk out what I'm thinking. CaerieD looks suspicious, but I can't draw any conclusions from it so I'm going to keep my eye on her". I know that catching scum trying to start bandwagons is a valid play, but the way in which you, Kyrie and Caerie all seem to have jumped on me for voicing vague suspicions makes me wonder.

So I'm keeping my eyes on all of you.

[tirial]

Idle Thoughts, thanks for clearing up the issue over role assignment Post 430. Withdraw FOS on Idle Thought.

Gadarene, could you answer one rules question, which I'd prefer an answer before there is any chance of it occuring. If a player is converted then lynched, how does their assignment show up? Is it purely as mafia, or would it be "town/mafia" "mason converted mafia" etc.

There still isn't really not enough to go on. SnakesCatLady or percypercy - any chance of borrowing a psychic cat? To be honest I think NAF is probably town, but that doesn't mean that Lighnin isn't, as both dnooman (post 424) and I (post 428) have said. I will be honest and say at the moment I am looking through Kyrie and Projammer's posts, but for reasons I started stating in post 342, I am leaning towards Projammer. However as the game moves on I also agree with nesta's reasoning in post 443, which is very much what I was thinking. Some posts of yours that that particularly concerned me, Projammer:

On the role claims issue:
"That wasn't me advocating role claims. It was an observation of actions from the other two games." Post 356
"Whomever get's the vote this time is pretty much guaranteed to try some sort of role claim. <snip>So get out there and VOTE!" (Post 223) looks pretty much like encouraging pushing peope into role-claims early, which would only help the mafia. A post on mason strategy suggesting working against the town (post 355) is a concern, but its clinched (for me) by Post 454
"And while the masons win if the town wins, that works the other way as well. The town wins if the masons win." Not from my understanding of the rules, or from Kyrie's post 402 - the masons also win if the town wins because all masons are town. However the town does not win if the masons win as not all townies are masons.

If this is incorrect let me know - otherwise FOS Projammer.

I would vote for you but there are two good reasons not to.
1) There's a bandwagon going on, and I'd like to hear your answers before risking triggering an early vote.
2) I think there's a better reason to vote for someone else.

percypercy, you haven't posted a lot of substance, or very often. You may not be around much, but please post some analysis or other useful information. My analysis here is based on the lack of information.
I'm not going to add another post rehashing the same old stuff. It clogs the thread up and wastes all of our time. Post 438. Actually it lets us know how you think, what lines you are looking down and your particular take on it, which issues you think are important and which ones you ignore. It means if you die other people can pick up the threads you were looking at, and therefore helps the town.
Could we each explain why we're voting why we're voting the way we are, just once again so it'll be in one spot? Post 425. You didn't explain your vote in that post and your request here was followed up by withdrawing your vote and FOSing DiggitCamera. If you ask for information you have to give some as well. And there is a problem with your post in 438. SnakesCatLady with 12 posts by post 421 is not exactly "laying low". Your count at the same time was 6.

Vote percypercy.

[percypercy]

I withdrew my vote fot DiggitCamera and placed a FOS on him because I decided I needed more information before I was comfortable voting for him. Also, like I said, I'll post when I have something to say and no other time. However, I will be gone for most of today so I won't be posting again until the evening.
-Lil

[CaerieD]

For the record, I'm a she.

I'm really suspicious of anyone deciding I'm scum based off of differences in the way I played last game versus the way I'm playing now. I was a) the Detective and b) offed by the Vigilante on Night 2. Unless I was the Detective again and hoping to get killed off quickly, I wouldn't play the same. I'm trying to play differently, because last time I sucked.

It's just not a very convincing argument against me, since there were so few posts to go on and I hadn't flip-flopped at all. True, vague musing like this are all we have to go on right now, but it's pretty logically weak. Now, if the FOS from Omi no Kami had come against me because of my few posts, like the vote against me did, it'd make more sense, but since it seemed to be for the exact opposite reason it struck me as pretty scummy.

As far as Projammer goes, I'm not particularly convinced by that defense, but still suspicious of the voters. I'm leaning towards switching my vote to one of those four, just because it seems so odd.

[Gadarene]

tirial:
Gadarene, could you answer one rules question, which I'd prefer an answer before there is any chance of it occuring. If a player is converted then lynched, how does their assignment show up? Is it purely as mafia, or would it be "town/mafia" "mason converted mafia" etc.

The latter. A player will be shown to be "mafia doctor," or "mafia detective," or "citizen turned mafia," and so on.

I'll have an updated vote count sometime later this morning.

[Lemur866]

I will say that now that we're truly into the game everyone is posting, so there are no true lurkers anymore. But SnakesCatLady hasn't posted anything of much substance. Of course she's got a good reason...there's nothing to post about. Except that applies to everyone.

So far I have no reason to change my vote.

Percypercy did hop on the Projammer bandwagon. I won't vote against him based on that, but thats a data point to consider.

[nesta]

Seems I'm putting my foot in every time I say something, but let me try again.

First off, people keep trying to read my observations as me advocating one thing or another. I'm not.
I’m not sure if you’re including me in the people who are saying you advocate something you don’t. On reviewing your posts I did catch one place I did that: in post 443 ( http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8492458&postcount=443) where I voted for you, I said you wanted to lynch Lightnin’ and if he turns out to be town to lynch NAF1138. This wasn’t entirely correct, because in post 409 ( http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8490221&postcount=409) you said:

And should lightnin turn out to be townie, FOS NAL.
I’m pretty sure from the context of that post that you mean FOS NAF1138 if Lightnin’ turns out to be town. You didn’t come right out and say we should lynch NAF1138 if Lightnin’ is town, so I apologize for saying you did. I do think that’s what you were getting at, though, just not in so many words.

Forcing a role claim is a bad thing. Claiming a false role is a VERY bad thing. Just ask Winston. I said that I had observed there were quite a few role claims in the first two games. Go back and reread my posts. I have never advocated forcing claims.
I never thought you were advocating false claims. In post 223 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8484938&postcount=223) you say:

Everyone is doing their best to give off I'm-a-townie vibes, so unless someone does slip up badly, there's no real hard data to go on. Whomever get's the vote this time is pretty much guaranteed to try some sort of role claim. About the only thing they're NOT going to claim is scum.
It was the fact that you thought whoever gets lynched will make a claim that I found odd. A vanilla townie wouldn’t be thinking this. It’s these types of disconnects from what a regular townie would be thinking that made me suspicious of you in the first place.

Masons. Yes, they win if the town wins. But one of their assigned goals is to win for themselves. So if it looks to them like they can eliminate the mob and enough townies for them to score a win they will. And while the masons win if the town wins, that works the other way as well. The town wins if the masons win. Small consolation to the townies that had to be sacrificed to make that happen.
As has already been pointed out, this isn’t entirely correct. If the masons outnumber the other townies at the end of the game, the masons win and the rest of the town loses.

The only firm stance I have made so far is that Lightnin and NAF are both pinging high.
I agree with you about Lightnin’, and I’m still undecided about NAF1138 (as I am with most everyone at this point). The only reason you’ve given for suspecting NAF1138 is because he was going after Lightnin’, and I agree with him (and you) that Lightnin’ deserves to be a suspect due to his over-defensiveness. What other reasons do you have for suspecting NAF1138?

I am keeping an eye on people that continue to misrepresent my posts though.
Fair enough. Please name names, though. If you think I’m misrepresenting you, call me on it specifically.
My vote for you stands. Am I 100% sure your scum? No. But I do think I’m right about you, and other than Lightnin’ no one has stood out nearly as much to me as someone trying to play the townie without actually being one.

[nesta]

Oh...dear. I'm not really sure what I think about the rush against Projammer. It seems a bit out of left field, which makes me think scum, but NAF1138's points seem solid. The vote just seems so sudden.

I'm hoping there's going to be some defense from Projammer and more explanation from those casting votes in that direction. After that, I'm a bit suspicious of those three.
I was surprised by the mini-wagon as well, even though I guess I co-started it. NAF1138 says he started his post about Projammer before mine was there, which I can believe since it takes me quite a while to compose posts where I link post numbers and quote a lot. If NAF1138 is town, then I'll feel a little vindicated that we both picked up on the same things. Of course, if he isn't, then I'll feel really stupid for maybe giving him ammunition against a fellow townie.

I'm not sure about percypercy. I didn't like the way she handled her early vote for DiggitCamera. And now she's on the bandwagon I started. What does this tell me? That either my vague suspicions about percypercy are probably wrong, or my pointed suspicions about Projammer are.

I'd like others to review Projammer's posts and see if they see the same things I am.

[Lightnin']

My vote for you stands. Am I 100% sure your scum? No. But I do think I’m right about you, and other than Lightnin’ no one has stood out nearly as much to me as someone trying to play the townie without actually being one.

You know, I was going to stay out of any subthread which mentions me as a suspect. Every attempt I've made to explain my actions has been viewed as being overly defensive, so why bother?

However, I just can't let this slip. Could you please explain exactly what I've done to
try to "play the townie without actually being one"?

As for why I'm still maintaining that Naf is scum, the only thing I can point to is that he's been very vocal, right from the beginning, in saying I'm acting suspicious. Once other people jumped on the bandwagon, though, he's kinda backed off. That in itself makes me even more suspicious that he's scummy- get the vote rolling, then back off so you look like one of the mob.

I'm not necessarily saying he's mafia... but I wouldn't be surprised if he's mason.

[Projammer]

On the role claims issue:
Post 356
(Post 223) looks pretty much like encouraging pushing peope into role-claims early, which would only help the mafia. A post on mason strategy suggesting working against the town (post 355) is a concern, but its clinched (for me) by Post 454
Not from my understanding of the rules, or from Kyrie's post 402 - the masons also win if the town wins because all masons are town. However the town does not win if the masons win as not all townies are masons.

You are correct about my mistake concerning town and mason wins. I had posted hastily while tired. The town does not win if the masons win. I realized my mistake when I woke up this morning and was going to post a correction except that you and another player had already caught it.

As for post 223, people voting gets people to talking to give everyone data to form opinions on their fellow players.
"Like politics, you might not vote for the right one, but you will learn something"
If we've managed to lynch scum, we get to look back to see who was defending him/her. Likewise, if the recently deceased is townie, we get to see who was pushing for it hardest.

I can see how that could look like I was pushing forcing role claims though. It was not my intent however.

[SnakesCatLady]

I will say that now that we're truly into the game everyone is posting, so there are no true lurkers anymore. But SnakesCatLady hasn't posted anything of much substance. Of course she's got a good reason...there's nothing to post about. Except that applies to everyone.

So far I have no reason to change my vote.

Percypercy did hop on the Projammer bandwagon. I won't vote against him based on that, but thats a data point to consider.

You are right, Lemur866, I haven't posted anything of much substance. This is my first time playing a game of this sort, so it is a learning experience for me. I am still suspicious of Lightnin', and haven't seen anything to change my mind. I have also started to wonder about percypercy. I don't understand why she would accuse me of "laying low" when I had more posts at the time than she did. Trying to get the FOS to point elsewhere, maybe?

I may be too tenderhearted for this game, I hesitate to cast a vote without something strong to go on, and that is just not going to happen this early. Anyone feel like owning up to being scum? I understand confession is good for the soul.

[tirial]

You are correct about my mistake concerning town and mason wins. I had posted hastily while tired.
Considering how long this thread is getting I can understand that.

As for post 223, people voting gets people to talking to give everyone data to form opinions on their fellow players.
"Like politics, you might not vote for the right one, but you will learn something"
I disagree - votes are useful only if accompanies by analysis or justification. Votes without analysis or on spurious grounds are less useful - except as a possible scum indicator. A player posting lots of votes without accompanying analysis doesn't help matters (although it does imply that maybe they have other information to go on that they aren't releasing to the thread).


If we've managed to lynch scum, we get to look back to see who was defending him/her. Likewise, if the recently deceased is townie, we get to see who was pushing for it hardest.
If we lynch scum then yes the scum's defenders (and the people pushing for it who aren't likely to be in the same faction) are useful information to have. However, if we lynch town it's less useful as its quite possible for a townie to start a bandwagon by mistake.


I can see how that could look like I was pushing forcing role claims though. It was not my intent however.
Understood. Regardless, my vote stays with percypercy, until I get some analysis or a concrete reason to unvote. (Two people have now requested percypercy's viewpoint, and neither have received it. Requesting information without giving any doesn't help the town much.)

[nesta]

However, I just can't let this slip. Could you please explain exactly what I've done to
try to "play the townie without actually being one"?
I didn’t post a detailed breakdown on your posts because I think others have stated pretty much the same case I would have, especially about you being over-defensive. As far as your posts that haven’t rang true to me, I’ll be happy to provide some examples.

In post 193 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8483843&postcount=193) you say:

Well, I guess I'm just going to have to vote for DiggitCamara.

Why? He was pretty free with the accusation- with no evidence at all. Since the only one who would have any evidence at this point would be one of the fargin' iceholes bad guys themselves, his vote has to be an attempt to redirect suspicion.

Of course, he might just be shootin' in the dark. But tell me, my friends- do we, as good wholesome townfolk, want an itchy trigger finger like DiggitCamara around? I mean, heck- look at his username, fer cryin' out loud! It doesn't even make any sense, and therefore MUST be a pseudonym.
[color removed, bolding mine]

This was early in the game, so as we’ve already established there’s going to be a lot of random voting going on. It wasn’t you voting for DiggitCamara that made me suspicious of this post, but the way you did it. It just struck me as false.

In post 227 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8485121&postcount=227) dnooman calls you on your vote for DiggitCamara, saying it’s a more vindictive tone that he’d expect so early in the game. You respond to this in post 232 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8485248&postcount=232):

While, yes, it does take more than one person with an itchy trigger finger to lynch someone, it only takes one FOS to get the suspicion started on that person... or, in DiggitCamara's case, one vote for lynch. The fact that he started the day off with a call for lynchin' makes me a bit nervous, hence my vote.

However, I think I am going to unvote DiggitCamara, and instead point the ol' FOS onto him. His vote is the only thing he's done that makes me a bit nervous, and I think we need more info before any sort of action should be undertaken (or not undertaken, whatever the case may be).
[color removed]

This seems like a big contradiction to me. You vote for DiggitCamara because you’re nervous about anyone advocating an early lynch, where in post 232 you seem to be pushing hard to get DiggitCamara lynched. When called on it you unvote him. Rachm Qoch calls you on your unvote in post 321 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8488837&postcount=321), and you respond by revoting DiggitCamara in post 323 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8488893&postcount=323):

Is it defensive to reconsider? Heck, if you want, go ahead and count me a revote for DiggitCamara. I had originally voted to lynch him because I thought he jumped on Cookies awful fast and for no reason, and I thought THAT was a bit suspicious. Further conversation among everyone else seemed to indicate that the first day's basically random, anyway, so I withdrew my vote.

But if it makes you feel better, let's lynch Digg.

Of course, at this point, EVERYTHING is a reason to be suspicious. Should I be suspicious of everyone who's suspicious of ME? :rolleyes:
[color removed]

That’s just plain odd. You seem to be trying to do whatever you think the town wants you to, reacting to the rest of the town instead of trying to find scum. This is also the post that you edited, and after Gadarene calls you on that, you get even more defensive. You defend yourself in post 346 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489255&postcount=346) (where you unvote DiggitCamara and vote NAF1138) and 354 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489327&postcount=354).

In post 361 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489411&postcount=361) you said:

Good explanation- and I think that was why I got so irritated at his nomination of me. As near as I could tell, I hadn't done anything that I felt warranted any suspicion, especially since I retracted my first (admittedly random) vote- he seemed to be going out of his way to find something, anything, suspicious. And then he seemed self-congratulatory on his suspicion of me after I "confirmed" that suspicion by defending my actions.

It just seemed really random, and I can't see any real use in doing it.

It's also annoying in that I now feel frozen in indecision. If we defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we don't defend ourselves, it's suspicious. If we just keep quiet, we're suspicious. If that's the way this is played, why bother?
This is one of your posts that really didn’t sit right with me. If you hadn’t done anything suspicious (which I disagree with), then getting really defensive about it doesn’t seem like a normal townie response. Sure, we all want to keep playing, but I think most townies develop a “kill me if you want, but you’re wrong” attitude when the lynch mob heads their way. In my limited experience I haven’t seen townies become frozen with indecision just because someone suspects them.

This post is getting really long, so I’ll just link to post 371 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489505&postcount=371), 384 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489801&postcount=384), and 391 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489876&postcount=391). All three hit my scumdar on little points, but they did start to get more reasonable. I think these posts are why NAF1138 backed off of his vote. They still sound a little too desperate to me, but not as much as the earlier ones.

In post 427 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8491518&postcount=427) you ask this question:

I can't remember, and the hamsters aren't cooperating right now so I can't go and look, but is a player's affiliation revealed when he/she is lynched (or whatever) out of the game?
It’s a small thing, but this hit my scumdar again. It just struck me as an odd question, perhaps by scum hoping that their role won’t be revealed if they are lynched? Of course, it could be a railroaded townie hoping to get the “I told you so” moment.

As for why I'm still maintaining that Naf is scum, the only thing I can point to is that he's been very vocal, right from the beginning, in saying I'm acting suspicious. Once other people jumped on the bandwagon, though, he's kinda backed off. That in itself makes me even more suspicious that he's scummy- get the vote rolling, then back off so you look like one of the mob.
And then there’s this. I’ve agreed with NAF1138 that you are acting suspicious, so his suspecting you isn’t a strike against him in my eyes. Neither is his backing off if he thinks Projammer is more likely to be scum than you are. You’re playing a little of the damned if you do, damned if you don’t game with him that irritated you so much about him (and others) suspecting you. Now that he unvoted you you’re now more suspicious of him?

I'm not necessarily saying he's mafia... but I wouldn't be surprised if he's mason.
This hit my scumdar as well. It’s just an odd suspicion to have. I don’t think most of us are looking for masons right now. But scum are.

[Lightnin']

This was early in the game, so as we’ve already established there’s going to be a lot of random voting going on. It wasn’t you voting for DiggitCamara that made me suspicious of this post, but the way you did it. It just struck me as false.


Whoosh. I was being flippant (did you not recognize the Johnny Dangerously quote?)- and at that point any votes were random, correct? Once the game got going, I became serious. There were a few other posters who, right at the beginning, used just as little justification for their first posts- how many people claimed they used random.org for their initial votes?


That’s just plain odd. You seem to be trying to do whatever you think the town wants you to, reacting to the rest of the town instead of trying to find scum. This is also the post that you edited, and after Gadarene calls you on that, you get even more defensive. You defend yourself in post 346 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489255&postcount=346) (where you unvote DiggitCamara and vote NAF1138) and 354 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8489327&postcount=354).


At that point, I wanted to keep playing. In my mind, I'd been singled out, right from the beginning, and it sure looked like I was just going to be sacrificed right from the start. Hey, if that's the way the game's played, at least say so.



This is one of your posts that really didn’t sit right with me. If you hadn’t done anything suspicious (which I disagree with), then getting really defensive about it doesn’t seem like a normal townie response. Sure, we all want to keep playing, but I think most townies develop a “kill me if you want, but you’re wrong” attitude when the lynch mob heads their way. In my limited experience I haven’t seen townies become frozen with indecision just because someone suspects them.


This is my first time playing the game. From my point of view, I'd been selected as a sacrifice right from the start- and what really bugged me about it was that the posters who said that I was acting suspicious weren't really being viewed as acting suspicious in their accusations of me. Since changing my initial vote made me appear scummy, then in my mind, changing my vote back to the way it was should've appeased their concerns. Of course, suddenly THAT became suspicious. *sigh*


It’s a small thing, but this hit my scumdar again. It just struck me as an odd question, perhaps by scum hoping that their role won’t be revealed if they are lynched? Of course, it could be a railroaded townie hoping to get the “I told you so” moment.

Well, let's see. Right from the start, I'd been accused of being scum. Any attempts to defend myself made me look even scummier. That morning, I'd decided that the only thing I could do would be let my lynching show that I was innocent, and that the people going after me were most likely the ones that really needed to be looked at. Hell yeah it was an "I told you so" moment.


Now that he unvoted you you’re now more suspicious of him?
This hit my scumdar as well. It’s just an odd suspicion to have. I don’t think most of us are looking for masons right now. But scum are.

Well, I *do* think it's suspicious. He accused me strongly, right from the start. He had several other posters who agreed with him, right from the start. Who's most likely to benefit from accusing someone else?

Would it have been less suspicious if I'd said that I think he's Mafia? Or if I'd said that I thought someone else was my new suspicion? Remember- damned if you do, damned if you don't. Accusing anyone else would've pinged scumdar. Dropping my accusation of him would've pinged scumdar. Keeping silent would've pinged scumdar.

And, apparently, clarifiying my position pings scumdar. :rolleyes:

[Gadarene]

Updated Vote Count

3 -- Lightnin' (Idle Thoughts, dnooman, Projammer)
3 -- Omi No Kami (Rachm Qoch, Kyrie Eleison, CaerieD)
3 -- Projammer (nesta, NAF1138, percypercy)
2 -- NAF1138 (Hal Briston, Lightnin')
2 -- percypercy (DiggitCamara, tirial)
1 -- Idle Thoughts (Blaster Master)
1 -- CaerieD (Lemur866)
1 -- Kyrie Eleison (Omi No Kami)
1 -- nesta (ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)

The day will end in approximately twenty hours.

[Millit the Frail]

Well, I *do* think it's suspicious. He accused me strongly, right from the start. He had several other posters who agreed with him, right from the start. Who's most likely to benefit from accusing someone else?

Would it have been less suspicious if I'd said that I think he's Mafia? Or if I'd said that I thought someone else was my new suspicion? Remember- damned if you do, damned if you don't. Accusing anyone else would've pinged scumdar. Dropping my accusation of him would've pinged scumdar. Keeping silent would've pinged scumdar.

I agree with nesta. Accusing someone of possibly being a Mason at this point in the game does more harm than good. I don't think there's any reason to believe that the Masons would be working against the town. What do I gain from your suspicion? Well, you'd be really foolish to make that accusation if you are a mason, so I think that rules you out as one of them and, in turn, makes you less likely to be a townie. And if you are just a townie or another special role, and you're trying to draw attention to probable Masons, then you're helping the scum. So you're a townie without our best interests at heart. The only people would are trying to find Masons now (and to induce paranoia among the town about a Mason win) are the scum.

As far as other suspicious players, I'm inclined to believe percypercy when she says she won't post unless she has something to say. It's not necessarily helpful, but I'm not reading anything more into it. And Projammer has cleared things up a bit, so I'm feeling less concerned about him.

Vote Lightnin'

[Lightnin']

I agree with nesta. Accusing someone of possibly being a Mason at this point in the game does more harm than good. I don't think there's any reason to believe that the Masons would be working against the town. What do I gain from your suspicion?

And what do you lose from my suspicion? The more we know about each other, the greater our chances of identifying scum.

Also, I'm hardly the only one who's suspected others of being Masons.

[Millit the Frail]

And what do you lose from my suspicion? The more we know about each other, the greater our chances of identifying scum.

Also, I'm hardly the only one who's suspected others of being Masons.

I meant "What knowledge do I gain about you from your suspicion?" What follows is what I feel we can draw from your posts.

Maybe I'm being hasty. I don't know. I didn't see Gadarene's vote count post until after I posted. Now I feel a little leery about being the tie-breaker. But I have a wedding to get to in a couple of hours and I'm worried about not getting a vote in before the deadline! There's plenty of time for things to turn around, and I'll try to get up tomorrow and adjust (or not adjust) my vote accordingly.

[SnakesCatLady]

In a way I hate to do this, because I don't really want to be the tiebreaker, but I am going to go ahead and cast my vote. I am hoping that posts after this will give me evidence to either change my mind or to feel more comfortable about my vote.

vote Lightnin'.

[DiggitCamara]

In a way I hate to do this, because I don't really want to be the tiebreaker, but I am going to go ahead and cast my vote. I am hoping that posts after this will give me evidence to either change my mind or to feel more comfortable about my vote.

vote Lightnin'.
Well, if I understand the rules correcty from Monday morning on, he'll still have 12 hours to defend himself.

And you'll have to post a bit more to forestall the same fate for tomorrow (unless your psychic cat protects you :D )

[Idle Thoughts]

Reading this thread and catching up today is akin to watching a tennis match. It's like my head is going back and forth reading the exchanges even though it's just staying in one position.

It's brought a couple things to light though, most important being, my suspicion on Lightnin' is slipping. This is due both to the posts he's making in his defense (which sound geniune), plus the fact that he's starting to garner more votes and being piled on. One of them (most recently voted) is Millit the Frail, who was fading from my radar but popped up on it again with the vote. S/He hasn't really been involved much and is seemingly staying in the background...however I haven't seen many posts with claims of real life going ons.

I tend to look at the vote updates for long periods of time and work out, based on who is currently voting for who, who I think is scum and not.

It seems probable that those with more than two votes have to have SOME scum voting for them, as they've got to be trying to subtle bump townies off in the day. And of all of the people voting for the three who have the most votes two of them are shady to me (the previously mentioned Millit the Frail and now percypercy due to things others pointed out in posts 461 (by dnoorman) and 470 (by nesta).

[tirial]

"did you not recognize the Johnny Dangerously quote?"What this one? Post 193: Since the only one who would have any evidence at this point would be one of the fargin' iceholes bad guys themselves, his vote has to be an attempt to redirect suspicion
Yesssss.... I've never seen the film, but wikipedia and the IMDB attribute it....I take it you don't remember who says it most, or you wouldn't have quoted it.
If you are an innocent townie, why would you think that posting that was a good idea? Quoting the Godfather might have appeared more innocent.

Please provide your attribution.

[tirial]

Actually after a few moments reflection I will say I'm not comfortable with the Lighnin' bandwagon (and apologise for mangling your username in the post above).

If I said the quote issue is just too obvious, and the bandwagon seems to have gained a lot of votes very quickly. We don't really have anything to compare his reaction to, to see whether its innocent townie or frantic scum. Has anyone else been under a similar bandwagon in this game for comparison?

[Lemur866]

Crap. This Lightning bandwagon is wrongheaded. Sure he seemed to get upset when people targeted him, but...but...I'm convinced a scum would try to play it cooler. It rings false to me as the action of a Mafiosi.

But in order to head off the Lightning lynch, we've got to pick someone else, and that means bandwagoning on one of the people who have three votes already, compared to Lightning's five. And honestly, I don't feel any strong difference between Projammer and Omi No Kami and Lightning.

[Gadarene]

DiggitCamara:
Well, if I understand the rules correcty from Monday morning on, he'll still have 12 hours to defend himself.

You don't understand the rules correctly. :) The day ends on Monday at 10:35 a.m. my time no matter what, and the leading vote-getter gets sent to the gallows at that instant. The 12-hour window for the lynchee to mount a defense is only to safeguard against the day ending early before everyone (particularly the person getting lynched) has had a chance to get their oar in...that's what happened on Day One of the second game.

To sum up: the 12-hour window does not, and cannot, run over the amount of time allotted for the day itself.

[dnooman]

This is turning out well I think. I'm happy with my vote for Lightnin' even if he sadly turns out to be a townie. Why? Because he has been accused and defended to some degree by a decent number of people. For example, the most recent posts by Lemur866 and tirial. This gives us tons of info when and if he swings.

If he's scum, yay for us, one down. If he's town, we can look back at who was defending him openly. The only people who know who the townies are are the mafia, it would be wise for them to have "taken the high ground" before we lynch an innocent townie. Obviously the masons know who each other are too.

nesta has been making some very solid assessments IMO. My FOS remains pointed at Projammer.

[DiggitCamara]

Thanks, Gadarene, for your clarification.

Well, since it seems I won't be connecting again 'til after dawn, and in case I end up sleeping with the fishes, I offer you my top 5 "FOS"-ers (you know, the whole "non-discussion thing during the night):

1. Lightnin' (strong "attacks", not so strong defense)
2. Omi no Kami (the whole CaerieD fiasco)
3. percypercy (again: not a lot of participation, and when she participates, fluff)
4. BlasterMaster (the whole CarieD fiasco)
5. SnakesCatLady (not a lot of participation, and when she participates, fluff)

And, for what it's worth: "Doctor heal thyself", at least for during the first night. After all (hopefully) the mafia don't know who the Doctor is, and we don't want to lose him/her during the first night.

[Idle Thoughts]

Crap. This Lightning bandwagon is wrongheaded. Sure he seemed to get upset when people targeted him, but...but...I'm convinced a scum would try to play it cooler. It rings false to me as the action of a Mafiosi.

But in order to head off the Lightning lynch, we've got to pick someone else, and that means bandwagoning on one of the people who have three votes already, compared to Lightning's five. And honestly, I don't feel any strong difference between Projammer and Omi No Kami and Lightning.

I agree with the first part of your post but not the second. I feel unvoting him is the best course (at least in my interests) but putting it on another person with as many votes (especially being that the other two with about as many votes aren't pinging my "shady" meter) isn't something I'd feel right to rush into.

So in all interest, and pending further notice, I'm going to unvote Lightnin' and put my vote again on Millit the Frail. Not only has s/he appeared on my radar again due to my explaination in post #483 but s/he doesn't have any votes as of yet anyway (thus I have no suspicions of fellow scum voters bandwagoning).

[Hal Briston]

So Lightnin' is the big target about now (although on preview I see that is fading). That's bothersome to me for one purely selfish reason -- he and I are the only ones who have a vote in for NAF. If Lightnin' does wind up being the one to swing, and we find he was scum, then I sure as hell don't want that kind of "guilt by association" stench on me.

Well, I said last time that while I still have my suspicions about NAF, they have been fading a bit. Put it all together, and I unvote NAF1138.

I can't be certain I'll be online before final voting time, so just in case, I'm going to throw in a vote for ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies for the reasons I gave in Post 429 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8491572&postcount=429) (calling non-suspicious behavior suspicious seems rather suspicious to me).

Hopefully I'll be able to jump on between dropping my daughter off at day care and the final vote, just in case something comes up to convince me otherwise.

[percypercy]

I just can't give any support to voting against Lightnin' . If he turns up dirty, my instincts(and cat) were wrong, but for now, he seems defensive when accused which has only raised more suspicion in some people. It's a vicious circle he's riding on. I suspect there would have been another, even more suspicion-raising explanation, if he'd kept his cool.
-Lil
I'm a girl, I promise

[fluiddruid]

Well I've been away for most of the weekend but seem to be caught up on reading.

While we have I think some leads on several scum candidates, I think I am going to have to agree that percypercy hasn't really given us a lot to work with and is seemingly going out of his way to avoid giving his opinions. IMHO, someone who only posts fluff is either scum trying to avoid a voting/FOS trail and people poring through his old posts for info, or, a less valuable townie contributor.

Though I have pointed out suspicion for several others, this to me seems like the least loss to the team should it be an incorrect vote. Since odds are stacked against us on this vote, vote percypercy for now. Though, I'll be interested to see how percypercy and Lightnin' both participate in the remaining time. What's holding me back is I think odds are much better that Lightnin' has a power role compared to percypercy and frankly a bad loss the first round could kill our chances given how few truly valuable power roles we have... but, based on all I've read, I can't disagree that Lightnin' has a bigger reek of scum to me.

[NAF1138]

sorry I have to post from my phone again. My girlfriends car was vandelized and I spent most of the day dealing with that. So once again the coding will suckm the spelling will suck, the formatting may get hinkey, and no quotes. Sorry about that. I will try to make a better post when I get home from the theater tonight.

As far as Lightnin' goes:
With every post he goes from seeming very scummy to seeming very inexperienced. I am too confused by him at this point to be able to vote for him. But I FOS him strongly still.

As to him thinking I am trying to distance myself from starting his band wagon, all I can say is I don't think anyone is going to forget my involvment in that one.

I also stand by my vote for Projammer, and the fact that nesta agrees with me and that we both saw scummy thing independantly of each other makes me feel even better about it. I am sticking with that vote.

[dnooman]

Bloody hell. The thought that Lightnin' might be a mason occurred to me. If he is, and the other masons were those that were defending him, we're in deep shit.

Unvote Lightnin'

On preview, I have to admit that fluiddruid makes a good point.

vote percypercy

[SnakesCatLady]

Well, hell. I had not thought about Lightnin' possibly being a mason, which could explain others defending him. I don't think I want to risk that this early in the game.

Unvote Lightnin'. My FOS is still waving in his general direction.

My FOS has also waved at percypercy, but if I vote for her now I look like I'm jumping on the bandwagon, so I don't want to do that.

Even though I have tried to explain why I haven't posted a lot, DiggitCamera still keeps trying to get folks focused on me. I can't understand why he keeps doing this, so I'm going to vote DiggitCamera.

[SnakesCatLady]

Since I can't edit, that would be:

vote DiggitCamera.

[Rachm Qoch]

So Lightnin' is the big target about now (although on preview I see that is fading). That's bothersome to me for one purely selfish reason -- he and I are the only ones who have a vote in for NAF. If Lightnin' does wind up being the one to swing, and we find he was scum, then I sure as hell don't want that kind of "guilt by association" stench on me.

Well, I said last time that while I still have my suspicions about NAF, they have been fading a bit. Put it all together, and I unvote NAF1138.

I can't be certain I'll be online before final voting time, so just in case, I'm going to throw in a vote for ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies for the reasons I gave in Post 429 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8491572&postcount=429) (calling non-suspicious behavior suspicious seems rather suspicious to me).

Hopefully I'll be able to jump on between dropping my daughter off at day care and the final vote, just in case something comes up to convince me otherwise.
FWIW, I shared ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies's suspicions of you as well, until Gadarene's explanation and the brief exchange after.

What apparently looked to you like an innocent question (ie randomization of roles) to me looked suspicious. I figured it was understood that roles weren't hand-picked, and that you were trying to make yourself look dumb by pretending not to know that.

If you go back and read Gadarene's response in post #408, he states that he too was surprised you even asked that question. But as we learned in the next few posts, not all games are run the same. Actually, I was surprised me to hear Idle Thoughts say that he/she runs games with non-random roles.

Point being, I don't think ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies's suspicions were unwarranted at the time, so I don't really think you need to be all that suspicious of her suspicions.

[Kyrie Eleison]

Now that I'm back from playing hooky over the weekend, having just finished watching the Sopranos (I'm calling it homework for the game now; I had that Tony fellow as mob from the beginning, so it must be working.) With less than 12 hours on the clock, I figure I ought to offer some review of my somewhat-too-exuberant vote, the tone of which I am blaming on playing Wii and drinking Rock Art Brewery's Midnight Madness until far too early into Saturday morning.

While I'm sure it came across as something of an OMG you voted for me thing, Omi first caught my attention in post #280 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8487179&postcount=280), where he says:Hmm. I'm almost sure the scum were behind the mini-wagon that almost rolled over NAF. The problem is nailing down exactly who was being honestly suspicious, and who wanted to kill the poor chap.
NAF got three votes early on. However, Omi is "almost sure" that scum are behind it, which leads me to believe that he's also almost sure that NAF is town. He's hardly likely to be sure that scum tried to bandwagon scum, right? This is a level of certainty regarding NAF's alignment that I just don't see. Yes, NAF1138 has posted a lot, and he does seem to have gained some goodwill from it. My sense is that NAF1138 is more likely town than not. But "almost sure"? Not close.

There are two ways that Omi could know that NAF is town with such certainty, but one of them might mean that this represents a newbie mistell, and that NAF and Omi are masons. So I elect not to call attention to it at the time. However, in post #299 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8488274&postcount=299) NAF FOSes him. If masons are casting suspicions on other masons on day one, I give up now.

I'm getting a strong vibe of scum knowing that a NAF wagon is going nowhere, but hoping to safely use that event to build a train against someone else. And sure enough, he votes for fluiddruid, and when that fails, he tries me on for size.

During some interplay on that, in a post directed to Rachm Qoch:

(I GUESS. I admit to not having seen this particular rule set before, where the masons are apparently set to lose if townwins.

This is only minorly suspicious, but he's just misstated the mason role in a way that would encourage masons to play in a way that would benefit scum.

I admit that I didn't even notice the inconsistencies in his claims about CarieD.

And, finally, while voting for me, he claims to be "most suspicious" of two other people. Until now, I've found it difficult enough to find one person to cast a non-random vote for. How is it, then, that Omi has the luxury of a pool of three? Is he that good? Or just more well-informed about a larger pool of targets? I'm comfortable voting the latter.

[Blaster Master]

...
Anyway, that all had nothing to do with THIS game, but that explains why I assumed Gadarene might have picked them.

Okay, I'll bite. This seems to be a reasonable enough explanation, so I will unvote Idle Thoughts
I have no suspicions at all of Omi No Kami OR CaerieD so I don't know what they're seeing. I think that the minor lurking and posting style of CaerieD may have tripped OiNK's (sorry, I couldn't resist :p) meter but I think s/he jumping the gun a bit. This doesn't make me any more weary though. And in turn, CaerieD finds this (with good reason) suspicious since she only had made two posts up until that time. So I think it's just a case of two citizens misunderstanding where each other is coming from.

Even with regard to the posts since you made this, I still don't really understand the pile on on Omi (and some FOSs on me) because of what he said. Even though he had some wrong information, I read it over all as "look CaerieD is posting different than the last game". For obvious reasons, I've paid attention to her posts, and noticed that she was playing differently as well. Thus, my conclusion is that both are likely pro-town.