Mafia The Game III: Kinder and Gentler

[Rachm_Qoch]

[QUOTE=Rachm Qoch]

@tirial

1853 Rachm again agreeing with lemur that if the doctor claims they should be lynched. Also as we now know he misrepresents what occurred.

Whatever.

This is 100% the opposite of what I was saying!!! from the post you are citing:
[/qUOTE]

This is pissing me off enough that I think I should go just back & set the record straight once and for all.
in that post I also stated:

@Me

One of the issues I’m pondering is Lemur’s power-role fishing and subsequent repeated insistance that the mafia had probably recruited, and possibly recruited the doctor. One of the things that outed him to me at least was his attempt two or three days back to argue that the watchman/doctor, from the mafia’s perspective, are no better recruited than dead. When his argument fell apart, he still refused to conceed the point. Then, later on after the third no-kill night, he did a 180 said that the doctor was possibly recruited, and we could no longer trust a potential doctor role-claim. Hmm. What was he trying to spin?

Clearly I’m not siding with Lemur here, as you claim I am. On the contrary I’m suggesting he was trying to bamboozle us at a time he was not yet a serious lynching target. But I first came to doubt the fact the doctor might have been recruited eariler. Previously, I posted:

@Me

Hal brings up an interesting point with Lemur’s insistance that the Mafia have already recruited. I haven’t gone back to determine the chronology exactly, but I think he made most of those posts before he was a forerunner for a lynching. Why would he repeatedly make this point? It could be subterfuge, but only if he thought he would be lynched in the near future. On the other hand, if Lemur happens to turn out town, his points definitely carry weight.

The post Hal had earlier made that I was alluding to was this one:

@Hal Briston

I don’t know if I’ll be on again before we lead our latest to the gallows, so I’m going to toss this out there just in case I mind up not surviving the night. From my notes:

If Lemur866 turns out to be scum, note that he continually harped on the recruitment having already taken place:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...599#post8587599
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...595#post8588595
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...687#post8588687
Might this mean it has not taken place yet?

How could you possibly construe this as meaning that I think Lemur wsa correct and the doctor was recruited?

You say "Rachm again agreeing with lemur " and “we now know he misrepresents what occurred” when, on the contrary, I was disaggreeing with Lemur and it is YOU who are misrepresenting what occured!!! I was making the EXACT OPPOSITE point that you are claiming I was making.

The record is plain for all to see. You and anyone else following this thread can go back and see that what you are saying is grossly factually wrong and what I am saying is factually correct.

Anyways, you say that I was suspiciously siding with Lemur while I wsa simultanneously voting for him. How is this even remotely supposed to make sense?

Do your fucking homework unless you’re hellbent on handing a victory over to the mafia. Anyone who clings to such a plainly wrong misrepresntation of what I said is either extremely dense or mafia.

Or both.

[Blaster_Master]

[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
I’m here everyone. I was home ill yesterday, which extended my time away from work. I find myself burried both in keeping up with this game and in keeping up with my work-related responsibilities. Work, of course, has my priority. I’ve already subbed out of Game 4, but hesitate to do so here because the game is so far advanced. I would like the opportunity to catch up on the game over the next couple of nights and through the weekend, but that means I will probably be quiet for another day or so.

People have said that they don’t “have a read” on me, but I find that very hard to believe.

Prior to Thursday of last week, I have been very participatory. Nothing I’ve said has made an impression one way or another?
[/QUOTE]

This is true, and maybe my mind grabs different things than what others do. Honestly, IIRC, I had been leaning town on you, but when Diggit mentioned that he is suspicious of you, it occurred to me that my reading of you was still mostly based on gut and my perception of the general tone, and not on anything really specific. That’s why I’m interested in seeing if Diggit’s suspicion is any bit more substatiated than my lack thereof.

[Hal_Briston]

[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
Prior to Thursday of last week, I have been very participatory. Nothing I’ve said has made an impression one way or another?
[/QUOTE]
If it makes you feel any better, my opinion has shifted since my Day 1 vote for you, and am now pretty sure you’re town.

[DiggitCamara]

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
I do not think that post points where you think it points.

It’s pointing to the Day One Dawn. What did you mean it to point to?
[/QUOTE]

Gah!

post #1376 marks Day 4 end.

[DiggitCamara]

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]

(snip)
As far as Cookies goes… now that you mention it, she’s been pretty much under my radar for most of the game. Which, of course, worries me at this point, but I’m not really sure what to think about that. Do you have a case, or is it just a gut feeling?

(snip)
[/QUOTE]

I don’t know about a case, but my argument (yesterday, by the way) was:

@DiggitCamara

I get a far stronger scum-vibe from ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies who

1. Was part of the Day 3 voteswing against Projammer
2. Was one of the “late joiners” against fluiddruid
3. Never joined Lemur866’s lynching

[Blaster_Master]

[QUOTE=DiggitCamara]
Gah!

post #1376 marks Day 4 end.
[/QUOTE]

Okay, I figured that post 1376was what you meant but I wasn’t sure what point you were trying to make with it… that’s why I thought maybe you actually meant someone’s last post of the day instead.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

My suspicion of Diggit goes back to the Day after Lightnin was lynched. In all of the chaos of suspicion and regret at having contributed to the lynching of a fellow townie, I decided to concentrate primarily on the most concrete thing I had at my disposal: the 3 other individuals who voted to lynch him and the likelihood that at least one of them was scum

DiggitCamara, Millit the Frail, & nesta.

Diggit had also called me out as suspicious (while voting for Lemur) after he had perused what had transpired during Day 3.

So that is what led to my first vote for Diggit back on Day 4:

[ul]
[li]He had also voted to lynch Lightnin’[/li][li]He had suspected me after Day 3[/li][li]His Day 3 suspicions were virtually opposite of mine[/li][/ul]

I don’t know how much of Diggit’s subsequent vote for me was due to that reasoning or to the circumstantial vote history that he’s again re-quoted above.

I countered Diggit’s three point justification for his vote against me with this (note that this was posted when Idle was still alive):

[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
Whatever floats your boat or sinks your sub. Conveniently for you, it isn’t a vote justification I can really defend against. My past votes are what they are, for the reasons I stated at the time that I made them, and I can’t change them.

Other (current) players who:

* did not vote to lynch Lemur: Idle, Millit, Hal
* voted to lynch Lightnin' (which you didn't bring up, but I will): DiggitCamara, Millit the Frail, nesta
* voted "late" for fluiddruid: Millit the Frail, Hal Briston, Rachm Qoch
* voted to lynch Projammer: nesta, Millit the Frail, Rachm Qoch

I’m not sure what your definition of “late” is for the fluiddruid vote, but my list came from the trailing 6 votes of the 11, and as precedent that true town did indeed vote late in that vote, CarieD’s vote followed mine. And depending on your definition of “late” in that statement, I’d just like to point out that Millit sure does pop up a lot.
[/QUOTE]

So to continue where I left off, Idle now being confirmed town, there are now two confirmed townies voting with me, as unfortunate as the outcomes of those votes happened to be.

I am willing to explore the possibility that the scum may be pitting Diggit and I against eachother, for potential town-on-town violence. What are y’all’s thoughts on that?

Millit’s 1 for 1 presence in the circumstantial evidence against me is hard to ignore, but still equally hard to infer much from.

Did a scummy Diggit not call Millit to task as he did me because they’re both scum? Was an innocent Diggit subtly manipulated by the scum towards me and away from a scummy Millit? Or are Millit and I both town, and Diggit and his cronies just decided I was the more desirable target for his scum pressure?

[Malacandra]

The Hispaniola game needs a substitute - any volunteers? PM me please.
Ta

/hijack

[Hal_Briston]

[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
Did a scummy Diggit not call Millit to task as he did me because they’re both scum? Was an innocent Diggit subtly manipulated by the scum towards me and away from a scummy Millit? Or are Millit and I both town, and Diggit and his cronies just decided I was the more desirable target for his scum pressure?
[/QUOTE]
Are those the only options? To me, you and Diggit both skew town, and while I have little to no read on Millet, she could easily be town as well. For all we know, you’re all being played against each other by outside scum. Hell, for all we know, you three are all masons and you’re putting on a very nice little play act for the rest of us.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

[QUOTE=Hal Briston]
Are those the only options? To me, you and Diggit both skew town, and while I have little to no read on Millet, she could easily be town as well. For all we know, you’re all being played against each other by outside scum. Hell, for all we know, you three are all masons and you’re putting on a very nice little play act for the rest of us.
[/QUOTE]

Those aren’t all of the options. But they’re some of the options that come into play when dissecting Diggit’s and my mutual suspicions of eachother.

[DiggitCamara]

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Okay, I figured that post 1376was what you meant but I wasn’t sure what point you were trying to make with it… that’s why I thought maybe you actually meant someone’s last post of the day instead.
[/QUOTE]

Just to put things into its proper context

[DiggitCamara]

[QUOTE=ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]
(snip)
Millit’s 1 for 1 presence in the circumstantial evidence against me is hard to ignore, but still equally hard to infer much from.

Did a scummy Diggit not call Millit to task as he did me because they’re both scum? Was an innocent Diggit subtly manipulated by the scum towards me and away from a scummy Millit? Or are Millit and I both town, and Diggit and his cronies just decided I was the more desirable target for his scum pressure?
[/QUOTE]

And, like you said yesterday, I’ll have to look into this “alleged 1 for 1 presence” if you turn out to be scum.

There are differences, however. For instance, in fluiddruid’s demise, you were the 10th out of 11 final votes against her. Millit (according to her chart, at least) was the sixth. I’ll have to look at the timing of the votes and how other people’s votes stacked up, but your vote is far “later” than hers.

[Millit_the_Frail]

[QUOTE=Hal Briston]
Are those the only options? To me, you and Diggit both skew town, and while I have little to no read on Millet, she could easily be town as well. For all we know, you’re all being played against each other by outside scum. Hell, for all we know, you three are all masons and you’re putting on a very nice little play act for the rest of us.
[/QUOTE]

I’m going to pull a Cookies here and say what? How can you have little to no read on me after 7 game days? I’ve been pretty bold about making most of my moves. I’ve been keeping all of the vote data organized, and I’m not shy about saying who looks suspicious to me. (I was wondering who would be the first to try to suggest that my spreadsheet was a ploy. Heh.) I could be convinced to vote a few different ways right now–Blaster Master, nesta, ESPECIALLY tirial, and even you, Hal,–let’s just say I’m putting on my Kevlar dress when you invite me out for a drink.

But everything **tirial **has said today is completely the opposite of how I feel, and I think Diggit was right on the money when he posited that tirial had managed to make herself the Mafia’s doctor. I think it happened on the third no-kill night, right after Lightnin’ was killed. Here’s how the three nights played out, in my mind:

1. Gee, let’s kill that helpful townie, tirial. Oh, crap! Blocked!
2. Ah, tirial was trying to lure the Doctor. And us. Maybe she’s a Do-Gooder! Let’s try Idle. Curses! Foiled again!
3. Bingo! All Do-Gooders are gone, so tirial was blocking herself, not luring anyone. Idle mast have gotten lucky. Let’s recruit tirial, because, at worst, we’re successfully recruiting a townie. Success! Tirial –> evil.

Anyway, for what it’s worth, I think Rachm Qoch has played too carefully to be Mafia. He’s losing his cool a little too much right now, which has always been a townies thing. And, most importantly, **tirial **started that wagon, the first vote of the day, so I’m definitely not getting anywhere near that. So, on to saving Rachm. Anyone else want to make a vote for one of my other candidates? I could possibly be persuaded to save this one for another day. She’ll still be around.

[Rachm_Qoch]

Two other claims you made that I glossed over this earlier, so:

[QUOTE=tirial]
Rachm Qoch also misrepresented BlasterMaster’s voting history - although blastermaster keeps saying I did.
[/quote]

I’ve been wracking my brain trying to figure what you’re talking about here, but haven’t the foggiest idea. So, what are you talking about here?

@tirial

1871 Rachm Qoch suggests we should ignore townie past voting history if we don’t know a recruit has taken place. Wouldn’t it be easier simply to look at past posting histories to look for players who may have been scum from the beginning? Only a mafia would look at it to prove someone was town.

I never intended to imply that we should ignore past voting history. I was trying to say that what’s suspicious is still suspicious – back to day one – but that our “Town Lists” from the start of the game are not necessarily to be trusted since any townie who might have been putting out good vibes for whatever reason back then could have been subsequently recruited to the mafia. Here’s post 1871 in it’s entirety:

@Rachm Qoch

@Blaster Master

And, to bring it full circle, I’m not even really sure why this is such a major question now. We still definitely have some scum who have always been scum and were not recruited. That is, we need to focus on catching them first, and if we happen to find the recruit along the way, cool beans; otherwise, I’m not sure it’s something to fret about, because we don’t have any confirmed townies to be concerned about whether or not they switched alliances.

It’s a relevant question simply because, if we conclude it didn’t happen, then we can use each player’s history going back to day one to acertain whether they’re pro-town. If we can’t confidently conclude that the recruitment didn’t happen, then the slate is wiped clean with regards to what you can use to consider a player trustworthy.

Lest there’s any confusion about what I was intending, read my followup in Post 1874

@Blaster Master

@Rachm Qoch

Originally Posted by Blaster Master
Right, but if a player has been untrustworthy from the start, and there’s at least two or three original scum still out there, I think it’s not in our interest to be focusing on finding the recruit. It’s clear to me, based on the insistence of the two lynched scum so far, that they want us to focus on the recruitment because we’ll get paranoid and start going “hey, he’s acting differently than he was two days ago, maybe he was recruited”, then we end up lynching a townie we wouldn’t have otherwise suspected if we weren’t focusing on the recruit instead of the original scum. Now, I’m not saying we should ignore the recruit, who is likely among us, but I don’t want to spend time looking for this shift in strategy in a recruit, when we still have at least two or three other players with an entire game worth of scumminess.

Agh… I really don’t feel like I’m doing a good job in explaining my point.

Understood. The scum is still scum, and we should never lose sight of that fact. The big problem with having a recruit in the game is that even the most slightly credible suggestion that it has been carried out effectively wipes out the “townie end” of your suspicion list, but leaves the “scummy end” intact. So the hypothetical benefit of confirmed townies is dramatically reduced compared to the previous games. This tips the balance in favor of the mafia more than simply adding an extra name to their roster.

I don’t think this can reasonably be interpreted as trying to ignore previous voting histories that might have been suspicious.

[Rachm_Qoch]

I just noticed something very interesting.

You posted:

[Quote=tirial]
Rachm Qoch suggests we should ignore townie past voting history if we don’t know a recruit has taken place.
[/quote]

“townie past voting history”? I never said that. None of us know living townie voting history. Unless you’re Mafia, of course.

You go on to say:

[Quote=tirial]

Wouldn’t it be easier simply to look at past posting histories to look for players who may have been scum from the beginning? Only a mafia would look at it to prove someone was town.
[/quote]
(bolding mine)

Mafia don’t need to look at anything to prove who’s town. They already know.

Congradulations. You’ve moved up at the top of my list, leapfrogging nesta and DiggitCamara.

[tirial]

[QUOTE=Rachm Qoch]
I just noticed something very interesting.

You posted:

“townie past voting history”? I never said that. None of us know living townie voting history. Unless you’re Mafia, of course.

[/QUOTE]

Actually you said we should ignore all past voting history, which looks pretty scummy to me. Town lists? I don’t think anyone had a town list from the start of the game that hasn’t changed.

And my apologies on the misrepresenting vote count - it seems that was Diggit P1848 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8610035&postcount=1848
lying to implicate me to protect you P1850:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8610061&postcount=1850
from nesta calling you out on the results of post Post 1752 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8598625&postcount=1752

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8611053&postcount=1874 P1874 reads to me more like covering your back after Blastermaster also called you on your wonderful idea of discarding the bulk of our evidence.

And since I am now playing handicap, this game is frankly no longer exactly fun.

I know you are scum, you know you are scum. The voting lists interestingly enough indicate you are scum.
Lets see P1059 Idle Thoughts - not much use on its own until compared with my own posting style/scum tells chart.

[tirial]

Right, his list: P1059 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8538273&postcount=1059

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8567174&postcount=1411 1411 makes it look like he doesn’t think there is scum in the same group as one has been found in. I didn’t think much of it at the time as it didn’t tell us very much. However, if we follow his logic to the conclusion, and assume 4 scum to start that would suggest one in each (more than 4 scum would be more than one in each, but there must be one).

I am also looking at this because in http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8567604&postcount=1422 1442 he then decides to go after Rachm and SCL - the members of the next group.

Group 1
fluiddruid
CaerieD
Millit the Frail
tirial
Group 2
Rachm Qoch
SnakesCatLady
group 3
Projammer (despite everyone else having strong suspicion of him)
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
Lightnin’
nesta
Lemur866
Group 4
Hal Briston
Blaster Master
DiggitCamara
Omi No Kami
Group 5
Idle Thoughts.
Discard group 5 - known town. Assuming four mafia, discard the groups that already have mafia in - this was the trend he started here: P1411. Follow the trend to one in each group.
This means Group 3: projammer, nesta, Lighnin’, and Cookies, and Group 1: CaerieD, Millet and myself were not scum at that time.
It means RachmQoch, as the surviving non-town member in his group is scum, and was then, and indicates Blaster Master, Hal Briston, and Diggit are suspicious.

Not much use on its own. Compare to the chart I ran at the same time, grouped by posting style and scum tells:

Level One
Lemur866 – overall feeling + examination of who the doctor protected (also jumps to the top because fluiddruid said this
CaerieD – for involvement in voting blocks and the lynchs of percypercy and projammer
Blastermaster – for involvement in the lynchs of percypercy and projammer
Idle Thoughts – for swinging away from fluiddruid, enquiring after the doctor more than an experienced player would

Level Two
Lightnin’ – the Day One swing could have been to protect him, and the rush vote to lynch Projammer spawned a bandwagon that saved fluiddruid.
DiggitCamara – Just a feeling.

Level Three
Omi no kami – overall impression + unvote of fluiddruid + voting record.
Hal Briston – no real reason just overall impression
Rachm Qoch – for voting closely aligned with CaerieD until called on it.
Nesta – insufficient information. All posts read neutral.
Cookies – insufficient information. All posts read neutral.

Level four
SnakesCatLady – for going after fluiddruid (and being voted for by fluid)
Millet the Frail – for her spreadsheet

Diggit, and Millet look scummy. Under suspicion are the members of group three. Also not very useful on its own.

My chart is designed to go by level of how complicated a player would be playing if they were scum - fluiddruid was on level four for what its worth. Spot the two that are on both - a.k.a pinged Idle Thoughts scumdar oddly and are using different playing styles, posting methods and still giving scum tells - and personally I think its unlikely we’ve got two scum playing the same level.

Diggit and Rachm.

That started me looking. Then when I started looking for evidence I kept finding it. I’d suggest some of the rest of you start looking - I know I am not trusted, this is why I am posting indicators and facts, do your own research.

And as Idle Thoughts spent several days in the game when he shouldn’t have been, lynched SCL and undermined me, he may just have cost the town the game. Hope he is happy.

[Rachm_Qoch]

[QUOTE=tirial]
Right, his list: P1059 http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8538273&postcount=1059

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8567174&postcount=1411 1411 makes it look like he doesn’t think there is scum in the same group as one has been found in. I didn’t think much of it at the time as it didn’t tell us very much. However, if we follow his logic to the conclusion, and assume 4 scum to start that would suggest one in each (more than 4 scum would be more than one in each, but there must be one).

I am also looking at this because in http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8567604&postcount=1422 1442 he then decides to go after Rachm and SCL - the members of the next group.

Group 1
fluiddruid
CaerieD
Millit the Frail
tirial
Group 2
Rachm Qoch
SnakesCatLady
group 3
Projammer (despite everyone else having strong suspicion of him)
ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
Lightnin’
nesta
Lemur866
Group 4
Hal Briston
Blaster Master
DiggitCamara
Omi No Kami
Group 5
Idle Thoughts.

<snip>

And as Idle Thoughts spent several days in the game when he shouldn’t have been, lynched SCL and undermined me, he may just have cost the town the game. Hope he is happy.
[/QUOTE]

In virtually a single breath you use Idle Thoughts’ prescient insight to prove that I must be mafia and then chastize him for leading us so horribly astray.

Wow.

Just wow.

What ever happened to the smart tirial we all came to know? Who got to you – the mafia or brain-eating zombies?

vote tirial

[tirial]

[QUOTE=Rachm Qoch]
In virtually a single breath you use Idle Thoughts’ prescient insight to prove that I must be mafia and then chastize him for leading us so horribly astray.

Wow.

Just wow.

What ever happened to the smart tirial we all came to know? Who got to you – the mafia or brain-eating zombies?

vote tirial
[/QUOTE]

1. I think whatever happened to Idle Thought happened after that post - I’ve discarded everything he did since. I also strongly think he just flipped a coin between you and SCL - since SCL had been fingered by scum, but the evidence against you was from your posts like every other player, he went for the wrong one.
2. Well I guess the brain eating zombies since you haven’t managed to.

[tirial]

And BTW Rachm, you need to do your own research. I know d@mn well you will go after me. Why don’t you investigate Diggit? Too worried about validating reasoning that implicates you?

Also, what about Hal, nesta, etc.

Oh, BTW I think Diggit was the scum vote on Lightnin’, while you played it safe.