Random Mafia

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

OK, so.

I just went back and started over at the beginning of this day, which is 650. Rather than type it up into some kind of narrative, here’s my notes directly in summary of the participation from that point forward (the numbers are total posts but probably aren’t razor-sharp since I just control-F’d each one):

TexCat – 4, some early day nonsense
Tom Scud – 6 and a vote
Oredigger – 4, two votes & an unvote
special ed – 14, all but one at meeko/about meeko (one at mahaloth’s “not enough talk" talk)
Freudian Slit – voted meeko immediately, 10, mostly meeko related but not entirely
Red Skeezix – one post, partially about a previous game, nothing much really
Meeko – 23 and a vote
Mahaloth – 6, no vote, mostly chatty
Storyteller – 1, no vote, promised further reading
GuiriEnEspana – 1, no vote, summary of NAF
One and Only Wanderers – 5 and a vote for me
KellyCriterion – 1 post, no gameplay
MHaye – nothing.
NAF1138 – is dead
Jimmy Chitwood – is me
Rysto – 10 and a vote
Chronos – 2, no vote
Drain Bead – 4, no vote, mostly defending herself
Zeriel – 8, voted
Peekercpa – is dead

It’s an ugly picture.

Essentially ed and Meeko and Freudian are primarily involved with each other, and then me and Rysto and Zeriel are mixing it up a little, and Oredigger is voting. There you go, you’re up to date; that’s the whole game.

Kelly, MHaye, Red Skeezix, storyteller, Chronos, and Guiri are combining for almost literally nothing in terms of gameplay so far. Drain Bead and Tex have posted a little bit more.

If I was scum right now, I’d be telling the other scum to just post two or three times about nonsense, and don’t even worry about the rest of the game, and I’d be doing the same. Don’t vote, don’t anything, until a few others do. If the scum are sticking their necks out, it’s a mistake. Which means two things: one, it raises the ugly possibility that there hasn’t even been a case presented against an actual scum yet, and two, it’s pretty much impossible at this stage of the game to even distinguish one of the majority of the players from any other one of the majority of the players. If the game picks up (if it doesn’t we’re just going to lose is all) I want this out there because the rational thing to assume is that the scum are mostly within that group who haven’t said much. Of course, the town is mostly within that group, too, but what the hell, I can’t help that.

[Zeriel]

Jimmy’s hit on something here that’s been bugging me as well. I realize that many of you can’t play on the weekends, but guys, it’s Tuesday. (insert old joke about giving up coffee here).

Some of you have got to have something to say about something today.

As of now we have just under two days until the lynch. Get something out there.

To summarize where I stand:

Drain Bead tripped a trigger of mine that I feel often catches me scum–that is, she made a statement about a “group” of players that implied something far different that what it actually said (when parsed, it only came down to one player).

Tom Scud and One and Only Wanderers are tied in second place in my suspicion-o-meter, the former for uttering the phrase “overnight thread” (a potentially highly damning slip) while trying to defend **Drain **and the latter for tossing out an OMGUS based (supposed) on a post made early in Day One that went ignored until he had a need to vote for Jimmy.

I will likely, given the activity in the game, switch my vote before the deadline to whichever one of the three is highest in votes.

[Freudian_Slit]

@One_And_Only_Wanderers

I find the death of NAF interesting. Why would scum shoot in that direction? Maybe one of the misspelled brotherhood is scum and wanted to confirm that misspellings were not a data point?

[quote=“One_And_Only_Wanderers, post:714, topic:532942”]

[quote=“Jimmy_Chitwood, post:703, topic:532942”]

Apart from the personal benefit that you’d receive if we all interpreted the nightkill that way, I think it’s a huge stretch to jump right to that explanation (or any explanation in particular, really). Is that really the first thing that jumped to mind – not that maybe NAF was on the right track at some point, but that somebody who tried to kill NAF, i.e. you, was actually on the right track?

[/QUOTE
To be honest, I didn’t remember who else all was mis spelled, and I didn’t have time to go find out, hence my use of the term. “Brotherhood”. I obviously wasn’t on the right track with Naf as that looked like a town reveal. That said the choice of NAF for death on night one is interesting, and the killer(s) had to have some reasons for chooing NAF.[/QUOTE]

@Rysto

Unless I’m missing something, the only other player who had a misspelling in their claim was Meeko.

[quote=“One_And_Only_Wanderers, post:714, topic:532942”]

[quote=“Jimmy_Chitwood, post:703, topic:532942”]

Apart from the personal benefit that you’d receive if we all interpreted the nightkill that way, I think it’s a huge stretch to jump right to that explanation (or any explanation in particular, really). Is that really the first thing that jumped to mind – not that maybe NAF was on the right track at some point, but that somebody who tried to kill NAF, i.e. you, was actually on the right track?

[/QUOTE
To be honest, I didn’t remember who else all was mis spelled, and I didn’t have time to go find out, hence my use of the term. “Brotherhood”. I obviously wasn’t on the right track with Naf as that looked like a town reveal. That said the choice of NAF for death on night one is interesting, and the killer(s) had to have some reasons for chooing NAF.[/QUOTE]

WTF? You make this whole case about the misspellings and yet can’t be bothered to figure out who is and who isn’t misspelled? Why do I feel like this whole misspelling thing is so much smoke and mirrors? I thought the votes against you on day one were kind of misguided, but now I’m not so sure. This is weird.

And the vote on jimmy–I can’t figure it out. It reads like so much OMGUS you suck, to me.

unvote meeko

Vote One and Only Wanderers

[Freudian_Slit]

NETA: Sorry for the weird coding. I think one of the people I quoted had something going on. Also, disregard last quote–it’s just a repeat by accident. Vote remains.

[special_ed]

OK, what’s with the bandwagon on One and Only?

Would someone please remind me what the case is?

After a complete re-read, and this is likely a bias I accrued while re-reading, I’m still pinged heavily by Jimmy. The OMGUS you suck vote (which seemed to start this quick bandwagon) and then jumping on the Mahaloth’s soap box while basically flinging mud at nearly everyone.

I’ll be occupied with that and another issue that came up and will post some more information when I damn well feel like it.

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Do you have a real question or are you just bored because you haven’t yelled at anyone in a while?

[special_ed]

@Jimmy_Chitwood

Do you have a real question or are you just bored because you haven’t yelled at anyone in a while?

Sure, let’s start with your vote.

@Jimmy_Chitwood

Really? Post 267 just now jumped out at you as a reason to vote for me; that is really something. You are reading this game in a peculiar order.

This couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that I haven’t liked the way you’re playing today, could it? I mean, I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that a post that had been sitting out there forever just suddenly cried out to you that it needed a response, as opposed to say my more recent posts which were directed at you. And your distinction is nonsense, which is why you hadn’t made it previously – he made his claim and you pressured him about the fact that it wasn’t a quote; why else would that be a problem other than the notion that he was withholding information? I really can’t see any other way around it at this point – your initial vote on NAF was ill-conceived and factually in error, your suggestion about the night kill was ridiculous, and now you’re coming after me based on an objection to a non-controversial days-old comment I made. I don’t know what you’re going for, but

Vote One And Only Wanderers

Despite the fact that we’ve got, what, seven votes on six people now? That’s not really very good. Other townies should start looking at existing cases, I think, so we can come to some kind of a consensus and actually get the ball rolling here.

So, here’s your reasoning as I see it.

1. OAOW brought up a point from early in the game about you as a reason for voting (which you ignorned in your post, btw, only dismissing it with a handwave)
2. OAOW voted for NAF, a now-dead Townie
3. OAOW made what is in your opinion a ridiculous comment on the possible circumstances of NAF’s death.
4. OAOW is voting you for something you feel isn’t controversial.
   So, OMGUS with a little bit of ‘you voted for a Townie’ thrown in.

Is that correct?

or, like I asked, would you like to clarify the case?

[MHaye]

Evening folks.

I’ve read the Day a couple of times (a prerequisite for me to comment on it intelligently, as when I react quickly I find myself doing things like vote the Vig for a bad vote. Right, Zeriel?)

Further explanation of my vote? Let’s see.

I voted in [post=12265736]591[/post]. My line of reasoning was this, as far as I can no reconstruct it.

OAOW made an extremely bad vote, for a reason that anyone could have seen was a bad reason (Sorry OAOW, but it was a very poor vote.) But it wasn’t the sort of vote that Nefarious Forces were likely to place, was it? Nefarious Forces have to be careful, because they know that every man’s hand will be raised against them if they slip – even their own mates will join the baying pack. That early in the game, the best defence the Forces have against untimely demise is a moment’s thought.

Thus, OAOW’s vote was not an indication of his alignment with the Nefarious Forces (at least, not as I was seeing it looking back from the end of Day 1). If anything, it was a weak pointer that OAOW was town-aligned (which, paradoxically, might offer a reason for Nefarious Forces to take such an action.) So, why did Chronos place his vote on OAOW? My reading was that Chronos might be one of the NF’s hoping to get a bit of traction for a case against a Townie, hence my vote.

That OAOW has attracted three votes just today is something I want to review before commenting on it. More later.

[Zeriel]

@MHaye

I’ve read the Day a couple of times (a prerequisite for me to comment on it intelligently, as when I react quickly I find myself doing things like vote the Vig for a bad vote. Right, Zeriel?)

Hey, now.

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

@special_ed

So, here’s your reasoning as I see it.

1. OAOW brought up a point from early in the game about you as a reason for voting (which you ignorned in your post, btw, only dismissing it with a handwave)
2. OAOW voted for NAF, a now-dead Townie
3. OAOW made what is in your opinion a ridiculous comment on the possible circumstances of NAF’s death.
4. OAOW is voting you for something you feel isn’t controversial.
   So, OMGUS with a little bit of ‘you voted for a Townie’ thrown in.

Is that correct?

or, like I asked, would you like to clarify the case?

As far as point 1 goes, no, he didn’t bring up a point from early in the game as a reason, he voted for me exclusively because of that post, after having ignored it up to this point. I addressed it as directly as it needs to be addressed.

Point 2, yes.

Point 3, no, he made what was a ridiculous speculation that served to cast suspicion on an individual player without naming that player, and referred to a group of players that didn’t actually exist, and admitted that he didn’t even bother checking to see if the group existed, and which also served to put his earlier vote, which he was criticized for, in a more flattering light.

Point 4 see point 1.

I don’t know what you’re getting out of misconstruing the context here, but you’ve ignored basically everything I’ve said about the events leading up to the vote. So now I’ll repeat it all again, and continue cluttering up this thread with a rehash of prior events, and we can waste the entirety of day 2 the same as we wasted the entirety of day 1, running around in circles.

I really don’t like this post. You seem very sensitive about your vote to kill NAF, who was town and is now dead. Like Rysto said, by “one of the misspelled brotherhood,” you obviously must mean Meeko. Why phrase it the way you did instead of just saying so? Who is the rest of the brotherhood?

Apart from the personal benefit that you’d receive if we all interpreted the nightkill that way, I think it’s a huge stretch to jump right to that explanation (or any explanation in particular, really). Is that really the first thing that jumped to mind – not that maybe NAF was on the right track at some point, but that somebody who tried to kill NAF, i.e. you, was actually on the right track?

It’s a bold effort, and to be honest I’m having trouble imagining the scum coming out of the gate with such a ham-handed manipulation, but that suggestion isn’t the most pro-town I’ve ever seen.

Was your first response to think that probably NAF was killed in order to throw up a smokescreen and protect the rest of a “Brotherhood” of people with misspelled posts? Is it helpful to the search for answers to obliquely suggest that this unidentified class of people (which upon 30 seconds’ investigation is revealed as a class of one: Meeko) will benefit from the kill, and thus are scum, and that’s the most likely explanation?

The first word is “scenario,” and you say yourself it’s pure conjecture; in other words, you’ve made up a set of assumptions, and then based on those assumptions you’re giving us an explanation of why it happened that way.

The question is, why that particular conjecture? It’s all well and good that within the constraints you’ve created, you can give us reasons why the logic is consistent. That doesn’t tell the rest of us anything about why you created the scenario in the first place. I mean, hey, scenario: NAF town, Meeko town. In this universe, you’re being ridiculous and scummy. See how easy that was for me to do?

And then he voted for me. And his reason had nothing to do with anything in the most recent 500 posts.

[Chronos]

Quoth Jimmy Chitwood:

Kelly, MHaye, Red Skeezix, storyteller, Chronos, and Guiri are combining for almost literally nothing in terms of gameplay so far. Drain Bead and Tex have posted a little bit more.

Yes, my participation has been a bit lower than usual, but it looks to me like I made the argument that ended up determining the lynch yesterday. OK, that wasn’t exactly a good thing, given that peeker apparently turned out to be Town, but it’s a stretch to call it “almost nothing”.

[MHaye]

Chronos, you’re ignoring the parameters of Jimmy’s participation analysis.

He said :

@Jimmy_Chitwood

OK, so.

I just went back and started over at the beginning of this day, which is 650. Rather than type it up into some kind of narrative, here’s my notes directly in summary of the participation from that point forward (the numbers are total posts but probably aren’t razor-sharp since I just control-F’d each one):

What have you done on Day 2? That’s what Jimmy was asking.

[Drain_Bead]

@Zeriel

Jimmy’s hit on something here that’s been bugging me as well. I realize that many of you can’t play on the weekends, but guys, it’s Tuesday. (insert old joke about giving up coffee here).

Some of you have got to have something to say about something today.

As of now we have just under two days until the lynch. Get something out there.

To summarize where I stand:

Drain Bead tripped a trigger of mine that I feel often catches me scum–that is, she made a statement about a “group” of players that implied something far different that what it actually said (when parsed, it only came down to one player).

Tom Scud and One and Only Wanderers are tied in second place in my suspicion-o-meter, the former for uttering the phrase “overnight thread” (a potentially highly damning slip) while trying to defend **Drain **and the latter for tossing out an OMGUS based (supposed) on a post made early in Day One that went ignored until he had a need to vote for Jimmy.

I will likely, given the activity in the game, switch my vote before the deadline to whichever one of the three is highest in votes.

If I turn up as Town, what does that make you think of Tom Scud’s alleged defense of me?

[Tom_Scud]

@MHaye

OAOW made an extremely bad vote, for a reason that anyone could have seen was a bad reason (Sorry OAOW, but it was a very poor vote.) But it wasn’t the sort of vote that Nefarious Forces were likely to place, was it? Nefarious Forces have to be careful, because they know that every man’s hand will be raised against them if they slip – even their own mates will join the baying pack. That early in the game, the best defence the Forces have against untimely demise is a moment’s thought.

Thus, OAOW’s vote was not an indication of his alignment with the Nefarious Forces (at least, not as I was seeing it looking back from the end of Day 1). If anything, it was a weak pointer that OAOW was town-aligned (which, paradoxically, might offer a reason for Nefarious Forces to take such an action.) So, why did Chronos place his vote on OAOW? My reading was that Chronos might be one of the NF’s hoping to get a bit of traction for a case against a Townie, hence my vote.

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

[Drain_Bead]

Also, zeriel, why are you so concerned with me making a general comment that only pointed to you, and yet you’ve never brought up OAOW making a generalization that only pointed to Meeko? This is another reason why I think your vote on me essentially boils down to OMGUS.

[GuiriEnEspana]

Well I stand deservedly poked. I think I’ve been finding it difficult to contribute to the game as discussion seemed to focus on a reduced group of players and I haven’t had much to add. I realise a lot more has been going on but the little voices tend to get drowned out. I also realise that being quiet does not help us find scum, apologies.

I’m not quite convinced of the case on OaOW. I found his first post about his theory on NAF being killed a little over-simplified and so I replied with a WoW on NAF and various alternative scenarios. I didn’t intend to kill the discussion with this post but it sort of died out until OaOW gathered a vote from Jimmy for his theory.

I still think Zeriel’s vote on Drain is mainly OMGUS.

I think Tom’s slip makes no sense as a slip (everything happened in this thread so it’s likely he was referring to this thread) but was an unfortunate choice of words.

I’ve no idea what to make of Meeko’s case on Freudian (more OMGUS?) but don’t see Freudian’s case on Meeko as sufficient reason to lynch him - just as it wasn’t yesterday, it was flawed reasoning but not necessarily scummy.

I’ll do my best not to leave my vote till the last minute toDay.

[Tom_Scud]

In fact (having marked the second night of Passover by starting some nummy-looking pork chops marinating), FoS MHaye for a vote reason that would make Vizzini blanch.

(BTW, yesterday was the first night of Passover; not sure if anyone else had any family obligations, but I did; that together with a fun little bout of food poisoning on Saturday has cut considerably into my Mafia-playing time.)

[special_ed]

@Jimmy_Chitwood

As far as point 1 goes, no, he didn’t bring up a point from early in the game as a reason, he voted for me exclusively because of that post, after having ignored it up to this point. I addressed it as directly as it needs to be addressed.

OK, so that was the reason. Fine. As far as cases go, it’s not a strong one, but I’m not seeing the Scum motivation in making it.

@Jimmy_Chitwood

Point 2, yes.

OK, so OAOW voted for a Townie and then unvoted him, eventually settling on as yet undetermined Zeriel.

@Jimmy_Chitwood

Point 3, no, he made what was a ridiculous speculation that served to cast suspicion on an individual player without naming that player, and referred to a group of players that didn’t actually exist, and admitted that he didn’t even bother checking to see if the group existed, and which also served to put his earlier vote, which he was criticized for, in a more flattering light.

I didn’t find it so ridiculous. Yes, he didn’t take into consideration every possibility, but all he was saying was, ‘maybe scum did this because of this, and that means NAF=Town, Meeeko=Scum’ A valid point, and I didn’t see him saying it was true, and I don’t recall a vote or even any pressure because of his suppositions.

@Jimmy_Chitwood

Point 4 see point 1.

I get it now, anyone suspecting you is therefore suspicious. Have you been drinking Meeko’s Kool-Aid?

You seem to think you’ve responded so well to your odd behavior that no one should be questioning it anymore.

@Jimmy_Chitwood

I don’t know what you’re getting out of misconstruing the context here, but you’ve ignored basically everything I’ve said about the events leading up to the vote. So now I’ll repeat it all again, and continue cluttering up this thread with a rehash of prior events, and we can waste the entirety of day 2 the same as we wasted the entirety of day 1, running around in circles.

What did I misconstrue? I’ve interpreted things differently, yes. And what does everything else you’ve had to say about the NAF stuff matter?

I don’t ind OAOW’s ponderings terribly suspicious. And I’m finding the fact that you do suspicious.

@Jimmy_Chitwood

<snipped all of Jimmy’s comments on why the thinking about NAF’s death is irrelevant>

And then he voted for me. And his reason had nothing to do with anything in the most recent 500 posts.

I’d like to add, that in attacking OAOW’s ponderings about NAF’s death and how incomplete they are, what’s the Scum motivation here?
but more importantly, to be honest, I’d like to hear from the other peopple who joined you in voting for OAOW, they were even more brief, and didn’t at all appear to be OMGUS like you.

so, um Oredigger, Freudian, any comments?

[Freudian_Slit]

@MHaye

Evening folks.

I’ve read the Day a couple of times (a prerequisite for me to comment on it intelligently, as when I react quickly I find myself doing things like vote the Vig for a bad vote. Right, Zeriel?)

Further explanation of my vote? Let’s see.

I voted in [post=12265736]591[/post]. My line of reasoning was this, as far as I can no reconstruct it.

OAOW made an extremely bad vote, for a reason that anyone could have seen was a bad reason (Sorry OAOW, but it was a very poor vote.) But it wasn’t the sort of vote that Nefarious Forces were likely to place, was it? Nefarious Forces have to be careful, because they know that every man’s hand will be raised against them if they slip – even their own mates will join the baying pack. That early in the game, the best defence the Forces have against untimely demise is a moment’s thought.

In general, though, “Scum would NEVER…” is poor reasoning. It’s in Scum’s best interests to be as unpredictable as possible, so I don’t know that I agree with your reasoning.

[Tom_Scud]

Looking back over TexCat’s posts, I still don’t see a reason to switch off of her; that vote of peeker remains pretty egregious. And the fact that she’s had nothing much to say since then (aside from an OMGUS vote of Skeezix) doesn’t help much.

Two marks in her favor: (1) she was the first to claim an “evil” name (and is the only “evil” name claimant at the moment) and (2) she spotted Meeko’s misspelling, which went a long way towards dispelling any suspicion of now-known Townie NAF. But still.