Interesting. Yeah, I think at this point I’m totally off the Drain Bead wagon.
I’m thinking of Gueri’s WIFOM argument; others (incl. OaOW) have also commented about how they really can’t consider Boozy/Alka town yet. How’s that Gueri wall coming along btw?
Go Scum!
Might as well spoil me, mods.
All right, I was getting worried Chronos was playing different and I glad it wasn’t just in my head. Nice work town!
I am a little curious about the two people who tried to derail Chronos’ lynch there at the end bad scum play or nervous townies? by the way I haven’t gone back and look to see who it was but it might be a place to look.
LoL Chronos.
Guiri WoW is coming along, but I’m slower than molasses with these things. Up to post 1100 or so. I should stop flipping back and forth between this thread and seeing whether I have a PM from CIAS yet (the IdleMafia game just starting) and get to work. I’ll put up whatever I have in an hour or two.
NETA: It was Guri and Ben both of which voted for Drain.
Anyway, going back to my Drain Bead case, the thing that had tipped me over to voting her was the fact that (a) she also didn’t strategic-vote during the Thing Fish lynch and (b) she then was willing to use non-strategic-voting as a part of her case against Chronos.
I’m willing now to accept her explanation that she thought Daphne and Freudian were tied at the time she left (the mods had typo’d in their last vote count before Drain’s last post of Night 2 and had Daphne with 3 votes (actually, 32), when she actually had 2).
Other than that, I still think she misrepresented the case against her in 1105, but OMGUS is a powerful force, and I was probably not entirely fair to peeker’s case against me, either.
It’s not just OMGUS. I’m now even more concerned that you were so happy to save Chronos by attempting to restart the case against me.
I’m talking about post 1105, when you complained that Normal had re-started her case against you citing your refusal to personally claim an alignment. Which was not true of Normal’s post #1022, which was her main prosecution post of Day 2 against you.
Nerous townie checking in her. Well done guys, I really didn’t see a strong case against him ans wasn’t convinced of the one against Draiin either. Not wanting to get heat for not voting strategically, I moved my vote from the previously inactive Scuba(who just happened to turn up) to Drain who had given up on her “death by Mods” ploy.
Yeah, nervous townie. As I’d previously expressed, when the vast majority had spoken out against Chronos and no-one defended him (and I did NOT defend him, just stated my fear of another Thing Fishtype error), I got the feeling that he must be town or third party. I suck.
No defense for a roleblocker at all from the scum team (or even self-defense) is serious WIFOM unless Drain is equally important to them…
Scum are fully capable of figuring out which way the wind is blowing.
More thoughts: I was thinking of doing a mini-WoW on Scuba, but really this postis enough to make me think we ought to look elsewhere.
If you’re a scum with fifteen posts, do you use one of them to highlight a three-player list containing (1) a near-as-confirmed townie and (2) at least 1 scum teammate?
If I’d been paying attention all week, as I should have been… who knows?
There’s little point in doing a post analysis on me when probably half my content is “I’m behind and can’t catch up” and the other half of my content exists in two posts (of which that is one, and the other is my 12:58 PM EDT today).
I’m thinking nervous Townies; if you’re trying to build momentum to derail a lynch (and they would have needed to get 2 more people to switch), the time to do it isn’t half an hour before the lynch.
That is, 2 people to switch, as the two in question didn’t switch their votes from Chronos to Drain; they switched from either No Lynch or a singleton vote.
And there’s this:
An outrageous smudge at the time - even Thing Fish defended him. In hindsight it turns out he WAS itching for his first nightkill and wanted Day 1 to end as soon as possible.
Here’s my WoW on Guiri from point of substitution (haven’t looked at Nanook’s post to end of Day Two. I have no time right now for any serious analysis, but I’m getting the following impressions:
– slightly nervous player; higher than average amount of “hope this doesn’t make me look bad” stuff
– (especially Day One) willing to poke people without much concern for consistency. For example, at one point she defended Chronos vote on OAOW, then later when Chronos brought up the end-of-Day vote-change FOS thing post jpei claim, she asked him if he was eager to get to his night-kills. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it stands out.
– very much into speculation and WIFOM scenarios
– a little weird regarding the Daphne bandwagon Day Two; swung back and forth on level of suspicion/validity of bandwagon several times. I find this sort of thing inherently suspicious, but can’t find a Scum motive in this case, as the pattern was already established pre-claim.
– revoted Thing Fish after unvoting him post-first-claim; to be fair, this was prior to his clarification, and the reasoning she gave was both plausible and consistent
– as regards Jimmy and Chronos interactions: Not much. Got a poke from Jimmy to explain why she retained Nanook’s vote on peeker; and the things mentioned above about Chronos. That’s it through Day Two, IIRC.
To sum up, I see more clearly why I wanted to do WoW on Guiri in the first place, but there’s no smoking gun. I think the late vote for Drain Bead today is actually a point in her favor – Scum had no reason other than a bizarre sort of WIFOM to do such a thing; there was no chance Chronos would survive.
Day One
[spoiler]531: thanks for welcome, is Town aligned, will need to re-read
558: keeps vote on peeker (no explanation)
596: (poked by Jimmy to explain vote) Sorry for newbie mistake, gave no reasoning because it’s been hard to catch up. peeker’s early and ambiguous vote seemed good choice for lynching. References PMs from Hoopy’s game as reason peeker’s claim wasn’t as ambiguous as previously thought, though timing remains dubious. Not dubious enough to keep vote on claimed doc, though. (unvotes)
Likely just Jimmy casting about for reasons to “suspect” someone, but could conceivably have been an intra-Scum reminder in the “may as well point this out in public since it’ll make me look good” mode.
615: not sure about AllWalker voting Chronos (to start the countdown); was impressed with Chronos persistence in re: OAOW. If Chronos is Scum, wouldn’t more join in? Don’t Scum have chit-chat somewhere?
642: (Tom nags non-voters) Almost afraid to vote, votes jpei because of anti-Town actions and lack of contribution to Scum search
691 (in response to jpei’s claim and role use) basically fluff for the sake of an unvote, but needles jpei on 3-day silence
695: mod question on Day end
703 (response to Thing Fish) not assuming jpei is Town, just giving him room to breathe while mods confirm claim and so forth
710: looking for “Mafia rule book”, didn’t know editing wasn’t allowed
751: notices the single-item “list” in Jpei’s PM, needles Chronos about wanting the day to end – eager for Night kill? Scum must be getting concerned with the extended Day.
I’m not sure what it means, but this is slightly curious coming from someone who was praising Chronos not too long ago.
834: Jpei’s claim and actions all make sense now. Still thinks AllWalker’s vote on Chronos was dubious. Doesn’t much like jpei’s bandwagon vote on Bill though, either; aren’t such things Scum ploys. No clue how to vote now that Bill has 8 votes and hers (his?) won’t really matter.
Okay, so I’m beginning to notice a pattern of poking people irrespective of stated opinions regarding their other actions. Not necessarily a bad thing, but certainly makes it hard to get a read on what Guiri really thinks.
851: (AllWalker wants the “dubious” thing explained) Would have expected leader’s vote to either confirm one of the leading candidates or to set a new trend and gain followers; yet the Chronos vote went nowhere, so was wasted. Was there some other motive, then? And do AllWalker’s repeated references to “stone” mean anything? Needled Chronos hoping to get a useful reaction, but nothing – not sure Scum, but up there among the candidates. Also points out that AllWalker’s angry reaction to jpei’s claim was a poor reason to remove his vote from Chronos. So dubious.
I’m not sure what to think about this post. It’s sort of all over the place. AllWalker’s votes weren’t exactly dubious, IMO, but it is worth noting that he did “waste” his leader vote in some sense, and that his conviction re: Chronos’ guilt was apparently not strong. On the other hand, this entire post gives off a vibe of wanting to have things both ways: it’s strongly provoking of AllWalker (and tangentially of Chronos) yet backs off just short of full commitment.
855: doesn’t think AllWalker is scummy and didn’t mean to single him out, was just as aside that popped out in discussing jpei. Also questioned jpei, obviously issues with authority. Expected leader’s vote to have more effect; questions “stone” thing again.
864: defends “smudge” of Chronos over day-end comment (questioned by Thing Fish), says will keep head down, as recent comments may have put her in the wrong light
865: Votes ColdPhoenix (now ScubaBen) based on Oredigger’s reasoning; prefers it to Bill bandwagon as a LtL option due to ColdPhoenix presenting a Doc counterclaim against peeker as a good thing.
869:vote-format correction
871: description of movie; screamers impersonate real people[/spoiler]
Night One
[spoiler]881 mod question: strategy at night?
885, 886, 887: fluff; clear Bill just didn’t have time to post
930: longish post clarifying day-end preferences expressed on Day One, in response to criticism of AllWalker by CIAS. Conclusion: CIAS wasn’t quite correct, but had a point.
931: sorry, still have to figure out spoilers; previous post “probably means nothing” but must be important to AllWalker if he brought it up
933: teasing AllWalker – can hold BillMc vote against him, even if not leadership! [/spoiler]
Day Two
[spoiler]971: doesn’t get texcat kill; are Scum doing lynch the lurker?
991: clarifies – can’t see why Scum or SK would target texcat at all when there were other town-aligned role claims out there. Maybe a paranoid gun owner or bomb? Elects Boozy as being likely Town.
1027: (In response to Diver and Daphne asking why she assumes Texcat was killed by Scum) clarifies again she couldn’t figure out why texcat was killed, that it was unlikely she was targeted by Scum. Points out her second post saying texcat might have died recruiting, something AllWalker brought up later as well. Hopes she’s explained herself well.
1102: instinct good enough reason for vote? Following up on amrussell analysis of Daphne, some “curious” posts – wondered if Daphne recognized teammates’ names among the not-misspelled in the voting lists; pointed out “slip” regarding a hypothetical Scum leader doing something Scummy being “great”; and a series of interactions with Gryff around the time of his claim that went from FOS to defense in four posts. Also appears to have thought Daphne deliberately ignored an earlier post of hers (his?) in order to make her look worse.
1104: clarifies what was meant by “slip”
1138: welcome to Scuba Ben; speculates Gryff’s gifts may be intended for only one person
1152:retracts argument against Daphne, was clutching at straws. Speculates at post restriction on leaders due to all three being quiet once “elected”. Gives opinion on Day end.
1157: Where’s Freudian?
1177: Questions the color associated with gryff’s role.
1192: characterizes the recent posts regarding Daphne as looking like Scum setting up a bandwagon. Four posts (from Thing Fish, Alka, Amrussell and Guiri herself) expressing various levels of doubt without voting, followed by two actual votes (from Drain Bead and Gryff). Says she’s still suspicious but not convinced, but guesses instinct isn’t good enough for a vote since nobody responded to that question.
Interesting post, considering who’s been confirmed as or suggested (by events & claims) to be Town since this point, but it’s a good point nonetheless. I’m slightly bothered by the “remains suspicious” part, which is a mild contradiction of the previous post on Daphne, which suggested she had dropped her suspicion.
1192: thanks peeker for saying that instinct is in fact very useful; was afraid if she voted with insufficient reasoning it wouldn’t encourage anyone else to follow along. Won’t follow her instinct re: Daphne since Daphne was brave enough to encourage her to; mentions to Chronos about having read too much into gryff’s color.
This also pings me a little – there’s a weird little back and forth regarding Daphne that I can’t easily account for. Daphne hasn’t claimed yet, so it’s not that; and it started before Guiri brought up the “scum bandwagon” thing, so it’s not that either.
1235 mod question re: Freudian
1249: jpei thought Freudian was Scum; her silence is strange, has she been muffled by Scum teammates? Daphne’s lack of reveal re: Freudian findings seems anti-Town
1273: reveals mod response to PM asking for clarification of Freudian’s status; votes FS on basis of her being scummy Day one and now not participating; would rather vote her than maybe mislynch Daphne or someone else
1350: enumerates inactive players
1368: unvotes, votes Boozy as part of Alka’s claim
1375, 1377: asks if Boozy’s title is correct, and if Government Tax Collector is a Scum or Town role, given it doesn’t seem very friendly to steal stuff; acknowledges crosspost with Alka’s confirmation and unvotes
1378: Alka/Boozy trying for WIFOM here?
1394: Megacorp detail is plus for Alka’s claim; problem spelling berynium is negative. Suggests either Alka or Boozy may need to be lynched to test the claim.
I’m a little pinged by this too, but it might well be my own prejudice regarding not liking to worry much about long-shot WIFOM until much later in a game. Seems counter-productive to shoot at zebras when there are still so many potential horses running around.
1422: (response to peeker FOS on “weak sauce” FS voters) Not included in that FOS since she unvoted, but not anti-Town to vote for someone who’s been absent so long, since at worst it doesn’t really hurt Town if she dies. Does summary of claims, naming 13 unclaimed players (excluding self) in which to most probably find all the Scum and possible third parties. Agrees with case against Thing Fish, votes Thing Fish. Mentions Thing Fish having kicked off suspicion against Daphne again and reiterates continuing suspicion about gryff despite claim and so on.
1426: (response to Daphne saying a reveal about FS would not be pro-Town) what about alignment only? Wouldn’t that be helpful?
1448: requests Thing Fish claim or other defense to come soon if it’s going to come, since she’s in Europe and won’t be able to unvote. Requests next Leader not to vote near midnight EST.
1451: fluff
1460: unvotes Thing Fish post (first) claim; goes through roles again. Speculates politician might not be able to vote for leader (OAOW). Would politician be Town or Scum?
1474: enumerates remaining non-voters, re-votes Thing Fish on basis of delayed claim, unverifiable self-protect, and failure to protect jpei Night One.[/spoiler]
Finally, a good lynch. 
I meant to say that I have been focused on current the vote leaders, not that I haven’t put a good portion of consideration into each of my votes. YesterDay I got into the discussion a bit more, and hope to be more active in the scum hunt Day 4.
.
Just to add to Normal’s post on Guiri, Nanook had basically 2 substantial posts:
251 elects Tom Scud, think OAOW shouldn’t claim.
380 thinks votes on jpei are dumb; votes peeker for being over-aggressive.
Which really doesn’t reflect at all on Guiri - I mean, the peeker thing could by trying to help build a wagon, I guess.
And since I’m probably going to be getting some heat tomorrow, some pre-emptive questions:
1 - Why did I (1) declare my intention to vote for Chronos during night 2 and (2) actually place the first vote on him on day 3?
2 - Why did Chronos vote for me early-ish in day 2, tying me among the vote leaders?
3 - Why did I spend several posts defending Peeker from CatinaSuit’s argument that jimmy tried to save him from the vig and thus peeker must have been jimmy’s scum buddy?
4 - Why did Jimmy snuggle me so publicly on Day 1?
I think this is a fair representation of my play so far. My only objection would be that I’m a “he” :).
This is my first mafia game and the first thing that seemed logical to me was to suspect everyone and everything. I think that comes out quite clearly from the WoW but I also realize that approx. 3/4 of us are Town so maintaining a constant level of suspicion on everyone probably isn’t going to get me much townie trust
I think I’ve explained a couple of times why I didn’t vote for Chronos and believe I never defended him, just questioned the reasoning behind the votes While I have been suspicious since Day 1, I felt I couldn’t base a vote on the same reasoning (I’d no idea of his usual play style, I’d no problem with posting his program, and I was equally guilty of Thing’s mislynch). Instinct alone isn’t enough and I didn’t want to lynch another Townie.