Sdmb mafia

[Zeriel]

@Boozahol_Squid_P.I

Zeriel has generated enough consistent heat that if she’s Town, the scum aren’t going to kill her, and she’s going to remain an object of contention for quite a while, and a reasonable target for a lynch based on the attention she got yesterday.

I am going to mail you a picture of my beard and/or penis, I swear to god.

[ok11]

@Boozahol_Squid_P.I

Between ok11, Zeriel, Pleonast and Hal Briston, and Shadowfacts, I think we have at least two scum.

Could you elaborate? I can see why the first 4 people are on the list, but how did ShadowFacts get lumped in with them (or I guess I should say us)? Also, why at least 2? And why does banning Zeriel give us more info than banning Hal, or someone else from that list? If we ban Zeriel and find out his alignment, what will it tell us about the other players? The more I understand your plan, the likelier I am to go along with it, so please explain your thought process in a bit more detail. Zeriel is my number 2 pick right now, so depending on your answers I might change my vote.

For now, I’ll vote to

Ban One And Only Wanderers

for reasons outlined in post 1101.

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Zeriel

Point Zero: I’M A HE. Crikey, it’s hard to follow when people refer to me as she.

Sorry, dude.

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@ok11

Could you elaborate? I can see why the first 4 people are on the list, but how did ShadowFacts get lumped in with them (or I guess I should say us)? Also, why at least 2? And why does banning Zeriel give us more info than banning Hal, or someone else from that list? If we ban Zeriel and find out his alignment, what will it tell us about the other players? The more I understand your plan, the likelier I am to go along with it, so please explain your thought process in a bit more detail. Zeriel is my number 2 pick right now, so depending on your answers I might change my vote.

You’re probably the person with the weakest reason to be on the lsit. I tossed you on there because you threw on the final vote on JSexton, effectively ending any chance to alter the lynch order. I also didn’t like your whole vote-that’s-not-a-vote deal, although I now see your reasoning about not being able to change a vote (even though the vote was closer than you’d imagined).

ShadowFacts is on my list of being involved in the whoel deal because of his one-minded obsession of Hal, and disregard of the votes on Zeriel in analyzing the vote progression. If it turns out that Hal is town, and Zeriel is scum, it seems plausible that Shadowfacts is scum trying to manufacture a case against Hal to the exclusion of Zeriel.

If Hal turns out to be scum, Shadowfacts’ case makes a lot more sense in that scum may have been trying to avoid Hal building up too many votes and overtaking Zeriel as the JSexton lynch option for Day Two. In that case, SF is right in that Pleonast did ‘take the heat off the Hal train’.

Why two scum? Because I think there was scum manipulation yesterday. And JSexton wasn’t scum, which means that if there was manipulation, it was to save another scum. That means that if I’m right, there’s one scum amongst Zeriel and Hal, and at least one amongst the movers and shakers in that vote chain.

[Rapier42]

@Boozahol_Squid_P.I

Too early in the game? While I don’t like the idea of an info lynch, that’s essentially what all lynches are in the beginning of the game. What the hell’s a Day One lynch other than a way for the town to draw early lines, and to establish a voting record for later lynches? Yesterday’s lynch was something completely other than an info lynch, I would stipulate, because it was a way of enforcing the pro-Town ideal of Lynch-All-Liars. While it sucks that JSexton turned out to be Town, what we’ve done is set a firm precedent that will deter scum from trying similar tricks.

Today, however, we don’t have any such scandals. What we do have is a very interesting lynch that went down yesterday that looks to have been influenced by one or more factors. Between ok11, Zeriel, Pleonast and Hal Briston, and Shadowfacts, I think we have at least two scum. At this point in the game, Zeriel has generated enough consistent heat that if she’s Town, the scum aren’t going to kill her, and she’s going to remain an object of contention for quite a while, and a reasonable target for a lynch based on the attention she got yesterday.

There are four ways of catching scum: special roles, scum-slips (i.e. misposts that should have gone on a scumboard, or referring to the town in the third person), analysis of logical inconsistencies, and vote-analysis. I feel strongly that if we know more about who was whom in yesterday’s events, we can exercise the fourth option to take down some scum. Zeriel was one of the stars of that whole fandango, and is a reasonable place to start.

I don’t agree - at this point, votes are generating information, not collecting it. We should be voting for who is acting scummy at this point, and justifying our votes as best we can. Your plan is very interesting to me, because it looked like an attempt to slip a vote through without justification.

I still don’t think you’ve generated a solid case against Zeriel. If we’re going to get some info now with his death, we’ll get more later. There’s plenty in what went down yesterday to chew on without throwing up our hands and deciding we need to ban somebody to decipher it.

[Santo_Rugger]

@amrussell

No. Days are max 144 hours, min 48. Betting that it lasts an extra 12 hours over the minimum gives you a 7/8 chance of being right. Whoop-de-do.

Please note I did not say, “this will 100% confirm me”. There will be times I can extend the Day. Some times I will be able to extend it longer than other times. I understand what you’re getting at, but if I stay alive long enough to consistently give the earliest possible time the Day can end, wouldn’t you agree that that will start reflect that I do, in fact, have that knowledge?

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Rapier42

I still don’t think you’ve generated a solid case against Zeriel. If we’re going to get some info now with his death, we’ll get more later. There’s plenty in what went down yesterday to chew on without throwing up our hands and deciding we need to ban somebody to decipher it.

It’s fair that you don’t think I’ve generated a solid case against Zeriel. My vote is an explanation of my case for going along with one of several relatively weak cases for banning that we’ve seen so far. I don’t think we have enough information from yesterday yet in order to generate an airtight case.

If you think we have enough info from yesterday without any more to decipher yet, then I’d like to see your decryption, rather than you smudging me because of my acceptance of the fact that we don’t have enough yet. Prove me wrong, and I’m happy to change my vote.

@Santa Rugburn

Please note I did not say, “this will 100% confirm me”. There will be times I can extend the Day. Some times I will be able to extend it longer than other times. I understand what you’re getting at, but if I stay alive long enough to consistently give the earliest possible time the Day can end, wouldn’t you agree that that will start reflect that I do, in fact, have that knowledge?

FWIW, I’d accept any day that you claim to be extended which runs over 144 hours to be a confirmation of your ability.

[Santo_Rugger]

@Rapier42

Considering that we’ve had two deaths each Night, if we do have a Vig, acting Night One was poor play. I think it likelier that we’ve got somebody what wants us to think we’ve got a vig. Or scum that were just as scared of Nanook as the rest of us.

I don’t think it’s likely that Nanooks vote for himself didn’t count, or where’d the other kill go?

Here’s a theory:

Night one, scum kill one, Nanook kills somebody who voted for him.

Night two, scum kill one, Vig kills Nanook, who is unable to kill anybody other than himself.

[Boozahol_Squid_P.I]

@Santo_Rugger

Here’s a theory:

Night one, scum kill one, Nanook kills somebody who voted for him.

Night two, scum kill one, Vig kills Nanook, who is unable to kill anybody other than himself.

Or:
Night One, scum kills one, Nanook kills one
Night Two, scum kills one, Nanook dies by his own hand

We definitely don’t have any proof that there’s a Vig in the game yet.

[Santo_Rugger]

@Boozahol_Squid_P.I

Or:
Night One, scum kills one, Nanook kills one
Night Two, scum kills one, Nanook dies by his own hand

We definitely don’t have any proof that there’s a Vig in the game yet.

To be clear, I didn’t state or imply there was any proof at all.

[Total_Lost]

@Zeriel

I am going to mail you a picture of my beard and/or penis, I swear to god.

wow - can I have a naughty pic too?
(I did call you “she” as well - do you need proof??? :p)

[Stanislaus]

A quick look at Rapier42:

Day One: there was an early vote on NBC for missing JSexton’s post; a long post on various characters here (including a request for Masons to out themselves). Then got picked up for the phrase “town-on-new-guy” violence wrt Hero; having admitted to looking for a better vote than NBC, voted for Diggit for saying of **Nanook **“I can’t really see a role like his in this game.” Unvoted when **Diggit **claimed and finished the Day with no vote.

On Day 2, Rapier left his early vote on **JSexton **for the rest of the Day. Here are his posts on that:

@Rapier42

I gotta say, this is exactly where I was going on the drive home. I see now that thats a dead end.

Jsexton, I have to assume that you anticipated a backlash in the event your gambit failed. Is “it’s too stupid for scum to do” the entirety of your defense? Because I’m quite happy to ban Jsexton if it is.

@Rapier42

EBWOP (I swear to god I previewed…)

So, it’s too stupid for scum to do, and it’s worked before.

Gah. Alright. What, exactly, did ok11 do that you found so scummy and what would have been wrong with actually building a case against her?

@Rapier42

I guess I’m having a hard time understanding this. I’ve pulled “impersonate the power-role” gambits myself, but only to draw scum fire, not to try and out one.

See, I’m looking at a player that oviously is sure enough of his instincts to pull something like this off, and I’m having difficulty divesting myself of the thought that a scum-aligned player with equal confidence in his instincts might attempt this to out (and hopefully get lynched) a Town power role.

I’m certainly unable to comprehend the thought of using this particular gambit on a hunch so weak that you’re unable to articulate the particulars of your suspicion.

That last post was 767 - just before **MHaye **pops up to tell us that we’re at 31 hours. It seems that Rapier’s big problem with **JSexton **is that he hasn’t said why he suspected OK11 in the first place. At this point, this is true. However, JSexton then posts this:

@JSexton

Let’s see. The reaction in post 233 to Santo’s claim was odd. Why call it 'cool"?
Post 422 was intriguing. I don’t generally think of townies as the ones hunting for breadcrumbs.
Post 459 was strangely wishy-washy. I don’t get being against lurker hunting, nor why you’d want to overturn that belief for this game.
I didn’t like pushing for Diggit’s info in post 555. It felt unreasoned.
In general, the focus on who voted when felt like it might be a way to post content without necessarily stating firm opinions.

I know, it’s not terribly convincing, which is why I felt that a gambit was a better idea than building a case.

…which should to some extent answer Rapier’s question. Except we don’t know one way or the other,because **Rapier **doesn’t respond to this or make another post on JSexton. He goes on to post 27 times from 812to 997, 22 of which are about Nanook.

We did spend a lot of time talking about **Nanook **yesterDay. My worry is that this gave scum an easy way of posting substantively, in a pro-town fashion, because they knew he wasn’t one of them. So I’m inclined to be suspicious of people who had a lot to say about that and comparatively little to say about their votes.

Just to get a vote in:

ban Rapier42

[Total_Lost]

I’m not sure I get the multi-quote-system, but I’ll try…

Early in the game Hero seemed to imply that peeker was lurking:

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

You clearly are reading along. Any reason you aren’t participating?

When Peeker responded [in a Peeker sort of why] Hero back down and said he would follow the game but cut down on posting.

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

I’m going to cut back posting until everyone else has had a chance to weigh in. I’ll be keeping my eye on the thread and will respond to any direct questions.

I can understand why Hero wanted others to participate more - but if you have something to share or state - why cut back and only respond when asked a question. It doesn’t seem like a pro-Town reaction.

The we get the mason-claim. Hero’s responce has already been discussed. I only have this to add:

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

I don’t know how either of your vote reasoning applies.
Yeah, I see that my coding wasn’t proper. You’re really gonna nitpick that?

ban: nanook

No - I did see the vote, but I felt it was strange to unvote right after a confirmed mason had specifically warned against doing just that. And then wait to vote again for a couple of hours. I might be assuse of nitpicking but it was not the code I was nitpicking… it was the timing.

After this Hero and Pleo discuss the Nanook situation and I get a more pro-Town vibe from Hero with the:

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

They become REALLY ineffective once you’re dead.
True, but again, this is a gamble and it is more likely a random kill would be town.

But as everyons seems to agree - getting Nanook out was a benefite to Town and Scum.

But then we got Hero toDay going after Shadow for looking at the vote record with:

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

Shadow, I partially agree with your premise. However, it feels like there is this sentiment developing than anyone who comes out against a lynch leader in 48+ hours has a scum motive. It is a WIFOM argument that needs to stop.

I’m not sure what needs to stop? Looking at the vote record or looking more at anyone that comes out against a lynch leader? I think it’s looking at the player that wasn’t lynch - but I really don’t agree with it either way. I think looking at vote records AND surviving lynch candidates is very useful.

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

Scratch the amrussel part. Somehow I missed his post on the topic of JS. I guess the point I was trying to make was there were times yesterday where town players could have been vocal about not lynching JS, but if another town player had been lynched as a result those vocal players would have been targets today.

It strikes me as a big swirly wine in front of me. I’m not gonna drink just yet.

Again I’m a bit confused about the point Hero is trying to make:
a) If a Town player was against the lynch of Jsexton they should have been more vocal about it
b) If someone was more vocal - and this result in another Town being lynched then
c) those vocal would have been looked upon the next Day as scummy
d) but Hero will not do that - because it would just be a WiFoM.

I hope I read it correctly.

But then Hero puts a fos on ShadowFacts - for what? looking at the vote records? beeing vocal on the JSexton-lynch?

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

As for me, I’m going to use my FOS until the 48 hour mark. At that point I will drop the vote on who I think is most scummy.

FOS Zeriel
FOS Hal Briston
FOS ShadowFacts

I think a lot of this is me just not understanding Hero’s way of thinking or his way to argue. I’m not going to vote right now - but I would really like to hear from Hero and find out if I got it all wrong…

[One_And_Only_Wanderers]

@ok11

Now, I have a few more questions. During the first 2 Days, your vote stayed on people who weren’t in danger of getting banned at the end of the Day. Why did you consider them scummier than other players?

I’m not going to vote for the people with most votes, just because they have most votes. If I can’t see the case on them, I will leave my vote on a person I do find scummy, even if i’m the only one who seems to think that

@ok11

What are your thoughts on Zeriel and Hal? Who is pinging you toDay? Is there something in RL preventing you from participating more, or is this just your style?

I need to reread on zeriel and Hal. I really wish we had the tools to only see posts by rather than having to reread everything every time.

As for my participation, it’s just RL, between the job and the family I don’t have oodles of spare time. I do read through all the posts at least every couple days and if i pick up on anything i ask questions and or vote. If i think I’ve caught a slip i really push it, which has gotten me lynched the last two games, even though in both cases I was town and right about the slip.

[Stanislaus]

@One_And_Only_Wanderers

I need to reread on zeriel and Hal. I really wish we had the tools to only see posts by rather than having to reread everything every time.

You can: Go to Advanced Search. Put in the name of the poster you’re looking for under “search by user name”. In search by keyword put in “mafia” (search titles only). Under Search Options, specify: greater than 1000 posts; last month or newer; Show results by Posts (this is the important bit.) Select Game Room as your forum.

And ta-DA! Here are all your posts.

[One_And_Only_Wanderers]

@amrussell

You can: Go to Advanced Search. Put in the name of the poster you’re looking for under “search by user name”. In search by keyword put in “mafia” (search titles only). Under Search Options, specify: greater than 1000 posts; last month or newer; Show results by Posts (this is the important bit.) Select Game Room as your forum.

And ta-DA! Here are all your posts.

Sweet. that will speed things up. Could we always do that, or is this a feature of the new boards?

[Hawkeyeop]

Amateurs.

Go to the game room and click on the number of posts in this thread. Then click on the number of posts next to a player. There will you find the information that you seek.

Sometimes being all knowing comes in handy.

[Total_Lost]

@Hawkeyeop

Amateurs.

Go to the game room and click on the number of posts in this thread. Then click on the number of posts next to a player. There will you find the information that you seek.

Sometimes being all knowing comes in handy.

Thanks for sharing - that will make life more easy

(or at least the part of life in the SDMB - someone seems to talk a lot of IRL so I went to Google to look for it… but I can’t find it anywhere lol)

[Total_Lost]

@Hero_From_Sector_7G

I’ve been suspicious of Zeriel since day 1. It really pinged me that Shadow was going after Hal instead of Zeriel, when his reason was Hal was being protected. I didn’t see Hal as ever being on the line, and Zeriel was actually much closer. Looking at voting records is good, but not when it is done in a vacuum and a filter.

This has made me uneasy about Shadow.

And the fos on Hal was then based on what?

[Pleonast]

Trying to catch up. Here are my notes…

PLAYER LIST

Nanook of the North Shore Troll KILLED NIGHT TWO
Kat
NaturalBlondChap Guest LYNCHED DAY ONE
One And Only Wanderers
pedescribe Charter Member KILLED NIGHT TWO
ok11
amrussell Charter Member
Boozahol Squid, P.I
peekercpa Watcher KILLED NIGHT ONE
Hal Briston
Rapier42
ShadowFacts
Blaster Master
Oredigger77 Charter Member
Zerial
Zsofia
Pleonast
Santo Rugger
JSexton Vanilla Town LYNCHED DAY TWO
Hero From Sector 7G
DiggitCamara Admin KILLED NIGHT ONE
Fretful Porpentine
Total Lost

Colors: Unknown, Town, Scum, 3rd Side
DAY ONE (23 players)

NBC : 6 (Santo Rugger, Hal Briston, Pedescribe, Zeriel, JSexton, Nanook o/t North Shore)
Nanook o/t North Shore : 5 (BS PI, Hero from Sector 7G, Peekercpa, Oredigger77, NBC)
DiggitCamara : 2 (ok11, ShadowFacts)
Hero from Sector 7G : 2 (One and Only Wanderers, Total Lost)
Zeriel : 2 (Kat, amrussell)
Kat : 1 (Zsofia)
peekercpa : 1 (Fretful Porpentine)
ok11 : 1 (DiggitCamara)
No Vote : 3 (Rapier42, Blaster Master, Pleonast)
DAY TWO (20 players)

JSexton : 7 (BS PI, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal Briston, Pleonast, Nanook o/t North Shore, ok11)
Zeriel : 6 (Kat, amrussell, JSexton, Hero from Sector 7G, Pedescrobe, Blaster Master)
Hal Briston : 3 (Oredigger, ShadowFacts, Zeriel)
Zsofia : 1 (Total Lost)
ok11 : 1 (OaOW)
No Votes : 2 (Santo Rugger, Fretful Porpentine)