Mini 1206: Death at a Funeral Mafia(Killed)

[PeregrineV]

Confirm.

[PeregrineV]

I'm having to replace 3 people. I'm very sorry for it being slow. Please guys that are here post.

Does this mean confirmation is over and day has started?

[PeregrineV]

I have a one shot Daycop guilty on willow.

Vote: willow

Vote: Clamping Cloyster

Can someone explain to me why this lie was a good thing, and something that town would do? kthx

[PeregrineV]

I have a one shot Daycop guilty on willow.

Vote: willow

Vote: Clamping Cloyster

Can someone explain to me why this lie was a good thing, and something that town would do? kthx

That's easy: to gather information about not only willow's reaction, but other people's reactions to willow's reaction, in order to find scum. The real question is why the hell scum would have done it. If you want to lynch CC, make sure to lynch me too, because I was going to do it.

I think I get the theory, but don't get why. If Willow was lynched and flipped town, Cloyster is supposed to say what "Oops, my bad, I'm really town and lied to see what would happen."??? That just doesn't make much sense to me.

But what I think you're saying is that Willow didn't get lynched, but we got to see his reaction and other people's reaction. OK, I guess, but you really got to time it so the guy doesn't get lynched, but only if he's town, but you don't know if your town, so.......

So, scum would want to reaction test but not really lynch if they know he's town, or even if he's scum, so......

No, I don't get it, and I think that scum

could

do it because you can't assign scum motivation for them to do so.

And "was going to" and doing it are miles apart.

[PeregrineV]

Unvote

for now.

Agree with CMAR about Taz read, but his posts always look like that to me.

Still not liking Cloyster thing, but see the point about bad Willow response.

Thread re-read coming up (while it's still small).

[PeregrineV]

@Time- Honestly, MedicatedLain seems like normal town.

@Taz- You really need to give reasons other than "He's voting me and I'm town". Also, you need to vote for someone other than people voting for you. Right now, you may or may not be scum, but you're sure acting like you are.
Also,

in a single post

, please give your reads about players so far and why. And yes, this is a test.

@Kiwi- Trusting your claim does not make Time town.

[PeregrineV]

@Time- Honestly, MedicatedLain seems like normal town.

@Taz- You really need to give reasons other than "He's voting me and I'm town". Also, you need to vote for someone other than people voting for you. Right now, you may or may not be scum, but you're sure acting like you are.
Also,

in a single post

, please give your reads about players so far and why. And yes, this is a test.

@Kiwi- Trusting your claim does not make Time town.

Would scum put themselves in a position in which they can get lynched?

Dont think so.

How did Time put himself into a position to be lynched? You claimed (whatever the no-hammer role is). If you did hammer, you'd be lynched next.

[PeregrineV]

Uh...you just answered your own question. I could have very easily died. Or Kiwi could have refused to do it, which in itself would be an indicator of his scumminess. If I did die would have been a 1:1 trade and ultimately worth it for the town. Its not complicated.

If your scum and know he's town, then you would not expect to die.
If your town and think he's town, you would hope he is not lying and hope to not die.
If your town and think he's scum, then why bother going through all this?
If your scum and he's scum, then you want us to accept your argument with no questions asked, since you would know you're not going to die.

This is my thinking of the 4 possibilities.

[PeregrineV]

@Nacho- I did see your questions, but am about to logoff for a while. I will answer them when I get back today.

[PeregrineV]

The BaM ruleset typically has no replacements. Look in the wiki. That's why he said that.

ROFL defend your bad scum partner more. Common sense dictates we deserve replacements if there are no shows. Effectively, we'd lose two players just because they signed up and never posted. They never played the game. Doesn't count. Common sense.

Common sense is what always gets the scum.

If your scum and know he's town, then you would not expect to die.
If your town and think he's town, you would hope he is not lying and hope to not die.

If your town and think he's scum, then why bother going through all this?

If your scum and he's scum, then you want us to accept your argument with no questions asked, since you would know you're not going to die.

This is my thinking of the 4 possibilities.

I'm town and I dont know what he is.

I'm town who jumped at the chance to confirm something confirmable.

The third bolded line is bad logic. Why? To make a point. To scumhunt... to get possible scum lynched. Whats the issue here. Common sense...

BRB isoing peregrine

If your town and think he's scum, then why bother going through all this?

So there is no possibility that you are town and he is scum with the inability to hammer? I get that you are scumhunting, but my oriignal point is that
1. It does not confirm your alignment.
2. It confirms Kiwi is telling the truth about hammerthing, but does not confirm his alignment.

[PeregrineV]

@Mod- vote count, please?

@GB- shouldn't you have waited until you got at least one action off before counterclaiming? You were in no danger of being lynched, and Time was still highly suspect.

[PeregrineV]

Vote: Timeeater

[PeregrineV]

Im not sold on that idea TBH. I am thinking more likely 1 is scum fake claiming, and one is real.

If Tim flips town, I'm not lynching GB. There could be two town jailkeepers.

Yes, but go back over and look at all the reactions from the point GB claimed, and tell me what you see.

[PeregrineV]

It's more like, scum wouldn't cc, because that's just retarded. When the original claim flips town, they know their destiny.
Town would cc.

So assuming town cc, we think the following:
Original claim scum?
1. How does he react to the cc? Scum or town wouldn't know if CC is accurate. So hedges bets.

lol what the fuck

the situation:

A: gb is

extremely

dumb town just lying to get me lynched

B: there are actually two jailkeepers, which isn't impossible as this is theme setup with "weird" roles (how do you know its unlikely - we dont know anything about this setup)

C: some sort of strange scum gambit - which he might be able to play out if he's a mafia roleblocker of some sort. Maybe he's even a mafia jailkeeper. This makes sense to me because he's been really desperate to get me lynched. Prob cause I called him and his whole team.

i dont even know tbh

waiting on nacho for advice. what i do know is that if we have two jailkeepers, thats confirmable. i think.

In order of most believable to everyone else down to "it's still possible", but not in order of what a town player would think.

Then, more lies, attack the mod, question the set-up, etc.

What my post was saying was the other reactions:

oooo!!!!
Oh dear, two people claiming the same role. Even I wouldn't make that type of game!
Re-read

Its a medival game.

Its possible. [for there to be 2 jailkeepers]

A counterclaim against the person who had the most votes and was pressured to claim a role that is in no wise guaranteed to be in a mini theme game.
That means something doesn't it?
I will try to think of this with logic.

jailkeeper claim.... ok

Taz unvotes right away

GBE counte claim, ive so far been seeing GBE as town, I believe him alot more than Time. We can test both vlaims today. IF time flips town, then GBE dies tomorrow.

Time talks about gambit and dumb town trying to get him lynched, town WOULD NEVER fake laim just to get a lynch cause if the lynched flips what he says, dumb town goes down tomorrow no questions.

I am officially stating intent to hammer, but I want an answeer to this question first.

To clarify, I'm asking for a name claim, just in case it sounded like I wanted you to quote anything. Don't quote your role PM (obviously, duh).

Ah, so a jailkeeper double claim eh? I tend to always believe the person that counter claims more than the person who was pressured into claiming in the first place. But right now, here is my personal thoughts on what I think is going on. I think that right now we probably do have 2 jailkeepers, but I think one is pro town and the other is pro scum. I do not see why the pro scum mafia player would counterclaim though since it would mean certain death for him in day 2, so according to this theory the only possible scum would be time, who has been acting scummy to begin with. I do also see a possibility of both people claiming to be scum partners trying to gain town cred for the surviving player, but I do not give that theory as much likelihood. I say we should lynch time and see his true role. As far as testing the jailkeeper role, I do not see any possible full proof way to test it, unless I am misunderstanding the role

Shit forgot about this game. This is first on my priorities.

[PeregrineV]

Peregrine

1. Several people have commented on this gambit now. Originally you were against it but said you would talk about it again later. What are you thoughts now, and why?
2. Who influenced your thoughts, and how?
3. Do you actually feel that Time trusted Kiwi's claim?
4. Have you played many games with Tax perviously?
5. What do you think about Gandalf and CC both going for a gambit early game?

6. Why did you hammer when there was still time in the day? (Even if you thought time was scum we would have still needed to find a partner(s).)
7. Did you even think about finding a partner(s)?

1. I'm against it because if it's a town gambit, you're lying. If you come back later and say, "No, but I'm really ____", you have no credibility. So, if town, you've totally brought a cloud of doubt to you the whole game for what? To see how someone acts when they are about to be lynched inside a page or two?
I think if you want to pull these "gambits" you better be fully prepared for the reaction types and draw some real information from them.

2. On the gambit? Well the policy lynch all liars comes to mind. Town can lie, as can scum, but scums already lying, so when town does it too it seems scummy.

3. Yes, as he allowed himself to be almost-lynched to prove he believed it.

4. Taz? Just here (http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 54&t=17467), this game, and the ongoing Lemming mafia, that I can remember off the top of my head

5. Gandalf did it the "right" way, if such a thing could be said. He asked about it first, implying he had information that could help town, but that scum would also find out if he revealed it. It was presented as an option for whether or not he should reveal it. That would allow everyone to weigh the pros and cons about it, and express their thoughts on his reveal. That in itself would generate conversation and could have been a gambit.
But, cloysters flat out stated an untruth for reactions, which gained a reaction from willow, but which has labeled Clamping a "suspect individual" in my eyes. Plus, I haven't heard more since from him.

6. Because for the first time I decided to go with the evidence instead of waiting for more. And his claim style seemed disingenuous, as well as the fact their was a counterclaim. I figured he was scum shooting for claiming a JK role on the off-chance that there would less likely be a town version of the JK than say a RB.

7. No. The whole partner speculation is way too speculative for me until we actually have a scum flip. Then it's more viable to go looking for them. Until then, each person is a possible scum island (unless something obvious comes up).

VOTE: GBevilchaos
Because the person you counterclaimed was, in fact, the town JK as he claimed.

[PeregrineV]

@Peregrine, response to post #403 please

Will do this tonight/tomorrow.

[PeregrineV]

gbevilchaos

1. What do you think about my analysis of the CC?
2. Did you expect that reaction from people when you CCed?
3. If you were town and someone else were in your position, would you vote for them?
4. What made you feel the need to post your full thoughts like that?

1. I hadn't considered the WIFOM side of the logic, but in my defense, I'm not that smart as scum. I've only completed 2 games as scum total, and I would never consider throwing myself into the spotlight to appear townish by WIFOM logic. That would be a huge risk in my opinion, when I could have easily just kept up regular pressure on Time to get him lynched. Your analysis is spot on, though. It would make sense for scum to do what I did if they expect people to use WIFOM to explain away the CC, although I'm not sure what advantage it would give over just keeping quiet and letting the wagon run its course.

2. No, I didn't expect the reaction that town displayed. I didn't expect Time to be town in the first place, so I didn't think there would be any reaction from town other than "yay, we found scum!"

3. No, I would not. I don't see an advantage of leaping into the spotlight and clinging to WIFOM as your only defense rather than using normal pressure to get an easy lynch as scum. It wouldn't make sense to me.

4. I CC'd a town player. Two things could happen now:
a. Town could lynch me, thinking that there can't be two town jailkeepers in one game.
b. Scum could NK me tonight, since it's an easy kill on a power role.
If I'm lynched/killed, my reads need to be out there. I may only have a certain amount of time before I can no longer share them at all.

Ok, now onto my next thought here. The lynch on time was good for town.

WOAH. Now stop raging after reading that. Let me back that up a bit.

Time showed that he is not a player that can hold back personal insults or his personal feelings about other players. Town is often lynched Day 1 because we don't have that much to go on. I'd rather have Time, who would have acted as a major distraction to anything that we were trying to do, lynched Day 1 than have him continuing to draw attention away from mafia with his obnoxious and self-centered posts and actions. He wasn't playing for town, he was playing for the "don't lynch Time" team. At the end of the day after his lynch, he even claimed scum in order to screw with us. I mean....really? If he made it to LyLo, his personal attacks, among other things, would have resulted in his lynch and the loss of the game. He had to go, regardless of his alignment. Sooner rather than later, in my opinion. He was anti-town, even if he was part of town himself.

That isn't to say I didn't think he's scum when I voted for him and CC'd him. I 100% did. I had plenty of evidence to back up my vote and wagon, and he acted scummy as all hell throughout the game. I'm just trying to lead to this...why would scum want to have the most distracting player in the game lynched? He was drawing SO much attention away from scum. Why on earth would scum not only push for the lynch of a player that was acting as the perfect attention-magnet away from scum, but also put their own ass on the line in CC'ing against him? It just wouldn't make sense.

Now, onto Taz. I explained why he was scummy in my last post. I locked him up last night and there was no kill the next day. I can't imagine scum wouldn't have sent in a kill.

Vote Tazaro

One of the issues with your counterclaiming Time was that day2, you would do this. As scum or as town, your only logical response would be "I'm town, and JK, and he claimed my role." Scum or town, you knew that his flip as town would mean scrutiny and, justifiably, a lynch for yourself.
Now, logic dictates to me, that after a Time town flip, one of two things is true.

1. gbevilchaos is second town JK. In which case he sees Time flip, and figures he's dead overnight, or dead the next day. If he lives, he will try his hardest to convince the town not to lynch him.
2. gbevilchaos is scum JK. In which case he knows how Time will flip, and figures the next day he will try his hardest to convince the town not to lynch him.

So, I can't see how your defense of your counter claiming actions would indicate alignment.

Secondly:
You can make an argument against Time's playstyle, but I don't see the relevance here. If Time was "more town looking" and "less distracting", would you still have counterclaimed him?
I'm getting the impression "no", when as town JK, your assumption is that you're counterclaiming a scum JK. That would not be based on his playstayle, but on the fact that

you

are the town JK. Saying something like "I counterclaimed because he was scummy" makes you look even worse.

As to your Taz targeting.

Day2 begins in Post 380

The schemiest thing that could have happened is if there was a no-kill to make us think that gbevil saved a person by jailkeeping ...

gbevilchaos announces jailkeeping of Taz in Post 397

gbevilchaos votes Taz in post 403 with this

Now, onto Taz. I explained why he was scummy in my last post. I locked him up last night and there was no kill the next day. I can't imagine scum wouldn't have sent in a kill.

I find Taz's argument before the facts are publicly known to be highly suspect.

Unovte.
Vote:Taz

Huge FoS:

gbevilchaos

[PeregrineV]

Eeerrr, you would really count that? ..I guess it's surprising you would count what I said too though.. Need more input here.

What does this mean between you and Kiwi?

[PeregrineV]

@Jason- get well, food poisoning is no laughing matter.

[PeregrineV]

Is taz being voted entirely for the fact that he was roleblocked last night?

Actually, I've voting him for bringing up mafia no-killing before gbevilchoas had even announced that he had roleblocked Taz.

There are many reasons why a No-kill could have occurred, and Taz pre-defending sounds to me like he was trying to formulate excuses before his jailkeeping was even announced.

[PeregrineV]

Is taz being voted entirely for the fact that he was roleblocked last night?

Actually, I've voting him for bringing up mafia no-killing before gbevilchoas had even announced that he had roleblocked Taz.

There are many reasons why a No-kill could have occurred, and Taz pre-defending sounds to me like he was trying to formulate excuses before his jailkeeping was even announced.

I'm the guy who brought

[up]

the fact that gbevilchaos, and the roleblock target that would be assumed from a no-kill, both could be town. This was an important thing to note because of mislynches, and it's not a crime that I thought of it before the possiblity actually surfaced.

Here is the final draft. Distraction might have caused me to blunder.

So, mafia huddled in thier cave, and said
Goon1: "Hey, let's not kill anyone tonight."
Goon2: "Yeah, and they'll think their pet jailkeeper blocked the NK!"
Voice of Reason: "Why would they think that? There's many things that could stop the night kill."
Goon1: "No, it's perfect, you see. Two mislynches in a row!"
Goon2: "Yeah! Go scum!"
Voice of Reason: "Well, gbevilchaos is already the lynch target because Time flipped town. And we don't know who he'll target tonight. He could target one of us anyway.
We can leave him alive for WIFOM for now, but we need to kill somebody."
Goon1: "No, no killing tonight!!"
Goon2: "Yeah, no killing tonight! Go Scum!!"

So, by your own logic Taz, you can still be scum.

And of course it could be a big bussing thing, but I'm giving gbevil the benefit of the doubt right now.

[PeregrineV]

Then would it be more logical to assume that perhaps I was the target of a nightkill, but was protected?

Maybe, would it?

The schemiest thing that could have happened is if there was a no-kill to make us think that gbevil saved a person by jailkeeping ...

[PeregrineV]

More logical to assume that in YOUR mind, Peregrine?

Logically, it could have been any number of things. Doc protection, bulletproof, RB, JK. Almost the very last possible thing I would think would be a No Kill on the part of the mafia.

[PeregrineV]

Wait, wait.

mod I voted for Taz on pg 19!

That was page 18.
Guess I hammered myself.
No thanks for you people's being wrong.

VOTE: Tazaro

L-1. Gandalf voted after he agreed to a SPECIOUS argument.

Well, why would you even vote for yourself at all?

[PeregrineV]

@Taz- Scum want impatience. That's no reason to vote yourself.

Well, if you're town then please give us your reads on all players before the lynch scene.

[PeregrineV]

Clamping cloysters 7 days without a post. Does he get a prod or death?

@Taz- so if you're town and coming back tomorrow, what are your reads (besides people voting you. You can include them, but would like one for ALL players)

[PeregrineV]

Unvote.
Vote: gbevilchaos

Disapprove of disappearing act.

[PeregrineV]

Still not seeing Kiwi case, would rather lynch clamping today.

Speaking of clamping, where is he?

Why would you want to Lynch clamping? He's almost certainly going to be modkilled. Lynching him would be a waste.

why modkilled, why no replacement?

BaM ruleset.

11.) If you are going to be gone for an extended period of time, please let me know. See rule 12.
12.)

If you do not post for the equivalent of a full game day (at least six days long) you will be modkilled at the end of the day. Further, you will be blacklisted from any future games using the BaM ruleset. Keep in mind that there are no replacements for flaking in a BaM ruleset game. Other circumstances requiring replacement are up to the mods discretion.

Currently up for blasting:

Activity Overview

Username	Last Posted In Thread	Elapsed Time	Post Count
gbevilchaos	2011-08-01 20:48:22	8 days 17 hours	37
CryMeARiver	2011-08-01 14:45:08	8 days 23 hours	14
Clamping Cloyster	2011-07-28 13:08:54	13 days 0 hours	12

[PeregrineV]

@Gandalf- Who are your top two scumpicks and why?

@Kiwi- 2nd scum pick besides Kiwi

@Jason- vote someone else- they're getting modkilled (I think)

I'll do the same.

Unvote.
Vote: Yankee

[PeregrineV]

I'll be out of town and posting/reading will be null/minimal during this time.

V/LA Friday Aug 12 to Mon Aug 15