Good Omens Mafia! Game Over.

[Aelyn]

Random vote: Thou-shalt-not-commit-adultery Pulsifer.

Oh, wait, it doesn't quite work like that, does it?

Um, I'm gonna have to rethink my tactics now...

Random vote: Locus Cosecant

for reminding me of my Maths lectures I've been skipping.

[Aelyn]

alright guys time to fess up, theres a reason that some of you guys have not heard of Good Omens, its because its all made up. An Angel antique dealer? Come on.

Agreed, that's a ridiculous concept. However... what about an angel rare-book dealer, who trades in Soho in an attempt to discourage people who might be tempted to try to buy something? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[Aelyn]

Genocide: That would mean, what, Beelzebub / Satan / Ligur / Hastur as one, Death / War / Famine / Pollution as another, and God / Metatron as the third? Sounds about right.

Also, I figure the Them are a Mason group, and as such unlikely to have a kill. I can't figure out where the last kill came from.

[Aelyn]

Huh, I assumed the characters not in the game were the two dead ones (Thou-shalt-not-commit-adultery Pulsifer and Agnes Device), or perhaps Pulsifer and Dog (given that Agnes does have an influence on today, unlike Pulsifer)

[Aelyn]

Bah. I'm afraid I won't be able to take part for the next three days, as I have plans for this weekend. Sorry all, and I'll see you all later.

[Aelyn]

Hi everyone, I'm back.

I'm not sure why anyone's really suspicious of Mith at this point - the acronyms seem to me to just be harmless fun. Then again, I also play at Misetings.com, where banter is a very much integral part of the game for the first couple of days.

I also found Gaspode's post a little suspicious, until I re-read it and re-interpreted it as saying "Mith seems to find Korais666 and Mepmuff 100% scummy, but I don't think they're that guilty quite."

I'll wait for some more information, I think.

[Aelyn]

I should probably warn you all that my scumdar's a little on the blink at the moment, apparently, since I don't see much suspicious with Gaspode's post.

[Aelyn]

...And "washing my hands" implies that I want them lynched, but don't want to be an obvious part of the lynching.

OK, that sentence made me sit up and take note. It sounds to me that he's basically stating that his intentions in lynching someone who he admits could be a power role are, basically, the same as the Mafia's intentions in lynching them: To get the person lynched, but for it to not be obvious that he wants them lynched. That screams scummy to me, although it is a tad strange that Gaspode stated it that obviously. Perhaps he's cracking somewhat under the pressure?

Either way,

Vote: Gaspode

. I'm about 80% sure he's scum.

And, for the record, I'm more awake now. Last night I was too tired to think properly.

[Aelyn]

Oops, you're quite right Genocide. I missed that last line in Stewie's post, and only saw it in Gaspode's. The entire train of thought popped into my head, and I quickly posted.

Bah, I really ought to be more careful. Nevertheless, I'm happy with my vote for now, although I'm also keeping an eye on Korais based on Mith's last post.

[Aelyn]

Stewie, I'm still waiting for your take on Genocide Heart.

Aelyn, sounds like you're looking really hard for a reason to vote. So hard actually, that the moment you think of reason to vote, you do it. Where does your 80% assurance come from now?

Well, the 80% thing was mostly because (mistakenly) I thought the "washing hands" comment came from Gaspode originally, and when I saw him explain how the phrase would mean he wanted to lynch but not seem important in the lynching, I interpreted it as him cracking and all but admitting he was scum, like I explained. Since then, I've realised my mistake, but I'm still suspicious of Gaspode in general. My gut reaction is that it's even chances he's scum, which to my mind is worth it.

[Aelyn]

Bah, I really ought to be more careful. Nevertheless, I'm happy with my vote for now

Why? It seemed to me that you were completely on my side until you misread my last post. There's no need to just follow the crowd here unless you actually believe I'm scum.

Since then, I've realised my mistake, but I'm still suspicious of Gaspode in general. My gut reaction is that it's even chances he's scum, which to my mind is worth it.

This is a cop-out. What's suspicious about me? The only specific things you've said in reference to me all game were supportive of my logic. If you can back up your vote with good logic I'll back off, but right now it just seems like you don't feel like completely admitting that you were wrong in your interpretation of my post. That's not a good reason to vote for someone.

I found the entire post slightly suspicious. I had been kinda supportive of you, as I was uncertain and wished to play conservatively. However, your last post before I voted you was suspicious in a number of ways, and I only pointed out the most obvious. Perhaps that was a fallacy, and I should have pointed out everything I found suspicious... but it's kinda difficult to point out a vibe.

I apologise for the error, and I'll try to be a bit more clear in the future.

@Mith: Why the HOS? You haven't mentioned me since the affair started, and you suddenly point your hand at me without even mentioning why?

[Aelyn]

Fair dos, Mith. I guess I simply never mentioned that that sentence wasn't the only reason I felt he was scummy, simply the largest.

Regarding the Korais situation: This intrigues me. Korais seems to have hugely over-reacted to what seemed to me to be early-game banter, and then grew angry when he was challenged about that. That seems to me to either be scummy, or simply be an indication that recently Korais has been very much over-tired.

I dunno, though. Mith's arguments are pretty convincing.

Unvote: Gaspode, vote: Korais666

[Aelyn]

Aelyn's post is pretty curious to me. Voting entirely based on what mith said leaves him open to shifting the blame.

Regarding the Korais situation: This intrigues me. Korais seems to have hugely over-reacted to what seemed to me to be early-game banter, and then grew angry when he was challenged about that. That seems to me to either be scummy, or simply be an indication that recently Korais has been very much over-tired.

This is me relying on Mith's reasoning, is it

[Aelyn]

Aelyn - But your summary was "Mith reasoning v. strong. yup."

My summary?

*re-reads post*

That wasn't supposed to be a summary. That was supposed to be me referencing mith's logic to dismiss the "very tired" thing rather than repeat it all myself.

@Peachy: Presumably you're trying to say that I followed tactic 3 in an attempt to distance myself from Gaspode? Like Fuldu says, that pretty much only means that I'm scummy if Gaspode is too.

Also, you missed out a fair bit of logic and context in my posts. The first quote was an attempt at clarification; it seemed like at least one person at the time had misinterpreted the post, and I'd hate to lynch someone on such a simple misunderstanding. The second one was in the middle of a bandwagon; it was meant as a lighthearted way of saying "I don't see the point in bandwagonning just yet."

The third came after what I'd misinterpreted as an all-but-confession, with a highly scummy air ignoring that. The fourth was me elaborating first on how the post which prompted me to vote had a suspicious air even before taking into account the misread bit, and then commenting on why I hadn't voted before.

And the last was simply me concluding that Korais was more suspicious than Gaspode, and so changing my vote.

I find it very strange that you also declined to comment on my posts explaining reasoning, and cut out reasoning from previous posts - which made the fourth quote look like I'd been supportive of him given the "suspicious" post. Also, cutting out context and important events / posts in the meantime makes me look a lot more wishy-washy, which in turn makes me look a lot scummier in retrospect.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't cut out highly pertinent information in that way. People might misunderstand things I'd said based on your partial quotes.

FOS: Peachy

.

[Aelyn]

It doesn't help that my current avatar is a rather cute Elven female, and before that I've been known to have an angel as my av.

I suppose it's my fault for choosing such a feminine-sounding name - but I've used it for so long, I always associate it with the Elven male Dragonrider which the name comes from (from a short story I wrote).

Sigh.


Back to the issue at hand: I don't feel Coron's "logic" is necessarily a bad reason to vote - after all, I've often relied on gut instinct when voting, and it tends to work out quite well. However, I do feel that it's somewhat scummy to try to get others to vote based on what your gut says to you, especially since it's very difficult for me to answer such a vague attack. Coron, please, elaborate on why I look scummy. Perhaps it's all a big misunderstanding

[Aelyn]

5) I expect you to believe by going back to the bottom of the page look at all posts by Aelyn and see how scummy he is.

*Sigh*

Look, can you

please

explain to me exactly what it is you find scummy? It's incredibly difficult to answer allegations like "He has a scummy style", but if I know exactly WHAT your issues are, I actually have a chance to explain my reasoning, and perhaps make you understand that I'm not a bad guy.

[Aelyn]

*snip reasons*

Thanks for the elaboration. I now kinda understand why you’re suspicious of me – namely, an unusually playful style. I’m playing around with different styles at the moment, and I didn’t realize that some people here don’t appreciate that in the same way that they do on the other forums I frequent. As far as I’m concerned, the random period of the game should include banter and theme discussion, until scumminess starts to make itself apparent. Hence my first five posts or so.

For example, my seventh post. The only reason I said “my scumdar is off” was simply that I couldn’t see what Gaspode had done which made four people or so jump on him. It wasn’t me trying to evade blame, it was me trying to point out in a somewhat jokey way that I didn’t find Gaspode’s post suspicious.

Also, the fourteenth post. I slip into a more serious mode for a few minutes, pointing out how I felt Peachy’s suspicions were based on statements taken out of context, making a group of posts seem like a train of thought when in fact they weren’t. Can you blame me for FOSing someone who was “being helpful” when that help consists of fallacious arguments against me?

[Aelyn]

Just noticed my vote - I thought I didn't have one on anyone for a sec. I really should take more care with my notes.

Unvote, vote: Coron.

[Aelyn]

Coron, at least we agree that people need to post more. Nothing seem to be happening here!

I don't feel you need to claim just yet, as the wagon on you isn't nearly strong enough. However, I do think that if maybe three more votes are placed on you, you should at least tell us the kind of role you have (Without giving details, of course; we don't want you modkilled for revealing too much, especially if you're a good guy after all!)

[Aelyn]

Ugh, this game is now getting SLOW. There's been plenty posted in the last few days, but there's been almost nothing posted about the game as opposed to Coron's playing style or similar things.

I agree we need an

official vote count, please?

But aside from that... I'm not gonna chip in again until I see something worthy of comment. I might re-read the game to date to see if I can glean any new insights.

[Aelyn]

My God, you really do idolise IS, don't you?

The last two pages have almost entirely been debates about your playstyle. What can I really say about that? I read the thread every day, and it's been about three days since I saw anything worth commenting on (I think).

Perhaps a better thing to say would be "We need everyone to talk, not just a quarter of the town." Nevertheless, the point is EXACTLY THE SAME. There's simply no reason for me to contribute right now, so I'm not going to. I don't want to clog the thread up with useless issues.

I gave the reason I wasn't saying anything; namely there was almost nothing to say anything about. I wasn't saying that I'm gonna wait until I can jump on somone, I was saying that I'm gonna wait until I can actually say something useful.

[Aelyn]

Coron, it states in the rules that you can describe the basic concept behind your role, but can't go into detail.

For example, "I'm an investigative role" is fine, but "I'm a Witchfinder, each night I can investigate someone and find out if they're a demon" is NOT. As I interpret the rules.

[Aelyn]

Agreed. If he's a mason, I think the best course of action at this point is for him to provide as much information as he can. If he is what he claims, then we'll have a confirmed townie on our hands, even if we do end up lynching him. It's not as good as a confirmed group of two, even without knowing the alignment of the two, but it's better than nothing.

Oh, and one other thing. Coron, you say you're a Mason. As far as you're aware, could you be a part of the mason group that could recruit Homer?

[Aelyn]

Oh, and one other thing. Coron, you say you're a Mason. As far as you're aware, could you be a part of the mason group that could recruit Homer?

Erm, wrong game Aelyn.

*smacks head*

Okay, I'm not playing Mafia with multiple games open at once anymore.

Unvote: Coron

as there seems to be no reason not to, and it's quite likely he's a Mason.

I'm happy to lynch Gaspode today, but I think we should hear get KE prodded and hear from everyone before actually lynching him.

[Aelyn]

Well that does match perfectly with the information I got about you,

that you give bad vibes and seem evil.

Given what's been said, I can only think of one plausible role that mith could have if he isn't just blowing smoke - but there

is

a plausible role, it's not part of a group, it's unlikely to be antitown, and yes - the manner of the kill will point pretty unambiguously to that role. Furthermore, if that's the kind of result Pooky gets, I can't think of any other characters where there's a possibility of ambiguity.

Agreed, if we're on the same page that is! I can see it being part of a group, but find it very unlikely indeed.

Trouble is, for the role I'm thinking, this sets off alarm bells:

Maybe my character owns a farm somewhere.

If you're trying to say you are who I think you're tring to say you are, then there's no way you could own a farm somewhere. For that reason, I'm sort of skeptical you actually do have that role. Am I thinking of the wrong role?

I think Mith was kinda being facetious there. I don't think that was a serious comment.

I think we should let mith live for now, and send him to kill someone tonight. If someone else dies in an unusual way, or if that person survives, we should lynch mith as a liar. Of course, that would require all doctors to keep the nominated nightkill unprotected, which in turn kinda assumes the scum don't have doctors. I think that's a risk owrth taking.

I'll abstain from voting for now. No-one's suspicious enough to earn a vote just yet.

[Aelyn]

Sorry I've been posting so little; without claims and counter-claims, this game has kinda lost interest for me.

I'm still keeping up, just, just not posting too much.

Vote Locus Cosecant.

I'm more suspicious of him than Mith, and I feel day needs to end. The game's far too slow right now.

[Aelyn]

Sorry I've been posting so little; without claims and counter-claims, this game has kinda lost interest for me.

You did take a look at the rules? There isn't going to be claims and counter-claims like in normal game. Do you think your interest for this game will ever rise?

Well, yeah, I looked at the rules. I wasn't anticipating that special rule when I signed up, but that doesn't mean I don't want to play.

Make no mistake. It's not the lack of roleclaims that I find dull, it's the lack of conversation in general. Thing is, normally games get dull for a while, a bandwagon starts up, and someone roleclaims. Then there's a whole lot of discussion, and my interest is piqued.

My interest will certainly rise each morning (plenty of stuff to talk about then!), but with a day as long as this one without significant discussion points like claims, it's too easy for me to lose interest. I apologise, and will try to post more regularly.

[Aelyn]

FOS DarkLight.

NO ROLE CLAIMS ARE ALLOWED. Any explicit role claim (either “I am [name of role] or an exact description of your role’s powers) will result in an instant modkill, whether true or false. Very basic descriptions (cop-type role, etc.) are ok, but if you hint at your actual role name or exact abilities (or hint at having another actual role name or exact abilities) at all you will be given a warning.

[Aelyn]

My earlier post seems to have not gone through.

Mod: Seol will not be able to post for an indefinite amount of time.

As such he would like to be replaced.

Thank you.

[Aelyn]

As it's been a while, when I read the book I have to ask from you with better grasp of the concept (Fuldu, mith):
Is there only one person in the list of characters that is good but gives bad vibes?

vote: Aelyn

Where's your interest for conversation in this fine morning?

Meh, I'm in the middle of my exams, so I can't put that much time into the game right now. Rest assured my content will pick up in the next few days - my last exam is tomorrow.

That said, I can think of a couple of characters who are essentially good but would give off bad vibes, and it's safe to say that Mith is not one of the three that immediately popped to my mind (to be fair, one of those three is dead right now). That's not to say that Mith isn't good, just that I'm gonna have to re-read the book.

Peachy: Can you see any reason why your character would give off scummy vibes?

Pooky: Do you ever get anything more specific than "bad vibes"? It's been three nights, so I'd imagine you got a third result of some nature. Don't say who you investigated unless you think it's a good idea, but if you always get "bad vibes", I have a pretty good idea who you might be... and if you are, don't trust your results.

[Aelyn]

I'm in agreement about Pooky's abilities, and Peachy was already setting off my scumdar yesterDay with her lurking. Aelyn's sorta-kinda-not-really interrogation of her doesn't make me any more confident of his innocence, but in the meantime

Unvote: Aelyn, Vote: Peachy

.

Frankly, my kinda-sorta-not-really interrogation was simply because I have an idea who Pooky might be... and Peachy's comments are fully in line with what I'd expect from Pooky's role.

However, they're also what I'd expect from scum looking for wriggle space. Frankly, I'm not surprised at Peachy's answer at all - it seems to me that either she's being completely honest, and Pooky is simply a rather paranoid form of cop, or that she's lying outright, is scum plain and simple, but thinks she has a chance of getting away with it because of the vagueness of Pooky's results. Truth be told, I feel the latter is more likely.

Quick analysis of Peachy’s posts:

In her first post, she attacks me with some partially valid points about my play early on. However, she also cut out some rather pertinent points of my post, accentuating the suspicious parts while ignoring the reasoning behind my actions. This was her only post day 1.

In her second, she leaps onto Mith, based on Pooky’s investigation. Perfectly valid.

In her third, she votes Doomcow because of his only six posts (!), which mainly consisted of votes or apologizing. The lurker vote seems slightly hypocritical, but only slightly – after all, her first post was hardly bereft of content.

Her fourth consisted of unvoting Doomcow, due to his posting.

And her fifth consisted of her defence and attack on Roland.

Peachy, care to explain why you’ve contributed so little? Your large day one post is admittedly significant, but you can’t cruise on the back of one big post, you know.

I see why Pooky investigated you.

Vote: Peachy

[Aelyn]

Great, at least this day'll end at last.

*Sigh*