Mafia 107 - Christmas Time Mafia (Game over)

[Tarballs]

9th Vote Count of Day 1

4 - TheLonging

(Konowa, Bogre, RichardGHP, CCARaven4)

3 - malpascp

(Nicodemus, Annachie, pman5595)

3 - sorasgoof

(DragonsofSummer, curiouskarmadog, TheLonging)

2 - RichardGHP

(diddin, NavyCherub)

1 - DragonsofSummer

(Parama)

1 - Annachie

(DizzyIzzyB13)

1 - Konowa

(EtherealCookie)

1 - curiouskarmadog

(ready2rock)

1 - diddin

(InflatablePie)

3 - Not voting

(malpascp, Fugitive, sorasgoof)


With 20 alive, it takes 11 votes to lynch.

Deadline for this day is January 21st, 2010.

[Nicodemus]

@ sorasgoof: Bogre summed it up pretty well here:

And as for someone role-blocking

you

, I actually didn't think of that. I'll admit I made a mistake there.

What I'm trying to say is that if you're lying about being a JoaT, it would be easier for you to fake a blocked investigation than to try to create a "real" fake one, if that makes sense.

Uh...so who did think of that?

You sound like a scum who's been writing with the foreknowledge of what could possibly happen, and is scared that he leaked the info.

Basically it looks like you were posting with what you thought was common knowledge (i.e. there is a mafia roleblocker who might block Richard) but when others started to comment on this slip you backtracked and tried to play dumb.

[sorasgoof]

@ sorasgoof: Bogre summed it up pretty well here:

And as for someone role-blocking

you

, I actually didn't think of that. I'll admit I made a mistake there.

What I'm trying to say is that if you're lying about being a JoaT, it would be easier for you to fake a blocked investigation than to try to create a "real" fake one, if that makes sense.

Uh...so who did think of that?

You sound like a scum who's been writing with the foreknowledge of what could possibly happen, and is scared that he leaked the info.

Basically it looks like you were posting with what you thought was common knowledge (i.e. there is a mafia roleblocker who might block Richard) but when others started to comment on this slip you backtracked and tried to play dumb.

Okay, let me try to explain here. I was ORIGINALLY saying that if Richard investigates someone tonight, and that investigation comes back blocked, it would be suspicious because that's very easy to fake.

When I said "I actually hadn't thought of that," I meant that if a town cop tries to investigate Richard tonight, and that cop comes back with a blocked investigation, we won't know if Richard was lying about being a JoaT (or Town at all, for that matter).

Does that make sense, now?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I would add to that that someone reaching L-1 in a game this size in this short a time is worrisome at best and alarming at worst.

Given the speed with which is has developed, I'd say there's a good chance that maybe as much as half that wagon is scum m- especially if TheLonging turns out to be scum.

WARNING: The below point is ONLY valid if TL flips scum.

I've seen scum do this in another game, where they imply that the wagon on their scumbuddy is full of bussing scum, so that if their buddy is lynched they can go happily down the row lynching the lynchers for "bussing." As I said, this only applies if TL flips scum, but it's something we need to watch out for. And, if TL indeed flips scum, my FoS will be falling upon you Dizzy.

Setting up conditional future lynches on such flimsy cases is far more suspicious than pointing out the conventional logic that a fast wagon with a poor case is likely to be scum driven.

I agree. however, in the game that I'm referring to (I can link it if you want), the exact same situation occured. A mafia member went to L-1 in less than a page, and one of his scumbuddies made a post very similar to yours, saying that scum would be on that wagon

regardless of their alignment

(funnily enough, the wagon went to L-1 without a single member of the scum team being a part of it). There is no reason to say something like this if you are town, since it's very obvious that scum would be on the quickly growing wagon of a townie. Only scum would say this, as it gives them the perfect excuse to lynch the players on the wagon.

As I said though, this case is only valid if TL flips scum, which personally I don't believe he will. I actually was going to hold this and post it later only if necessary, but then I thought about it and realized that it does the town no good if I die with helpful information in my head but out of the thread. That's why I made a note of it, and nothing more.

The fact that you can cite a single instance of that happening, versus the many, many declarations that there is scum on a particular wagon, (since it happens at least once in every game) would suggest that this is not a uniquely scum thing to do and your reaction is curious, even if this is academic since I doubt TheLonging is scum anyway.

[Nicodemus]

The fact that you can cite a single instance of that happening, versus the many, many declarations that there is scum on a particular wagon, (since it happens at least once in every game) would suggest that this is not a uniquely scum thing to do and your reaction is curious, even if this is academic since I doubt TheLonging is scum anyway.

Fair enough, although I'm still not sure you're seeing my specific point. It's not a big deal though, and I'm ready to drop it if you are. Plus, as you said this is a fairly useless argument.

@ sorasgoof: Bogre summed it up pretty well here:

And as for someone role-blocking

you

, I actually didn't think of that. I'll admit I made a mistake there.

What I'm trying to say is that if you're lying about being a JoaT, it would be easier for you to fake a blocked investigation than to try to create a "real" fake one, if that makes sense.

Uh...so who did think of that?

You sound like a scum who's been writing with the foreknowledge of what could possibly happen, and is scared that he leaked the info.

Basically it looks like you were posting with what you thought was common knowledge (i.e. there is a mafia roleblocker who might block Richard) but when others started to comment on this slip you backtracked and tried to play dumb.

Okay, let me try to explain here. I was ORIGINALLY saying that if Richard investigates someone tonight, and that investigation comes back blocked, it would be suspicious because that's very easy to fake.

When I said "I actually hadn't thought of that," I meant that if a town cop tries to investigate Richard tonight, and that cop comes back with a blocked investigation, we won't know if Richard was lying about being a JoaT (or Town at all, for that matter).

Does that make sense, now?

No. Actually, you've muddied the waters a bit more for me now, and you're climbing higher on my scumlist.

How does "as for someone role-blocking

you

, I hadn't thought of that" = "a town cop tries to investigate Richard and comes back with a blocked investigation"?

I see your original statement as saying "What if the mafia RB's Richard? How will we know if that's true, or if he's lying?" Then, your response to your own statement is "Oh. I hadn't thought about the idea that the mafia could RB Richard, I was only thinking that he could fake being RB'ed." And now, in your clarifying post, you're saying that "I hadn't thought of that" means that you "hadn't thought about a cop being RB'ed in the night, thus obscuring his investigation of Richard." Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense at all.

I really don't understand how you went from Mafia RBer might block Richard -> I didn't think about mafia RBing Richard -> what if the mafia block a cop, so he can't investigate Richard?

Answer now please.

HoS: sorasgoof

[DragonsofSummer]

The answer is he is backtracking and sucking at it.

[EtherealCookie]

Ugh, I'm really hating all this damn speculation on night actions when we don't even have open roles. We're feeding the mafia ideas, and causing chaos amongst ourselves with stupid wild guesses. Soras seems to be the blatant choice here, I'm not liking his contradictions. As it's been said, his original post mentioned Richard being roleblocked, now he says he never thought about richard being roleblocked? Bull.

FoS:Sorasgoof

[Annachie]

EC, we're only feeding the mafia ideas if they are all newbies. But I agree whole heartedly.

So much thrown around, so much given up, and so much WIFOM bait for anyone involved.

Fos

to the lot of you.

[sorasgoof]

Guys. What aren't you getting?

What I originally thought:

Richard's investigation could come back blocked- We don't know if he's lying.

What I didn't realize:

Someone could investigate Richard and that investigation could come back blocked- We don't know if he's lying about being a JoaT.

I'm not trying to "cover my tracks." I'm trying to explain what you guys don't seem to be understanding.

[sorasgoof]

Oh. Wait. I thought "role-blocking" was when someone investigates someone, the role of the person they investigate is not given to the investigator. Apparently "role-blocking" actually blocks that person from investigating in the first place?

Example of what I thought:

Player A role-blocks Player B
Player C investigates Player B
Player B receives a blocked investigation from the mod.

I can see why you guys find me suspicious now.

[sorasgoof]

Sorry for triple post, but the third line of the above example should say "Player C receives a blocked investigation from the mod."

[Annachie]

Soras, *EBWOP, Edited By Way Of Post, is the usual thing to say when you in #485, and go read some of the roles in the Wiki, and stop speculating in thread.

[sorasgoof]

I know what EBWOP means. Is it really that necessary to put it?

And that's what this game is. Speculation. Information-gathering. I don't see anything wrong with what I did, other than misunderstanding the role of a role-blocker. If we can predict the mafia's actions, we have an advantage. I'm sorry for trying to help. I'll just re-post old information like half of the other players in the game. Is that what I'm supposed to be doing? I don't think so.

[RichardGHP]

Guys. What aren't you getting?

What I originally thought:

Richard's investigation could come back blocked- We don't know if he's lying.

What I didn't realize:

Someone could investigate Richard and that investigation could come back blocked- We don't know if he's lying about being a JoaT.

I'm not trying to "cover my tracks." I'm trying to explain what you guys don't seem to be understanding.

I get what you're saying, but that doesn't affect the fact that even if a cop got blocked while investigating me, I would still be investigating someone else and get a scan.

My investigation could come back blocked - you would have reason to doubt my claim, and rightfully so. A cop's investigation on me comes back blocked - the cop doesn't even have to say anything about it.

If you can predict the actions of the mafia: If you can, good for you, but I don't recommend putting it in-thread. Remember, everything posted here is viewable to mafia as well, and if you blantantly state what you think the mafia will do, the mafia starts getting into WIFOM debates at the possible expense of the town.

[diddin]

unvote, Vote: sorasgoof

Sorry, I'm not buying the way you noobclaimed not understanding what a roleblocker does. If you didn't, you would be playing in newbie games, and anyway, it just seemed like a desperate attempt to cover your tracks.

[InflatablePie]

I'll respond to Pie in a bit.

HoS sorasgoof

You're just digging a hole deeper and deeper, man. I started becoming suspicious of you a bit back, when you were stating you weren't gonna vote.

However, my vote stays on diddin until he can defend himself about my points in 462. Strange how you were sort of defending soras early on, and now you're voting him once he's garnering the most suspicion.

[sorasgoof]

unvote, Vote: sorasgoof

Sorry, I'm not buying the way you noobclaimed not understanding what a roleblocker does. If you didn't, you would be playing in newbie games, and anyway, it just seemed like a desperate attempt to cover your tracks.

I'm very sorry you feel that way.

I thought I did know what a roleblocker does. Why play a newbie game if you think you know the rules? And I do, now. I don't think there's anything else I don't know.

[Annachie]

So basically, you're going to pull out the noob card too? Screw it, I'm not buying it.

To whom was that directed?

[RichardGHP]

unvote, Vote: sorasgoof

Sorry, I'm not buying the way you noobclaimed not understanding what a roleblocker does. If you didn't, you would be playing in newbie games, and anyway, it just seemed like a desperate attempt to cover your tracks.

I'm very sorry you feel that way.

I thought I did know what a roleblocker does. Why play a newbie game if you think you know the rules? And I do, now. I don't think there's anything else I don't know.

I don't buy that, especially since this is your second game you've been in with me, with a third pending. You should know what the roles are by now. Not knowing what something as basic as a roleblocker does? Hard to believe.

FoS: sorasgoof

@Annachie: I'm assuming he was referring to sora.

[diddin]

diddin:
- Unvotes TL after asked why TL is scum. Shows he had little to no good reasoning to vote TL; goes along with the bandwagons easily.
- Votes for No Lynch, then in his next two posts says he wants to be sure he's lynching scum. Newbs and scum alike vote for NL, but the way he's saying he wants to catch scum seems odd to me, especially since you can't lynch scum by NLing.
- Calls Richard scum and lists his reasons, but still doesn't have a vote down until 35 posts later - that tells me he either wanted to avoid Rich or possibly wait for more votes. He finally voted after Rich's claim/the posts by Fugi/Nico/TL. Four votes had garnered by this time, leading me to believe diddin was waiting for a wagon to start before voting on Richard, incase said wagon was unsuccessful.
- Two things of note - he tries to avoid pman early on (FoSes Rich for jumpy voting, pman had been way worse; doesn't address this till later) and defends sora recently (saying DoS jumped on sora too soon for the Night Action talk). Not scummy per se, but notable.

1. I believed TL's claim of Vanilla Townie, and looked back and thought he wasn't as scummy as I first thought. And how was I on the wagon? I was only like the second or third person to vote for TL.

2. My no-lynch vote was just to test what people thought of a no-lynch. Looking back, I should've just suggested it instead of outright voting for it.

3. I was waiting for Richard to claim, knowing he would do so in his claim-happy fashion.

4. My main suspicion on pman was his apparent eagerness to point out TL was at L-1, I didn't think the RVS thing warranted an FoS. And with soras, I didn't particularly think the night action talk was scummy, this recent shenanigan was to me.

[diddin]

EBWOP: Richard: If you think he's so scummy, why aren't you voting for him? Waiting for a wagon, as Pie said I was? Interesting.

[RichardGHP]

EBWOP: Richard: If you think he's so scummy, why aren't you voting for him? Waiting for a wagon, as Pie said I was? Interesting.

I was considering it at one point, but I can't rule out the possibility that he's a noob. He's only played one game and it's almost believeable that he didn't know what a roleblocker really does. I'm too undecided at this point, so only an FoS.

[sorasgoof]

EBWOP: Richard: If you think he's so scummy, why aren't you voting for him? Waiting for a wagon, as Pie said I was? Interesting.

I was considering it at one point, but I can't rule out the possibility that he's a noob...

You're one to talk...

[RichardGHP]

I knew somebody would bring that up. The way I see it, it's irrelevant and that post was unnecessary.

[Annachie]

2. My no-lynch vote was just to test what people thought of a no-lynch. Looking back, I should've just suggested it instead of outright voting for it.

If this was the case then it should have been said when you unvoted the no-lynch.
Now it looks like trying to rewrite your past.

Fos Diddin